Escape Performance as a Function of Delay of Reinforcement and Inescapable Us Trials

Moffat, Gene H.; Koch, Daniel L.

doi:10.2466/pr0.1973.32.3c.1255

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, Table 6 also summarizes Moffat and Koch's (1973) results on human subjects listening to a Bill Cosby comedy recording. Occasionally the recording would stop and the subject could start it again by depressing a panel.…”

Section: Immediacy Oj Negative Rcinjorccmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a law of response strength.

Villiers¹,

Herrnstein²

1976

Psychological Bulletin

253

183

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approximately 40 experiments on rats, monkeys, pigeons, and in one case, human beings have obtained functional relations between some parameter of reinforcement and some measure of response strength. With few exceptions, the obtained functions fit the same mathematical form: Strength of responding appears to be proportional to its relative reinforcement. This principle is, furthermore, logically consistent with the matching law for simple choice, according to which the relative frequency of each alternative in a choice matches its relative frequency of reinforcement.Confronted with choices differing only in the frequency of reinforcement, subjects match the distribution of response alternatives to the distribution of reinforcements (de Villiers, in press;Herrnstein, 1970Herrnstein, , 1971. That is to say, the choices come to obey the following equation, in which RI to R n enumerates the response alternatives and r x to r n the reinforcements associated with each:Equation 1, sometimes called the matching law, says that the relative frequency of each kind of responding equals, or matches, the relative frequency of its reinforcement. 1 A large experimental literature supports the matching law. Although some workers have proposed other formal representations (Baum,

show abstract

Section: Immediacy Oj Negative Rcinjorccmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a law of response strength.

Villiers¹,

Herrnstein²

1976

Psychological Bulletin

253

183

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Extensive research since the 1960s has shown that Equation 2, the hyperbolic absolute response rate form, and Equation 5, the power function version of the matching law, provide excellent descriptions of the behavior of many vertebrate animal species in single- and multialternative environments (Baum, 1974, 1979; Dallery, McDowell, & Lancaster, 2000; de Villiers, 1977; de Villiers & Herrnstein, 1976; McDowell, 1988b, 1989; Wearden & Burgess, 1982). A body of research that is at least as extensive has shown that human behavior is also governed by these equations (Beardsley & McDowell, 1992; Bradshaw, Szabadi, & Bevan, 1976, 1977, 1978; Bradshaw, Szabadi, Bevan, & Ruddle, 1979; Buskist & Miller, 1981; Cliffe & Parry, 1980; Dallery, Soto, & McDowell, 2005; Kollins, Newland, & Critchfield, 1997a, 1997b; McDowell & Wood, 1984, 1985; Moffat & Koch, 1973; Pierce & Epling, 1983; Ruddle, Bradshaw, & Szabadi, 1981; Ruddle, Bradshaw, Szabadi, & Foster, 1982; Takahashi & Iwamoto, 1986). In a large majority of these experiments with animal and human subjects, the equations accounted for large proportions of variance in individual-subject response rate ratios (for multialternative environments described by Equation 5), or in the absolute response rates of individual subjects (for single-alternative environments described by Equation 2), regardless of species.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On the theoretical and empirical status of the matching law and matching theory.

Jj¹

2013

Psychological Bulletin

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The original and power function versions of the matching law and matching theory are mathematical accounts of continuous choice that have been applied to the behavior of many vertebrate species, including humans, and have become influential in a variety of disciplines, such as economics, behavioral pharmacology, and clinical science. Each version can be interpreted either from a response strength perspective or from a purely algebraic perspective. The point of departure of both versions of matching theory is the assertion that all behavior is choice governed by the matching law. This assertion permits sets of equations to be derived that constitute the 2 versions of the theory. Considerable experimental evidence leads to the conclusion that both interpretations of the original version of the matching law and theory are false and that both interpretations of the power function version of the law and theory are tenable. Specifically, the behavior of animal and human subjects conforms exactly to the mathematical forms required by the power function version of the law and theory, and the theoretical assumptions entailed by both interpretations of this version are supported by the empirical evidence. In addition, the theoretical interpretations of all but 1 of the parameters of the power function version's equations are consistent with available evidence. The one problematic parameter is interpreted as the rate at which unmeasured background resources are acquired. The theoretical interpretation of this parameter must be reconciled with observation in order to maintain matching theory's central assertion that all behavior is choice.

show abstract

Empirical Matching, Matching Theory, and an Evolutionary Theory of Behavior Dynamics in Clinical Application

McDowell

2021

Perspect Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Escape Performance as a Function of Delay of Reinforcement and Inescapable Us Trials

Cited by 5 publications

References 10 publications

Toward a law of response strength.

Toward a law of response strength.

On the theoretical and empirical status of the matching law and matching theory.

Empirical Matching, Matching Theory, and an Evolutionary Theory of Behavior Dynamics in Clinical Application

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About