科研之友
微信
新浪微博
Facebook
分享链接
摘要
In experiments on operant behavior, other activities, called background activities, compete with the operant activities. Herrnstein's () formulation of the matching law included background reinforcers in the form of a parameter r(O), but remained vague about the activities (B-O) that produce r(O). To gain more understanding, we analyzed data from three studies of performance with pairs of variable-interval schedules that changed frequently in the relative rate at which they produced food: Baum and Davison (), Belke and Heyman (), and Soto, McDowell, and Dallery (2005). Results sometimes deviated from the matching law, suggesting variation in r(O). When r(O) was calculated from the matching equation, two results emerged: (a) r(O) is directly proportional to B-O, as in a ratio schedule; and (b) r(O) and B-O depend on the food rate, which is to say that B-O consists of activities induced by food, as a phylogenetically important event. Other activities unrelated to food (B-N) correspond to Herrnstein's original conception of r(O) and may be included in the matching equation. A model based on Baum's (Baum, 2012) concepts of allocation, induction, and contingency explained the deviations from the matching law. In the model, operant activity B, B-O, and B-N competed unequally in the time allocation: B and B-O both replaced B-N, B-O replaced lever pressing (Soto et al.), and key pecking replaced B-O (Baum & Davison). Although the dependence of r(O) and B-O on food rate changes Herrnstein's () formulation, the model preserved the generalized matching law for operant activities by incorporating power-function induction.
- 出版日期2014-9
