Unit Price and Choice in a Token‐reinforcement Context

Foster, Theresa A.; Hackenberg, Timothy D.

doi:10.1901/jeab.2004.81-5

Cited by 30 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Madden et al reported that Equation 7 closely predicted human cigarette smokers' preferences between different reinforcer amounts available at a range of FR values (see Foster & Hackenberg, 2004, for supporting data with pigeons).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Labor Supply and Consumption of Food in a Closed Economy Under a Range of Fixed- And Random-Ratio Schedules: Tests of Unit Price

Madden

Dake

Mauel

et al. 2005

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The behavioral economic concept of unit price predicts that consumption and response output (labor supply) are determined by the unit price at which a good is available regardless of the value of the cost and benefit components of the unit price ratio. Experiment 1 assessed 4 pigeons' consumption and response output at a range of unit prices. In one condition, food was available according to a range of fixed-ratio schedules, whereas in the other condition, food was available according to a range of random-ratio schedules. Consistent with unit price predictions, consumption and response output were approximately equivalent across schedule types within the lower range of unit prices. However, at Unit Prices 64 (ratio value ϭ 192) and greater, considerably more consumption and response output were observed in the random-ratio condition. Experiment 2 replicated these findings with 4 pigeons using the rapid demand curve assay procedure that is commonly used in the behavioral economics literature. Findings are integrated with two mathematical models of behavior under variable reinforcer delays.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Labor Supply and Consumption of Food in a Closed Economy Under a Range of Fixed- And Random-Ratio Schedules: Tests of Unit Price

Madden

Dake

Mauel

et al. 2005

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In certain situations, animals distribute their choices proportional to the relative outcomes, a behaviour known as matching [8], [15], [16], [17]. Alternatively, animals exclusively choose one of the options – that with the higher probability of outcome – thereby increasing the relative occurrence of the outcome.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural Correlate of Choice Confidence in a Discrete Trial Paradigm

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How animals make choices in a changing and often uncertain environment is a central theme in the behavioural sciences. There is a substantial literature on how animals make choices in various experimental paradigms but less is known about the way they assess a choice after it has been made in terms of the expected outcome. Here, we used a discrete trial paradigm to characterise how the reward history shaped the behaviour on a trial by trial basis. Rats initiated each trial which consisted of a choice between two drinking spouts that differed in their probability of delivering a sucrose solution. Critically, sucrose was delivered after a delay from the first lick at the spouts – this allowed us to characterise the behavioural profile during the window between the time of choice and its outcome. Rats' behaviour converged to optimum choice, both during the acquisition phase and after the reversal of contingencies. We monitored the post-choice behaviour at a temporal precision of 1 millisecond; lick-response profiles revealed that rats spent more time at the spout with the higher reward probability and exhibited a sparser lick pattern. This was the case when we exclusively examined the unrewarded trials, where the outcome was identical. The differential licking profiles preceded the differential choice ratios and could thus predict the changes in choice behaviour.

show abstract

“…When combined, these measures produce a costbenefit ratio made up of the number of responses emitted per reinforcer (i.e., unit price; e.g., Foster & Hackenberg, 2004). Alternatively, stated in economic terms, unit price is the amount of income expended to access a commodity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Unit Price Evaluation of Severe Problem Behavior

Borrero¹,

Francisco²,

Haberlin³

et al. 2007

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluated problem behavior exhibited by 6 individuals with developmental disabilities using the behavioral economic conceptualization of unit price. Descriptive observations were conducted during interactions between the participants and their primary care providers in a clinical laboratory, the participants' homes, or school. Data were recorded on potential reinforcers and problem behavior. After identifying reinforcers for each participant's problem behavior by way of functional analysis, the descriptive data were analyzed retrospectively, using the cost-benefit ratio described by the concept of unit price. Results showed that demand was elastic and produced monotonic response output curves. The results represent an extension of the concept of unit price to severe problem behavior under naturally occurring environmental conditions.

show abstract

Unit Price and Choice in a Token‐reinforcement Context

Cited by 30 publications

References 47 publications

Labor Supply and Consumption of Food in a Closed Economy Under a Range of Fixed- And Random-Ratio Schedules: Tests of Unit Price

Labor Supply and Consumption of Food in a Closed Economy Under a Range of Fixed- And Random-Ratio Schedules: Tests of Unit Price

Behavioural Correlate of Choice Confidence in a Discrete Trial Paradigm

A Unit Price Evaluation of Severe Problem Behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About