Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Preference for qualitatively different reinforcers.

V Hollard, M C Davison

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

|November 1, 1971

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Concurrent schedules: undermatching and control by previous experimental conditions.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1979

Same author

Intracranial self stimulation from endbrain nuclei in the pigeon (Columba livia).

Physiology & behavior·1978

Same author

Response rate and changeover performance on concurrent variable-interval schedules.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1978

Same author

Distribution of response ratios in concurrent variable-interval performance.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1978

Same author

The relation between the generalized matching law and signal-detection theory.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1978

Same author

Histological data: Hollard and Davison (1971).

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1978

Same journal

The Genoeconomics of Impulsive Intertemporal Choice: A Critical Review.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Shaping the extinction burst: Increasing its probability and preventing its emergence across topographies.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Evaluating the combined effects of effort and probability on monetary discounting.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

An improved translational approach to studying persistence-strengthening effects of differential reinforcement of alternative behavior.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Interactions between the effects of food and water motivating operations on concurrent food- and water-reinforced responding in mice.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Odor-visual and visual-visual matching to sample with dogs.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

See all related articles

This study shows that pigeons can choose between food and brain stimulation, demonstrating that different types of rewards can be understood using the same behavioral economics principles. This research advances our understanding of reinforcement and choice behavior.

Area of Science:

Behavioral neuroscience
Comparative psychology
Neuroeconomics

Background:

Understanding choice behavior is crucial in psychology and neuroscience.
Previous models often focus on single reinforcer types.
Investigating responses to qualitatively different reinforcers is needed.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate pigeon choice behavior between two distinct reinforcers: food and brain stimulation.
To determine if a unified theoretical framework can explain choices between different types of rewards.
To explore the application of behavioral economics principles to complex reinforcement scenarios.

Main Methods:

Three pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules.
One key offered food reinforcement, the other offered ectostriatal brain stimulation.

Related Experiment Videos

Brain stimulation parameters were constant, while food availability varied.

Main Results:

Pigeons demonstrated stable choice behavior between food and brain stimulation.
The results support the integration of qualitatively different reinforcers within a single theoretical framework.
Behavioral allocation varied predictably with changes in food reinforcement rate.

Conclusions:

Qualitatively different reinforcers can be analyzed within the same theoretical framework as variations of a single reinforcer.
This supports a unified approach to understanding choice and reinforcement across diverse reward types.
Findings have implications for behavioral economics and the study of motivation.