Second-Order Schedules of Token Reinforcement with Pigeons: Implications for Unit Price
Saved in:
| Title: | Second-Order Schedules of Token Reinforcement with Pigeons: Implications for Unit Price |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Bullock, Christopher E., Hackenberg, Timothy D. |
| Source: | Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. Jan 2006 85(1):95-106. |
| Availability: | Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. Available from: Indiana University Department of Psychology. Bloomington, IN 47405. Tel: 812-334-0395; Fax: 812-855-4691; e-mail: jeab@indiana.edu; Web site: http://seab.envmed.rochester.edu/jeab/index.html |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Physical Description: | |
| Page Count: | 12 |
| Publication Date: | 2006 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Token Economy, Reinforcement, Animals, Animal Behavior, Food, Scheduling, Visual Stimuli, Light, Responses, Behavioral Science Research |
| DOI: | 10.1901/jeab.2006.116-04 |
| ISSN: | 0022-5002 |
| Abstract: | Four pigeons were exposed to second-order schedules of token reinforcement, with stimulus lights serving as token reinforcers. Tokens were earned according to a fixed-ratio (token-production) schedule, with the opportunity to exchange tokens for food (exchange period) occurring after a fixed number had been produced (exchange-production ratio). The token-production and exchange-production ratios were manipulated systematically across conditions. Response rates varied inversely with the token production ratio at each exchange-production ratio. Response rates also varied inversely with the exchange-production ratio at each token-production ratio, particularly at the higher token-production ratios. At higher token-production and exchange-production ratios, response rates increased in token-production segments closer to exchange periods and food. Some conditions were conducted in a closed economy, in which the pigeons earned all their daily ration of food within the session. Relative to comparable open-economy conditions, response rates in the closed economy were less affected by changes in token-production ratio, resulting in higher levels of food intake and body weight. Some of the results are consistent with the economic concept of unit price, a cost-benefit ratio comprised of responses per unit of food delivery, but most are well accounted for by a consideration of the number of responses required to produce exchange periods, without regard to the amount of reinforcement available during those exchange periods. (Contains 1 table and 5 figures.) |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 19 |
| Entry Date: | 2013 |
| Accession Number: | EJ993366 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Four pigeons were exposed to second-order schedules of token reinforcement, with stimulus lights serving as token reinforcers. Tokens were earned according to a fixed-ratio (token-production) schedule, with the opportunity to exchange tokens for food (exchange period) occurring after a fixed number had been produced (exchange-production ratio). The token-production and exchange-production ratios were manipulated systematically across conditions. Response rates varied inversely with the token production ratio at each exchange-production ratio. Response rates also varied inversely with the exchange-production ratio at each token-production ratio, particularly at the higher token-production ratios. At higher token-production and exchange-production ratios, response rates increased in token-production segments closer to exchange periods and food. Some conditions were conducted in a closed economy, in which the pigeons earned all their daily ration of food within the session. Relative to comparable open-economy conditions, response rates in the closed economy were less affected by changes in token-production ratio, resulting in higher levels of food intake and body weight. Some of the results are consistent with the economic concept of unit price, a cost-benefit ratio comprised of responses per unit of food delivery, but most are well accounted for by a consideration of the number of responses required to produce exchange periods, without regard to the amount of reinforcement available during those exchange periods. (Contains 1 table and 5 figures.) |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0022-5002 |
| DOI: | 10.1901/jeab.2006.116-04 |
