The experimental analysis of behavior: Whence and thence?

Davison, Michael

doi:10.1037/bar0000101

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a recent paper, Davison (2018b) highlighted divided stimulus control as an area that “cries out for future research” (p. 136), and posed the question, “Do divided [stimulus control] effects occur in temporal discriminations?” (p. 136). The present experiment is the first step toward answering this question, and our results tentatively suggest that the answer is “yes,” with the caveat that changes in accuracy were very small in the present experiment, and the effects of relative reinforcer probabilities on divided stimulus control appeared to be time-dependent; such effects appeared greater for the shorter (2 s) interval than for the longer (8 s) interval (see Figure 3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although several studies have now shown that relative reinforcer probabilities divide stimulus control, the generality of this relation between relative reinforcer probabilities and divided stimulus control is not well established. One situation in which divided stimulus control, and the variables that determine the division, is presently not well understood is when stimuli provide information about the time of the next reinforcer (Davison, 2018b). That is, if the dimensions of a compound stimulus signal the time of the next reinforcer, rather than whether a left- or right-key response is likely to produce it as in previous studies (e.g., Davison & Elliffe, 2010), do relative reinforcer probabilities determine the division of control between the compound-stimulus dimensions?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent paper, Davison (2018b) highlighted divided stimulus control as an area that "cries out for future research" (p. 136), and posed the question, "Do divided [stimulus control] effects occur in temporal discriminations?" (p. 136).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Timing compound stimuli: Relative reinforcer probabilities divide stimulus control in the multiple peak procedure.

Gomes-Ng¹,

Elliffe²,

Cowie³

2020

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cogniti

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research suggests that when multiple stimuli signal the location of future reinforcers, the extent of control by each stimulus depends on the relative reinforcer probability associated with that stimulus. In this experiment, we asked whether relative reinforcer probabilities also divide control between stimuli that signal the time to future reinforcers. Six pigeons responded in a multiple peak procedure in which 2 dimensions of a compound stimulus—a color (red or green) and a frequency of on/off alternation (fast or slow)—signaled a fixed-interval 2- or 8-s schedule. Across conditions, we varied the probability of reinforcer deliveries associated with each dimension from .1 to .9. Relative reinforcer probabilities determined the degree of control by each stimulus dimension; as the probability of reinforcer deliveries associated with one dimension increased, a peak in response rates at the time signaled by that dimension became apparent while a peak at the time signaled by the other dimension diminished. However, these effects of relative reinforcers were smaller than in previous research, probably because elapsed time also competed for control over behavior. These findings extend the relation between relative reinforcers and divided stimulus control from spatial to temporal discriminations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Timing compound stimuli: Relative reinforcer probabilities divide stimulus control in the multiple peak procedure.

Gomes-Ng¹,

Elliffe²,

Cowie³

2020

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cogniti

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although investigating the effects of relative reinforcer rates on attention allocation has clear theoretical and applied relevance, few studies have done so, and those that have employ similar procedures (Davison, 2018b). Therefore, the generality of the relation between relative reinforcer rates and attention allocation across procedures is not well established.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative reinforcer rates determine pigeons’ attention allocation when separately trained stimuli are presented together

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research suggests that organisms allocate more attention to stimuli associated with higher reinforcer rates. This finding has been replicated several times when stimuli are trained together as compounds, but not in other procedures. Thus, the generality of the relation between relative reinforcer rates and divided attention is not well established. Therefore, we investigated whether relative reinforcer rates determine attention allocation when stimuli are trained separately and then encountered together. Pigeons learned to associate two colors and two frequencies of key light on/off alternation with a left or right comparison key in a symbolic 0-s delayed matching-to-sample task. Across conditions, we varied the probability of reinforcement associated with each stimulus dimension during training. After training, we introduced test trials in which a color and flash-frequency stimulus were presented simultaneously. During sample-stimulus presentation in test trials, all pigeons preferred the stimulus associated with the higher reinforcer rate, suggesting that more attention was allocated to that stimulus. Interestingly, such attention allocation did not result in preference for the comparison that matched that stimulus. Instead, all pigeons preferred the comparison that was physically closer to the stimulus associated with the higher reinforcer rate, suggesting that comparison choice was controlled by the location of that stimulus. Nevertheless, overall, our results provide the first evidence that relative reinforcer rates determine divided attention between separately trained stimuli and thus demonstrate the generality of the relation between relative reinforcement and attention allocation. We suggest several avenues for future research to establish further the generality of this relation.

show abstract

Translations in Stimulus–Stimulus Pairing: Autoshaping of Learner Vocalizations

Silva

Williams

2019

Perspect Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experimental analysis of behavior: Whence and thence?

Cited by 3 publications

References 45 publications

Timing compound stimuli: Relative reinforcer probabilities divide stimulus control in the multiple peak procedure.

Timing compound stimuli: Relative reinforcer probabilities divide stimulus control in the multiple peak procedure.

Relative reinforcer rates determine pigeons’ attention allocation when separately trained stimuli are presented together

Translations in Stimulus–Stimulus Pairing: Autoshaping of Learner Vocalizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About