Timberlake’s theories dissolve anomalies

Killeen, Peter R.

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2019.103894

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 205 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further simplify the model by assuming that the ideal level of responding R 0 = 0-the animals are indolent. When that is not the case (as in contra-freeloading effects; Killeen, 2019;Osborne, 1977) R 0 will take positive values. To save a parameter, divide numerator and denominator by ρ, and set c = √(ρ/θ), the root of the ratio of restoring force for responses over that for food.…”

Section: Implications For Delay Discounting Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bidding for delayed rewards: Accumulation as delay discounting, delay discounting as regulation, demand functions as corollary

Killeen

2019

J Exper Analysis Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the accumulation paradigm animals press one manipulandum to accumulate pellets or seconds of access to food, and then press another manipulandum, or run some distance, to collect it. The accumulation may be interpreted as delay discounting, with the animals adjusting the distal amount to compensate for its distance or delay. The amount accumulated before being collected is a linear function of the distance or time that the experimental paradigm stipulates for collecting it. That linear function follows from the Unit‐Price/Unit‐Amount axiom. The inverse of the linear compensation functions gives a delay‐discount hyperbola. The advantages of the accumulation paradigm and analytic framework for delay discounting studies are noted. Compensation functions are then derived from a behavioral regulation model, which generalizes them to contexts where the individual's budget for response cost becomes over‐taxed. In turn, such compensation/regulation models lead directly to representative demand functions. In sum, regulation models provide a theoretical grounding for demand functions, compensation functions, and delay discounting hyperbolas. The parameter that links them is the unit amount k, the slope of the compensation function and of the discount function, the setpoint for consumption in a regulation model, and the ideal quantity consumed at minimal price in a demand analysis.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Delay Discounting Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bidding for delayed rewards: Accumulation as delay discounting, delay discounting as regulation, demand functions as corollary

Killeen

2019

J Exper Analysis Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The assumption that an organism controls its own perceptions seems at odds with the linear model of causation that is widely rooted in academic psychology (Bell, 2014); for instance, dynamical phenomena are studied by manipulating some aspect of subjects' environments (independent variables) and describing the concomitant effects (dependent variables) in detail. The fact that the actual cause of certain behavior is sometimes a previous behavior—such that the system inputs may correspond to the system's behavior itself (e.g., Bell, 2014; Killeen, 2019)—points to the need for a theoretical and methodological shift. Whenever we assume a system under study has nonlinear features, such as closed loops, special techniques are advantageous for describing its dynamics.…”

Section: Methodological and Analytical Approaches Of Feedback Control...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This result, however, does not explain how deviations from perfect matching may occur through the same mechanism, but we think it is a first step to integrate several fields and results using general principles. When addressing the distinction between goal-directed and habitual behavior, for illustration, some claim that the latter represents an open loop (Balleine, 2019;Killeen, 2019) while the former does not. Such an assumption is not congruent with the consideration that every instance of behavior represents a closed loop (e.g., Bell, 2014;Marken, 2009).…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When addressing the distinction between goal‐directed and habitual behavior, for illustration, some claim that the latter represents an open loop (Balleine, 2019; Killeen, 2019) while the former does not. Such an assumption is not congruent with the consideration that every instance of behavior represents a closed loop (e.g., Bell, 2014; Marken, 2009).…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The nervous system as a solution for implementing closed negative feedback control loops

Sosa

Alcalá

2022

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavior can be regarded as the output of a system (action), as a function linking stimulus to response (reaction), or as an abstraction of the bidirectional relationship between the environment and the organism (interaction). When considering the latter possibility, a relevant question arises concerning how an organism can materially and continuously implement such a relationship during its lifetime in order to perpetuate itself. The feedback control approach has taken up the task of answering just that question. During the last several decades, said approach has been progressing and has started to be recognized as a paradigm shift, superseding certain canonical notions in mainstream behavior analysis, cognitive psychology, and even neuroscience. In this paper, we describe the main features of feedback control theory and its associated techniques, concentrating on its critiques of behavior analysis, as well as the commonalities they share. While some of feedback control theory's major critiques of behavior analysis arise from the fact that they focus on different levels of organization, we believe that some are legitimate and meaningful. Moreover, feedback control theory seems to blend with neurobiology more smoothly as compared to canonical behavior analysis, which only subsists in a scattered handful of fields. If this paradigm shift truly takes place, behavior analysts—whether they accept or reject this new currency—should be mindful of the basics of the feedback control approach.

show abstract

“…The Skinnerian parameter was dominant only in conditions in which responding could accelerate or delay reinforcement; contiguity by itself did not matter. They argued that on trials with no contingency, responses became habitual, and thereby insensitive to their consequences (Dezfouli & Balleine, 2013; Dickinson & Pérez, 2018; Graybiel, 2008; Killeen, 2019; Smith & Graybiel, 2014; Thrailkill et al, 2018). Those citations are to a literature that our field ignores at its peril.…”

Section: Lost In the Forestmentioning

confidence: 99%