Variation, Repetition, and Choice

Abstract

Experiment 1 investigated the controlling properties of variability contingencies on choice between repeated and variable responding. Pigeons were exposed to concurrent-chains schedules with two alternatives. In the REPEAT alternative, reinforcers in the terminal link depended on a single sequence of four responses. In the VARY alternative, a response sequence in the terminal link was reinforced only if it differed from the n previous sequences (lag criterion). The REPEAT contingency generated low, constant levels of sequence variation whereas the VARY contingency produced levels of sequence variation that increased with the lag criterion. Preference for the REPEAT alternative tended to increase directly with the degree of variation required for reinforcement. Experiment 2 examined the potential confounding effects in Experiment 1 of immediacy of reinforcement by yoking the interreinforcer intervals in the REPEAT alternative to those in the VARY alternative. Again, preference for REPEAT was a function of the lag criterion. Choice between varying and repeating behavior is discussed with respect to obtained behavioral variability, probability of reinforcement, delay of reinforcement, and switching within a sequence.

History effects on induced and operant variability

“…Taken together, these findings demonstrate operant control on variability levels, replicating previous findings (AbreuRodrigues, Lattal, Santos, & Matos, 2005;Maes, 2003;Neuringer et al, 2001;Page & Neuringer, 1985;Stokes, 1999).…”

Resistance to Change and Preference for Variable Versus Fixed Response Sequences

“…At first glance, Abreu‐Rodrigues et al's (2005) results, taken together with those of Doughty and Lattal (2001), appear to challenge expectations based on behavioral momentum theory. If variable responding is more resistant to change than stereotyped responding, preference for a VARY over REPEAT terminal link in concurrent chains should increase directly with the variability requirement to the extent such a requirement produces greater variation, all else being equal.…”

“…The beneficial effects of environmental enrichment on neural development and plasticity are well known (Bennett, Diamond, Krech, & Rosenzweig, 1964; van Praag, Kempermann & Gage, 2000), and it may be that organisms have been selected to favor environments that support behavioral variability rather than stereotypy. From this perspective, the multiple schedule with VARY and REPEAT components developed by Doughty and Lattal (2001) based on Neuringer's work, and extended by Abreu‐Rodrigues et al (2005) and here to concurrent chains, provides an ideal paradigm to study effects of behavioral variation and repetition with reinforcer variables controlled.…”

Análise do comportamento no Brasil

“…Essa foi uma estratégia importante para ampliar as temáticas de pesquisa e a diversidade de conhecimento especializado no país, bem como aumentar a divulgação da produção nacional no exterior. São exemplos do resultado bem sucedido desse investimento a produção sobre: comportamento adjuntivo (e.g., Gimenes, Brandão & Benvenuti, 2005); variabilidade comportamental (e.g., Abreu-Rodrigues, Lattal, Santos & Matos, 2005), comportamento precorrente (e.g., Oliveira-Castro, Faria, Dias & Coelho, 2002), modelo experimental de autocontrole (e.g., Hanna & Todorov, 2002), comportamento de observação (e.g., Tomanari, Balsamo, Fowler, Farren & Dube, 2007), para citar alguns. É nacionalmente reconhecida e aqui enfatizada também a qualidade da pesquisa desenvolvida pelo Grupo de Estudo e Pesquisa sobre Comportamento do Consumidor (e.g., OliveiraCastro, Foxall & Schrezenmaier, 2006) e dos trabalhos teórico-conceituais e empíricos desenvolvidos na PUC-SP (e.g., Andery, Micheletto & Serio, 2005) e na UFPA (e.g., Tourinho, 2006).…”