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

Choice between response units: The rate constancy model.

M D Zeiler, T F Blakely

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

|March 1, 1983

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

On sundials, springs, and atoms.

Behavioural processes·2014

Same author

Time without clocks.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1999

Same author

Temporal control in fixed-interval schedules.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1994

Same author

To wait or to respond?

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1993

Same author

On immediate function.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1992

Same author

Temporal reproduction.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·1989

Same journal

Performance and feedback function on variable differential reinforcement of low rates: Tempus urgit vel abundat?

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

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

See all related articles

This study explored how pigeons allocate responses between two simultaneous schedules of reinforcement. A new model accurately predicted response rates based on time allocation matching reinforcement frequency, outperforming existing matching law models.

Area of Science:

Behavioral psychology
Animal behavior
Operant conditioning

Background:

Conjoint schedules involve simultaneous reinforcement opportunities for a single response.
Understanding response allocation is crucial for predicting behavior under complex reinforcement conditions.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate response allocation in pigeons under conjoint schedules of reinforcement.
To test a novel time-allocation model against the absolute-rate version of the matching law.

Main Methods:

Pigeons pecked a key for food under conjoint random-interval and differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedules.
Reinforcer frequency and DRL parameters were systematically varied.
An external stimulus was used in one experiment to signal DRL interresponse time completion.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

A time-allocation model, where time spent on a schedule matches reinforcement frequency, accurately described response rates.
This model was superior to the absolute-rate matching law and applicable to concurrent schedules.
Pigeons did not maximize overall reinforcer frequency.

Conclusions:

The proposed time-allocation model offers a robust explanation for behavior under conjoint schedules.
It accounts for matching, undermatching, and bias, providing insights into reinforcement control.
Behavioral allocation does not always equate to optimizing reinforcement rates.