Insensitivity to Post-Reinforcement Delay in the Choices of Pigeons and Humans

  1. Eduardo Polín
  2. Vicente Pérez
Revista:
International journal of psychology and psychological therapy

ISSN: 1577-7057

Año de publicación: 2024

Volumen: 24

Número: 3

Páginas: 399-418

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: International journal of psychology and psychological therapy

Resumen

Research on choice behavior has helped us to identify many of the variables that determine the decisions we make, leading to better predictions of these behaviors and the development of technologies for their modification. However, research on decision-making in situations of negative punishment is scarce compared to other conditions, such as reinforcement or positive punishment, at least in studies with non-human subjects. The present paper tries to address this question through four experiments on choice behavior by pigeons and humans. The aims of the first experiment (with four pigeons) were to study the validity of considering the duration of access to the reinforcer as the length of the delay of the consequence, and the duration of the inter-trial interval as the degree of negative punishment, in a concurrent program in which these parameters were varied. Results showed insensitivity to the length of the inter-trial interval, a phenomenon that was replicated with forty-seven human participants under an analogous procedure in experiment 2. Experiment 3 (with four pigeons and fifty-one humans) and experiment 4 (with twelve pigeons and one hundred ninety-seven humans) explored the efficacy in increasing this sensitivity of including differential contexts during post-reinforcement delays and/or commitment response. Results revealed a greater isolated effect of the commitment response and a markedly reduced effect of the differential contexts. The main conclusion of this work is that choices are affected very little by the duration of the post-reinforcement delay, although this insensitivity can be slightly reduced by requiring a commitment response

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Ainslie GW (1974). Impulse control in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 485-489. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-485
  • Ainslie GW (1975). Specious reward: A behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulsive control. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 463-496. Doi: 10.1037/h0076860
  • Ainslie GW & Herrnstein RJ (1981). Preference reversal and delayed reinforcement. Animal Learning & Behavior, 9, 476-482. Doi: 10.3758/BF03209777
  • Allison J (1989). The nature of reinforcement. In S.B. Klein y R.R. Mowrer (Eds.), Contemporary Learning theories: Instrumental conditioning and the impact of biological constraints on learning (pp. 13-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Baker F, Johnson MW, & Bickel WK (2003). Delay discounting in current and never-before cigarette smokers: Similarities and differences across commodity, sign, and magnitude. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 382-392. Doi: 10.1037/0021-843x.112.3.382
  • Baum WM (1973). The correlation-based law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 20, 137- 153. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-137
  • Catania AC (1963). Concurrent performances: a baseline for the study of reinforcement magnitude. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 299-300. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-299
  • Catania AC (1974). Investigación contemporánea en conducta operante. Ciudad de Mexico: Trillas. Davison M & Hogsden I (1984). Concurrent variable-interval schedule performance: Fixed versus mixed reinforcer duration. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41, 169-182. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-169
  • De Villiers P (1977). Choice in concurrent schedules and quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In WK Honig y JER Staddon (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (233-287). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Deluty MZ (1976). Choice and the rate of punishment in concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 25, 75-82. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.25-75
  • Deluty MZ (1978). Self-control and impulsiveness involving aversive events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 4, 250-266. Doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.4.3.250
  • Eisenberg R, Weier E, Masterson EA, & Theis LY (1989). Fixed-ratio schedules increase generalized self-control: Preference for large rewards despite high effort or punishment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 383-392. Doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.15.4.383
  • Epstein R (1981). Amount consumed as a function of magazine-cycle duration. Behaviour Analysis Letters, 1, 63-66.
  • Estle SJ, Green L, Myerson J, & Holt DD (2006). Differential effects of amount on discounting temporal and probability discounting of gains and losses. Memory & Cognition, 34(4), 914-928. Doi: 10.3758/BF03193437
  • Flora SR & Pavlik WB (1992). Human self-control and the density of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 201-208. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-201
  • Foxx RM & Shapiro ST (1978). The timeout ribbon: a nonexclusionary timeout procedure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11(1), 125-136. Doi: 10.1901/jaba.1978.11-125
  • Green L, Myerson J, Lichman D, Rosen S, & Fry A (1996). Temporal discounting in choice between delayed rewards: The role of age and income. Psychology and Aging, 11, 79-84. Doi: 10.1037//0882-7974.11.1.79
  • Green L & Snyderman M (1980). Choice between rewards differing in amount and delay: Toward a choice model of self-control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 34, 135-147. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-135
  • Hackenberg TD & DeFulio A (2007) Timeout from reinforcement: Restoring a balance between analysis and application. Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta, 33, 37-44.
  • Herrnstein RJ (1961). Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267-272. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267
  • Herrnstein RJ (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243-266. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243
  • Holt D, Green L, & Myerson J (2012). Estimating the subjective value of future rewards: comparison of adjusting amount and adjusting delay procedures. Behavioural Processes, 90, 302-310 Doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2012.03.003
  • Holz WC (1968). Punishment and rate of positive reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11, 285-292. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-285
  • Hutton L, Gardner ET, & Lewis P (1978). Matching with a key-peck response in concurrent negative reinforcement schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30, 225-230. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-225
  • Ito M & Asaki K (1982). Choice behavior of rats in a concurrent-chains schedule: Amount and delay of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 383-392. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-383
  • Jenkins WO & Clayton FL (1949). Rate of responding and amount of reinforcement. Journal of Comparative Physiological Psychology, 42, 174-181. Doi: 10.1037/h0055036
  • Keller JV & Gollub LR (1977). Duration and rate of reinforcement as determinants of concurrent responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 28, 145–153. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.28-145
  • Landom J, Davison M, & Elliffe D (2003). Concurrent schedules: reinforce magnitude effects. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 79, 351–365. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.2003.79-351
  • Lea SEG (1979). Foraging and reinforcement schedules in the pigeon: Optimal and non-optimal aspects of choice. Animal Behavior, 27, 875-886. Doi: 10.1016/0003-3472(79)90025-3
  • Logan EA (1965). Decision making by rats: Delay versus amount of reward. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 59, 1-12. Doi: 10.1037/h0021633
  • Logue AW & De Villiers PA (1978). Matching in concurent variable-interval avoidance schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 61-66. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-61
  • Logue AW, Forzano LB, & Tobin H (1992). Independence of reinforcer amount and delay: The generalized matching law and self-control in humans. Learning and Motivation, 23, 326-342. Doi: 10.1016/0023-9690(92)90012-B
  • Logue AW, Smith ME, & Rachlin H (1985). Sensitivity of pigeons to prereinforcer and postreinforcer delay. Animal Learning & Behavior, 13, 181-186. Doi: 10.3758/BF03199271
  • Mazur J (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In: M Commons, J Mazur, JA Nevin, & H Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative Analysis Of Behavior: The Effect Of Delay And Of Intervening Events On Reinforcement Value Vol. 5 (pp 55-73). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Mazur JE & Logue AW (1978). Choice in a “self-control” paradigm: Effects of a fading procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30, 11-17. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-11
  • Mazur JE, Snyderman M, & Coe D (1985). Influences of delay and rate of reinforcement on discrete-trial choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 4, 565-575. Doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.11.4.565
  • Mischel W & Grusec J (1967). Waiting for rewards and punishments: Effects of time and probability on choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 24-31. Doi: 10.1037/h0024180
  • Murphy JG, Vuchinich RE, & Simpson, CA (2001). Delayed reward and cost discounting. Psychological Record, 51, 571-588.
  • Navarick DJ (1982). Negative reinforcement and choice in humans. Learning and Motivation, 13, 361-377. Doi: 10.1016/0023-9690(82)90015-7
  • Navarick DJ & Fantino E (1975). Stochastic transitivity and the unidimensional control of choice. Learning and Motivation, 6, 179-201. Doi: 10.1016/0023-9690(75)90021-1
  • Navarick DJ & Fantino E (1976). Self-control and general models of choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2, 75-87. Doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.2.1.75
  • Neuringer A (1991). Operant variability and repetition as functions of interresponse time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 17, 3-12. Doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.17.1.3
  • Ohmura Y, Takahashi T, & Kitamura N (2005). Discounting delayed and probabilistic monetary gains and losses by smokers of cigarettes. Psychopharmacology, 182, 508-515. Doi: 10.1007/s00213-005-0110-8
  • Picker M & Poling A (1982). Choice as a dependent measure in autoshaping: Sensitivity to frequency and duration of food presentation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 393-406. Doi: 10.1901/ jeab.1982.37-393
  • Rachlin H & Baum W (1969). Response rate as a function of amount of reinforcement for a signaled concurrent response. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 11-16. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-11
  • Rachlin H & Green L (1972). Commitment, choice and self-control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 17, 15-22. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-15
  • Rachlin H, Logue AW, Gibbon J, & Frankel M (1986). Cognition and behavior in studies of choice. Psychological Review, 87, 355-374. Doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.93.1.33
  • Reilly MP & Glenn SS (2000) Behavioral variability and stereotypy in humans: the effects of interresponse blackouts. Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta, 26, 41-63.
  • Renda CR & Madden GJ (2016). Impulsive choice and pre-exposure to delays: III. Four-month test-retest outcomes in male wistar rats. Behavioural Processes, 126, 108-112. Doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2016.03.014
  • Schneider DJ (1973). Implicit personality theory: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 79, 294-309. Doi: 10.1037/ h0034496
  • Schwartz B (1969). Effects of reinforcement magnitude on pigeons’ preference for different fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 253-259. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-253
  • Smith AP, Marshall AT, & Kirkpatrick K (2015). Mechanisms of impulsive choice: II. Time-based interventions to improve self-control. Behavioural Processes, 112, 29-42. Doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2014.10.010
  • Snyderman M (1983). Delay and amount of reward in a concurrent chain. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39, 437-447. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.39-437
  • Solnick JV, Kannenberg CH, Eckerman DA, & Wailer MB (1980). An experimental analysis of impulsivity and impulse control in humans. Learning and Motivation, 11, 61-77. Doi: 10.1016/0023-9690(80)90021-1
  • Sonuga-Barke EJS, Lea SEG, & Webley P (1989). An account of human “impulsivity” on self-control tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41, 161-179. Doi: 10.1080/14640748908401190
  • Stubbs DA & Pliskoff SS (1969). Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 887-895. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-887
  • Timberlake W & Allison J (1974). Response deprivation: An empirical approach to instrumental performance. Psychological Review, 81, 146-164. Doi: 10.1037/h0036101
  • Todorov JC (1973). Interaction of frequency and magnitude of reinforcement on concurrent performances. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 19, 451-458. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-451
  • Todorov JC, Hanna ES, & Bittencourt de Sá MCN (1984). Frequency versus magnitude of reinforcement: New data with a different procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41, 157-167. Doi: 10.1901/ jeab.1984.41-157
  • Valero L & Luciano C (1997). Discriminación condicional en niños: los efectos de contingencias diferenciales de reforzamiento/tiempo fuera. Psicothema, 9, 599-608.
  • Van Houten R (1983). Punishment: From the Animal Laboratory to the Applied Setting. En: S Axelrod & J Apsche, (Ed.), The Effects of Punishment on Human Behavior, 1st ed (pp.13-44). London: Academic Press.
  • White KG & Pipe ME (1987). Sensitivity to reinforcer duration in a self-control procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 235-249. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-235
  • White KG, Pipe ME, & McLean AP (1985). A note on the measurement of stimulus discriminability in conditional discriminations. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 23, 153-155. Doi: 10.3758/BF03329810
  • Young JS (1981). Discrete-trial choice in pigeons: Effects of reinforcer magnitude. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 35, 23-29. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-23
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet