Stimulus control depends on the subjective value of the outcome.
conflicting information
intertemporal choice
stimulus control
subjective value
Journal
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
ISSN: 1938-3711
Titre abrégé: J Exp Anal Behav
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0203727
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2020
09 2020
Historique:
received:
03
03
2020
revised:
28
06
2020
accepted:
06
07
2020
pubmed:
21
8
2020
medline:
29
10
2021
entrez:
22
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Stimuli that provide information about likely future reinforcers tend to shift behavior, provided a reliable relation between the stimulus and the reinforcer can be discriminated. Stimuli that are apparently more reliable exert greater control over behavior. We asked how the subjective value (measured in terms of preference) of reinforcers associated with stimuli influences stimulus control. Five pigeons worked on a concurrent chains procedure in which half of all trials ended in a smaller reinforcer sooner, and the other half in a larger reinforcer later. In Signaled trials, the color and flash duration on the keys in the initial link signaled the outcome of the trial. In Conflicting probe trials, the color and the flash duration signaled conflicting information about the outcome of the trial. Choice in Signaled trials shifted toward the signaled outcome, but was never exclusive. In Conflicting probe trials, control was divided idiosyncratically between the 2 stimulus dimensions, but still favored the outcome with the higher subjective value. Thus, stimulus control depends not only on the perceived reliability of stimuli, but also on the subjective value of the outcome.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
216-232Informations de copyright
© 2020 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.
Références
Alsop, B., & Davison, M. (1991). Effects of varying stimulus disparity and the reinforcer ratio in concurrent-schedule and signal-detection procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56(1), 67-80. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1991.56-67
Baron, M. R. (1965). The stimulus, stimulus control, and stimulus generalization. In D. I. Mostofsky (Ed.), Stimulus generalisation. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Baum, W., & Rachlin, H. (1969). Choice as time allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12(6), 861-874. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1969.12-861
Baum, W., Schwendiman, J., & Bell, K. (1999). Choice, contingency discrimination, and foraging theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71(3), 355-373. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1999.71-355
Baum, W. M., & Davison, M. (2014). Choice with frequently changing food rates and food ratios. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 101(2), 246-274.
Belke, T., & Spetch, M. (1994). Choice between reliable and unreliable reinforcement alternatives revisited: Preference for unreliable reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 62(3), 353-366. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1994.62-353
Bizo, L. A., & White, K. G. (1995). Biasing the pacemaker in the behavioral theory of timing. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64(2), 225-235.
Boutros, N., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2009). Conditional reinforcers and informative stimuli in a constant environment. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 91(1), 41-60. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2009.91-41
Boutros, N., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2011). Contingent stimuli signal subsequent reinforcer ratios. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 96(1), 39-61. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.96-39
Cannella, H., O'Reilly, M., & Lancioni, G. (2005). Choice and preference assessment research with people with severe to profound developmental disabilities: A review of the literature. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2004.01.006
Catania, A., & Cutts, D. (1963). Experimental control of superstitious responding in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6(2), 203-208. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1963.6-203
Cowie, S. (2018). Behavioral time travel: Control by past, present, and potential events. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice, 18(2), 174-183. https://doi.org/10.1037/bar0000122
Cowie, S. (2019). Some weaknesses of a response-strength account of reinforcer effects. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15021149.2019.1685247
Cowie, S., & Davison, M. (2016). Control by reinforcers across time and space: A review of recent choice research. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 105(2), 246-269. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.200
Cowie, S., & Davison, M. (2020). Being there on time: Reinforcer effects on timing and locating. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 113(2), 340-362.
Cowie, S., Davison, M., Blumhardt, L., & Elliffe, D. (2016). Learning in a changing environment: Effects of the discriminability of visual stimuli and of time. Learning and Motivation, 56, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2016.08.001
Cowie, S., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2011). Reinforcement: Food signals the time and location of future food. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 96(1), 63-86. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.96-63
Cowie, S., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2014). A model for food and stimulus changes that signal time-based contingency changes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 102(3), 289-310. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.105
Cowie, S., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2016). A model for discriminating reinforcers in time and space. Behavioral Processes, 127, 62-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2016.03.010
Cowie, S., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2017). Control by past and present stimuli depends on the discriminated reinforcer differential. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 108(2), 184-203. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.268
Davis, H., & Memmott, J. (1982). Counting behavior in animals: A critical evaluation. Psychological Bulletin, 92(3), 547-571. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.92.3.547
Davison, M. (2018). Divided stimulus control: Which key did you peck, or what color was it? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 109(1), 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.295
Davison, M., & Baum, W. (2000). Choice in a variable environment: Every reinforcer counts. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2000.74-1
Davison, M., & Cowie, S. (2019). Timing or counting? Control by contingency reversals at fixed times or numbers of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition, 45(2), 222-241. https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000201
Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2010). Divided stimulus control: A replication and a quantitative model. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 94(1), 13-23. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2010.94-13
Davison, M., & Jenkins, P. E. (1985). Stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and schedule performance. Animal Learning & Behavior, 13(1), 77-84. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213368
Davison, M., & Jones, B. (1998). Performance on concurrent variable-interval extinction schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 69(1), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1998.69-49
Davison, M., & Nevin, J. A. (1999). Stimuli, reinforcers, and behavior: An integration. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71(3), 439-482. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1999.71-439
Fantino, E., Dunn, R., & Meck, W. (1979). Percentage reinforcement and choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32(3), 335-340. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1979.32-335
Farthing, G., & Hearst, E. (1970). Attention in the pigeon: Testing with compounds or elements. Learning and Motivation, 1(1), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/0023-9690(70)90129-3
Fox, A., & Kyonka, E. (2013). Pigeon responding in fixed-interval and response-initiated fixed-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 100(2), 187-197. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.38
Fox, A., & Kyonka, E. (2015). Timing in response-initiated fixed intervals. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 103(2), 375-392. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.120
Freeman, K., Green, L., Myerson, J., & Woolverton, W. (2009). Delay discounting of saccharin in rhesus monkeys. Behavioral Processes, 82(2), 214-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2009.06.002
Gaiardi, M., Bartoletti, M., Bacchi, A., Gubellini, C., & Babbini, M. (1987). Increased sensitivity to the stimulus properties of morphine in food deprived rats. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 26(4), 719-723. https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-3057(87)90603-4
Garcia, J., & Koelling, R. A. (1966). Relation of cue to consequence in avoidance learning. Psychonomic Science, 4(1), 123-124. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03342209
Gomes-Ng, S., Elliffe, D., & Cowie, S. (2019a). Relative reinforcer rates determine pigeons’ attention allocation when separately trained stimuli are presented together. Learning & Behavior, 47(3), 245-257.
Gomes-Ng, S., Elliffe, D., & Cowie, S. (2019b). Timing compound stimuli: Relative reinforcer probabilities divide stimulus control in the multiple peak procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition, 46(2), 124-138. https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000233.
Grace, R. (1999). The matching law and amount-dependent exponential discounting as accounts of self-control choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1999.71-27
Grace, R., & Nevin, J. (1997). On the relation between preference and resistance to change. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 67(1), 43-65. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1997.67-43
Green, L., & Myerson, J. (2004). A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychological Bulletin, 130(5), 769-792. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769
Hanley, G., Iwata, B., & McCord, B. (2003). Functional analysis of problem behavior: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36(2), 147-185. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2003.36-147
Hull, C. (1933). Differential habituation to internal stimuli in the albino rat. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 16(2), 255-273. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071710
Jenkins, W., Pascal, G., & Walker, R. (1958). Deprivation and generalization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56(3), 274-277. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043850
Jessel, J., Hanley, G. P., & Ghaemmaghami, M. (2016). Interview-informed synthesized contingency analyses: Thirty replications and reanalysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 576-595. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.316
Johnson, M. W., & Bickel, W. K. (2002). Within-subject comparison of real and hypothetical money rewards in delay discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 77(2), 129-146. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2002.77-129
Kelley, M. E., Liddon, C. J., Ribeiro, A., Greif, A. E., & Podlesnik, C. A. (2015). Basic and translational evaluation of renewal of operant responding. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(2), 390-401. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.209
Killeen, P. (1978). Superstition: A matter of bias, not detectability. Science, 199(4324), 88-90. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.199.4324.88
Killeen, P., & Jacobs, K. (2016). Coal is not black, snow is not white, food is not a reinforcer: The roles of affordances and dispositions in the analysis of behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 40(1), 17-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-016-0080-7
Killeen, P., & Jacobs, K. (2017). The modulated contingency. The Behavior Analyst. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-017-0101-1
Krägeloh, C., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2005). Local preference in concurrent schedules: The effects of reinforcer sequences. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 84(1), 37-64. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2005.114-04
Kramer, T. J., & Rilling, M. (1970). Differential reinforcement of low rates: A selective critique. Psychological Bulletin, 74(4), 225. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029813
Landon, J., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2002). Concurrent schedules: Short- and long-term effects of reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 77(3), 257-271. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2002.77-257
Lawicka, W. (1964). The role of stimuli modality in successive discrimination and differentiation learning. Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, 12, 35-38.
Leeper, R. (1935). The role of motivation in learning: A study of the phenomenon of differential motivational control of the utilization of habits. The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology, 46(1), 3-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856559.1935.10533143
Li, M., Garner, W.D., Wessinger, H., & McMillan, D. (1995). Effects of food deprivation and satiation on sensitivity to the discriminative-stimulus effects of pentobarbital in pigeons and morphine in rats. Behavioral Pharmacology, 6(7), 724-731. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008877-199511000-00008
Liddon, C., Kelley, M., & Podlesnik, C. (2017). An animal model of differential reinforcement of alternative behavior. Learning and Motivation, 58, 48-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2017.04.001
Lotfizadeh, A., Edwards, T., Redner, R., & Poling, A. (2012). Motivating operations affect stimulus control: A largely overlooked phenomenon in discrimination learning. The Behavior Analyst, 35(1), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03392268
Mackintosh, N. (1974). The psychology of animal learning. Academic Press.
Mackintosh, N., & Little, L. (1969). Intradimensional and extradimensional shift learning by pigeons. Psychonomic Science, 14(1), 5-6. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03336395
Madden, G. J., Begotka, A. M., Raiff, B. R., & Kastern, L. L. (2003). Delay discounting of real and hypothetical rewards. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11(2), 139-145. https://doi.org/10.1037/1064-1297.11.2.139
Mazur, J. (1996). Choice with certain and uncertain reinforcers in an adjusting-delay procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 66(1), 63-73. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1996.66-63
McLinn, C., & Stephens, D. (2006). What makes information valuable: Signal reliability and environmental uncertainty. Animal Behavior, 71(5), 1119-1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.09.006
McMillan, N., & Roberts, W. (2012). Pigeons make errors as a result of interval timing in a visual, but not a visual-spatial, midsession reversal task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 38(4), 440-445. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030192
Miller, J., Saunders, S., & Bourland, G. (1980). The role of stimulus disparity in concurrently available reinforcement schedules. Animal Learning & Behavior, 8(4), 635-641. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03197780
Miranda-Dukoski, L., Davison, M., & Elliffe, D. (2014). Choice, time and food: Continuous cyclical changes in food probability between reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 101(3), 406-421. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.79
Newman, F., & Baron, M. (1965). Stimulus generalization along the dimension of angularity: A comparison of training procedures. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 60(1), 59-63. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022334
Premack, D. (1962). Reversibility of the reinforcement relation. Science, 136(3512), 255-257.
Racey, D., Young, M. E., Garlick, D., Pham, J. N., & Blaisdell, A. P. (2011). Pigeon and human performance in a multi-armed bandit task in response to changes in variable interval schedules. Learning & Behavior, 39(3), 245-258. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-011-0025-7
Rachlin, H., & Green, L. (1972). Commitment, choice and self-control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 17(1), 15-22. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1972.17-15
Rayburn-Reeves, R., Molet, M., & Zentall, T. (2011). Simultaneous discrimination reversal learning in pigeons and humans: Anticipatory and perseverative errors. Learning & Behavior, 39(2), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-010-0011-5
Rayburn-Reeves, R., Moore, M., Smith, T., Crafton, D., & Marden, K. (2018). Spatial midsession reversal learning in rats: Effects of egocentric cue use and memory. Behavioral Processes, 152, 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2018.03.005
Reynolds, G. S. (1961). Attention in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4(3), 203-208. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1961.4-203
Roper, K., & Zentall, T. (1999). Observing behavior in pigeons: The effect of reinforcement probability and response cost using a symmetrical choice procedure. Learning and Motivation, 30(3), 201-220. https://doi.org/10.1006/lmot.1999.1030
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(2), 253-259. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1969.12-253
Segal, M., & Harrison, J. M. (1978). The control of responding by auditory stimuli: Interactions between different dimensions of the stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30(1), 97-106. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1978.30-97
Seligman, M. E. (1970). On the generality of the laws of learning. Psychological Review, 77(5), 406. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029790
Seligman, M. E., & Hager, J. L. (1972). Biological boundaries of learning. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Shahan, T. A. (2010). Conditioned reinforcement and response strength. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 93(2), 269-289. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2010.93-269
Shahan, T. A., & Podlesnik, C. A. (2006). Divided attention performance and the matching law. Learning & Behavior, 34(3), 255-261. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192881
Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. Prentice-Hall.
Spetch, M., Belke, T., Barnet, R., Dunn, R., & Pierce, W. (1990). Suboptimal choice in a percentage-reinforcement procedure: Effects of signal condition and terminal-link length. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53(2), 219-234. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1990.53-219
Spetch, M., Mondloch, M., Belke, T., & Dunn, R. (1994). Determinants of pigeons' choice between certain and probabilistic outcomes. Animal Learning & Behavior, 22(3), 239-251. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03209832
Stagner, J., & Zentall, T. (2010). Suboptimal choice behavior by pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(3), 412-416. https://doi.org/10.3758/pbr.17.3.412
Stubbs, D. A., & Pliskoff, S. S. (1969). Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12(6), 887-895. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1969.12-887
Thomas, D., Freeman, F., Svinicki, J. G., Burr, D. E. S., & Lyons, J. (1970). Effects of extradimensional training on stimulus generalization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83(1, Pt.2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028588
Thomas, D., & King, R. (1959). Stimulus generalization as a function of level of motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57(5), 323-328. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042183
Timberlake, W. (1993). Behavior systems and reinforcement: An integrative approach. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60(1), 105-128. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1993.60-105
Timberlake, W. (1994). Behavior systems, associationism, and Pavlovian conditioning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(4), 405-420. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03210945
Timberlake, W. (1997). An animal-centered, causal-system approach to the understanding and control of behavior. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 53(1-2), 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-1591(96)01154-9
Urcuioli, P. J. (1984). Overshadowing in matching-to-sample: Reduction in sample-stimulus control by differential sample behaviors. Animal Learning & Behavior, 12(3), 256-264. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199966
Ward, R. D., & Odum, A. L. (2006). Effects of prefeeding, intercomponent-interval food, and extinction on temporal discrimination and pacemaker rate. Behavioural Processes, 71(2-3), 297-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2005.11.016
Weaver, J. E., Dorrance, B. R., & Zentall, T. R. (1999). Present/absent sample matching in pigeons: Is comparison choice controlled by the sample stimulus or by differential sample responding? Animal Learning & Behavior, 27(3), 288-294. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199727
White, K. G., & Pipe, M. E. (1987). Sensitivity to reinforcer duration in a self-control procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48(2), 235-249.
Williams, B. (1981). The following schedule of reinforcement as a fundamental determinant of steady state contrast in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 35(3), 293-310. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1981.35-293
Yokoyama, K., Dailey, D., & Chase, S. (2006). Processing of conflicting and redundant stimulus information by pigeons. Learning & Behavior, 34(3), 241-247. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF0319287
Zentall, T., Clement, T., Bhatt, R., & Allen, J. (2001). Episodic-like memory in pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(4), 685-690. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196204
Zentall, T., Singer, R., & Stagner, J. (2008). Episodic-like memory: Pigeons can report location pecked when unexpectedly asked. Behavioral Processes, 79(2), 93-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2008.05.003