Differential outcomes enhance accuracy of delayed matching to sample but not resistance to change.

John A Nevin, Ryan D Ward, Corina Jimenez-Gomez, Amy L Odum, Timothy A Shahan
Author Information
  1. John A Nevin: Department of Psychology, University of New Hampshire, NH, USA. jnevin@cisunix.unh.edu

Abstract

Three experiments assessed the relation between the differential outcomes effect and resistance to change of delayed matching-to-sample performance. Pigeons produced delayed matching-to-sample trials by responding on variable interval schedules in two components of a multiple schedule. In the same-outcome component, the probability of reinforcement was the same for both samples (.9 in Experiments 1 and 2, .5 in Experiment 3); in the different-outcomes component, the probability of reinforcement was .9 for one sample and .1 for the other. In all three experiments, the forgetting functions in the different-outcomes component were higher and shallower than in the same-outcomes component. When total reinforcement was greater in the same-outcomes component (Experiments 1 and 2), resistance to disruption by prefeeding, intercomponent food, extinction, or flashing lights typically was greater in that component. In Experiment 3, when total reinforcement was equated, resistance to disruption was similar across components. Thus, the level and slope of forgetting functions depended on differential reinforcement correlated with the samples, but the resistance to change of forgetting functions depended on total reinforcement in a component. Both aspects of the results can be explained by a model of delayed matching to sample performance.

References

  1. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1992 Apr;18(2):154-73 [PMID: 1583445]
  2. J Exp Anal Behav. 2007 Sep;88(2):285-317 [PMID: 17970420]
  3. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Jul;44(1):15-34 [PMID: 16812424]
  4. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Mar;29(2):331-6 [PMID: 16812059]
  5. Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Feb;23(1):73-90; discussion 90-130 [PMID: 11303339]
  6. J Exp Anal Behav. 2003 May;79(3):307-21 [PMID: 12908760]
  7. Behav Res Methods. 2005 Aug;37(3):436-49 [PMID: 16405138]
  8. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Sep;28(2):155-61 [PMID: 16812022]
  9. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 May;27(3):453-67 [PMID: 16812006]
  10. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 May;61(3):389-406 [PMID: 16812728]
  11. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 Jul;76(1):43-74 [PMID: 11516115]
  12. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Mar;73(2):125-39 [PMID: 10784005]
  13. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005 Jul;84(1):65-75 [PMID: 16156137]
  14. Learn Behav. 2005 Feb;33(1):1-21 [PMID: 15971490]
  15. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Jul;58(1):159-72 [PMID: 16812662]

Grants

  1. R01 MH065949-02/NIMH NIH HHS
  2. R01 MH065949/NIMH NIH HHS
  3. R01 MH065949-03/NIMH NIH HHS
  4. R01 MH065949-04/NIMH NIH HHS
  5. R01 MH065949-06/NIMH NIH HHS
  6. R01 MH065949-05/NIMH NIH HHS
  7. R01 MH065949-01/NIMH NIH HHS
  8. R15 AG011459-01/NIA NIH HHS
  9. R01 MH065949-07/NIMH NIH HHS
  10. 65949/PHS HHS

MeSH Term

Animals
Columbidae
Environment
Mental Recall
Reaction Time
Recognition, Psychology
Retention, Psychology

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0componentreinforcementresistancedelayedchange1sampleforgettingfunctionstotalexperimentsdifferentialoutcomesmatching-to-sampleperformancecomponentsprobabilitysamples9Experiments2Experiment3different-outcomessame-outcomesgreaterdisruptiondependedmatchingThreeassessedrelationeffectPigeonsproducedtrialsrespondingvariableintervalschedulestwomultipleschedulesame-outcome5onethreehighershallowerprefeedingintercomponentfoodextinctionflashinglightstypicallyequatedsimilaracrossThuslevelslopecorrelatedaspectsresultscanexplainedmodelDifferentialenhanceaccuracy

Similar Articles

Cited By