Kinetics of matching.

Mark, Terence A.; Gallistel, C. R.

doi:10.1037/0097-7403.20.1.79

Cited by 65 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The parameters of rats' visits to these two locations are unaffected by these large, purely random reward-byreward fluctuations in the income flows-another example of behavioral stasis. However, when the rate parameters for the two exponentials change frequently, subjects (rats and mice) respond to each change in the income flows by changing the parameters of their visits quickly and abruptly (Mark and Gallistel 1994). These results and others of a similar nature imply that stochastic models are updated only when the experiences they encode require an update.…”

Section: Assessing Model Viabilitymentioning

confidence: 76%

Information Theory, Memory, Prediction, and Timing in Associative Learning

Wilkes

Gallistel

2017

Computational Models of Brain and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Assessing Model Viabilitymentioning

confidence: 76%

Information Theory, Memory, Prediction, and Timing in Associative Learning

Wilkes

Gallistel

2017

Computational Models of Brain and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Assessing behavior in reference to optimality may therefore lead to inaccurate conclusions concerning risk preference or aversion. To account for this variance while modeling risk-neutral behavior we used a variation of the Matching Law, an equation originally formulated to account for the response allocation of animals under concurrent free operant conditions (31), which has been extended to a variety of paradigms and species (32)(33)(34)(35)(36). Matching Law posits that under free operant conditions a subject allocates responses in a proportion that matches the relative reinforcement of the available options.…”

Section: Instrumental Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term risk preference and suboptimal decision making following adolescent alcohol use

Nasrallah¹,

Yang²,

Bernstein

2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals who abused alcohol at an early age show decisionmaking impairments. However, the question of whether maladaptive choice constitutes a predisposing factor to, or a consequence resulting from, alcohol exposure remains open. To examine whether a causal link exists between voluntary alcohol consumption during adolescence and adult decision making the present studies used a rodent model. High levels of voluntary alcohol intake were promoted by providing adolescent rats with access to alcohol in a palatable gel matrix under nondeprivation conditions. A probability-discounting instrumental response task offered a choice between large but uncertain rewards and small but certain rewards to assess risk-based choice in adulthood either 3 weeks or 3 months following alcohol exposure. While control animals' performance on this task closely conformed to a predictive model of risk-neutral value matching, rats that consumed high levels of alcohol during adolescence violated this model, demonstrating greater risk preference. Evidence of significant risk bias was still present when choice was assessed 3 months following discontinuation of alcohol access. These findings provide evidence that adolescent alcohol exposure may lead to altered decision making during adulthood and this model offers a promising approach to the investigation of the neurobiological underpinnings of this link.adolescence ͉ probability discounting A dolescent alcohol use is a serious public health problem and is associated with an increased risk for development of chronic alcohol use disorders in adulthood (1). Furthermore, an association between a history of alcohol abuse and deficits in decision making has been documented (2-5). However, the question of whether maladaptive choices constitute a predisposing factor to, or a consequence resulting from, alcohol use remains open. Animal models allow for direct testing of causality and for examination of potential neural substrates underlying an association between alcohol use and risky decision making.Developing rodent models of alcohol abuse has been challenged by the fact that most rat strains do not freely consume significant amounts of ethanol in solution. A method for overcoming the reluctance of nondeprived rats to drink high levels of ethanol in solution was developed by Rowland et al. (6). It utilizes a palatable gel matrix containing ethanol and when made available to rats it stimulates robust and reliable selfadministration, without the need for fluid or food deprivation or any training period. Intake of these alcohol ''Jello Shots'' resulted in significant elevations of blood alcohol concentrations (6) in the range of 5 to 45 mg % with a linear relationship to amount consumed (r ϭ 0.94). Furthermore, alterations in brain chemistry in association with this administration protocol have also been documented (7-8). Since this delivery method does not require training to promote intake, it is particularly appropriate for developmental studies, such as those focused on adolescence, since, in ro...

show abstract

“…Ifsubjects sample a memory for the VI:40 in red and a memory for the VI:40 in green, these two samples are, on average, equally likely to favor either alternative and, hence, the matching level should be indifference. On the other hand, as Williams (1994) and Mark and Gallistel (1994) have pointed out, it may be that it is the probability of switching out of a schedule that is the controlling variable for preference here. Subjects may respond in the probe tests as though the alternative were the original training alternative.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, meloriation (Herrnstein & Vaughan, 1980;Vaughan, 1985) and "momentary maximizing" (Shimp, 1969) argue that subjects choose the better of two local rates or probabilities of reinforcement, and this results in overall matching. Rather than explaining it, other, "molar" matching accounts simply assume matching (e.g., Baum & Rachlin, 1969; Gallistel, 1990;Mark & Gallistel, 1994). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of time matching: Arousal makes better seem worse

Gibbon

1995

Psychon Bull Rev

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Matching of time allocation across alternatives in proportion to relative reinforcement rates is a ubiquitous finding in the animal-learning literature on choice. The dynamics ofthe underlying mechanism, however, remain poorly understood. A recent finding by Belke (1992) profoundly challenges scalar expectancy theory (SET; Gibbon et al., 1988) and other accounts of matching in concurrent variable interval (VI) schedules. He studied concurrent probe tests of stimuli associated with equal VIs but trained in alternative concurrent pairs. In training, one was preferred and the other not. Unreinforced probes revealed a strong preference for the alternative preferred in training. An experiment is reported replicating this result and showing that it is not due to generalization of preference levels from training. When the probe is between the two preferred training stimuli, the richer schedule is unpreferred. A SET account of these results is presented which implicates two processes in time allocation: (1) the choice between alternatives based on memory for delays to reinforcement, and (2) the times at which such choices are made. The former process is sensitive to reinforcement scheduling; the latter is sensitive to arousal levels induced by overall reinforcement rates in training.A now venerable tradition in operant schedule research shows that animals choosing between concurrently available variable schedules of reward allocate time spent at each alternative in proportion to their rates ofpayoff(the matching law; Herrnstein, 1970; see Williams, 1988, for a review). The matching law is ubiquitous throughout the animal kingdom. A form of matching is seen at the level of groups of animals distributing individuals across resource sites where it is known as the "ideal free distribution" (see Gallistel, 1990, for a review). At the level of individuals, where it has been studied extensively in the animal-learning literature, accounts of matching have engendered an enduring controversy about its source. Matching of behavior proportionate to payoff implies more choices for the less profitable resource than strictly necessary to maximize overall payoff rates. Several "molecular" or "quasi-molecular" accounts of matching, which posit maximizing payoffs at a local or molecular level, have been proposed. For example, meloriation (Herrnstein & Vaughan, 1980;Vaughan, 1985) and "momentary maximizing" (Shimp, 1969) argue that subjects choose the better of two local rates or probabilities of reinforcement, and this results in overall matching. Rather than explaining it, other, "molar" matching accounts simply assume matching (e.g., Baum & Rachlin, 1969; Gallistel, 1990;Mark & Gallistel, 1994).The author is grateful for extensive discussion of these ideas with C. R. Gallistel, who lent formative insights into an understanding of switching rates. Thanks are due S. Fairhurst for data collection and analysis. The work was supported by NIMH Grant MH41649-09. Address correspondence to John Gibbon, Biopsychology Unit 50, 722 W. I68th St.,...

show abstract

Kinetics of matching.

Cited by 65 publications

References 35 publications

Information Theory, Memory, Prediction, and Timing in Associative Learning

Information Theory, Memory, Prediction, and Timing in Associative Learning

Long-term risk preference and suboptimal decision making following adolescent alcohol use

Dynamics of time matching: Arousal makes better seem worse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About