| Project/Area Number |
60510070
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for General Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Research Field |
Psychology
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Osaka City University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
ITO Masato Associate Professor of Psychology, Osaka City University, 文学部, 助教授 (70106334)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
1985 – 1986
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 1986)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥1,800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,800,000)
Fiscal Year 1986: ¥400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥400,000)
Fiscal Year 1985: ¥1,400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,400,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | Choice / foraging / amount and delay of reinforcement / 採餌スケジュール / 強化量 / 遅延時間 / 相互作用 |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
The present study investigated the interaction of amount and delay of reinforcement in concurrent and successive choice situations. In concurrent choice situations, rats were given a choice between alternatives differing in amount and delay of reinforcement. First, the ratio of the delays was constant at 3:2 while their absolute values were varied. The shorter delay terminated with 1 food pellet whereas the longer delay terminated with 3 food pellets. As the absolute values of the delays to reinforcement increased, preference for the longer-delayed but larger reinforcer increased. Second, the number of food pellets was varied in one alternative while it was constant (1 pellet) in the other alternative under two different terminal link schedules of a concurrent-chains schedule. Rats undermatched the response ratios to reinforcer amount ratios with the shorter terminal links (5 sec) whereas they overmatched with the longer terminal links (20 sec). In successive choice situations, rats and pigeons were exposed to a foraging schedule characterized by three different states (search, choice and handling states). The shorter duration (or smaller) reinforcer was more likely to be accepted the longer the handling time preceding the longer duration (or larger) reinforcer. All ofthe results are inconsistent with the predictions derived from the choice model assuming a simple multiplicative interaction of amount and delay of reinforcement.
|
