Measuring reinforcer efficacy: does relative persistence do it? Comment on Meisch (2000)
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 13, 2026

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats
Published on: March 17, 2019
1Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville 32611, USA. branch@psych.ufl.edu
Abstract:
R. A. Meisch (2000a) offers a new way to scale the effectiveness of reinforcers. Specifically, he uses as a measure the ratio of output under a relatively large fixed-ratio schedule to the output under a smaller fixed-ratio schedule. With such metrics, it is usually the case that as reinforcer magnitude is increased, the measured ratio increases. The method, however, violates a foundation of all measurement, comparison against a fixed standard. Some of the data provided in this article illustrate the problem of selecting what will serve as the "baseline" for comparison (i.e., what will serve as the denominator of the measure). Depending on the selection of baseline, one can find effects of a particular experimental operation ranging from none to substantial.
Related Concept Videos
Timing and Consequences on Behavior
Humans, however, can respond to delayed reinforcers. We often make decisions between immediate small rewards and delayed larger rewards. This ability to delay gratification is a significant factor...
Primary and Secondary Reinforcers
Effective reinforcers for humans vary depending on the individual and the context. Primary reinforcers, such as food, water, sleep, shelter, and pleasure, have inherent value and satisfy basic biological...
Regression Toward the Mean
