Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
Autor/inn/en | Madden, Gregory J.; Smethells, John R.; Ewan, Eric E.; Hursh, Steven R. |
---|---|
Titel | Tests of Behavioral-Economic Assessments of Relative Reinforcer Efficacy II: Economic Complements |
Quelle | In: Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 88 (2007) 3, S.355-367 (13 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext |
Sprache | englisch |
Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz |
ISSN | 0022-5002 |
Schlagwörter | Positive Reinforcement; Correlation; Prediction; Evaluation Methods; Program Effectiveness; Animals; Animal Behavior; Food; Water; Hypothesis Testing; Behavioral Science Research |
Abstract | This experiment was conducted to test the predictions of two behavioral-economic approaches to quantifying relative reinforcer efficacy. The normalized demand analysis suggests that characteristics of averaged normalized demand curves may be used to predict progressive-ratio breakpoints and peak responding. By contrast, the demand analysis holds that traditional measures of relative reinforcer efficacy (breakpoint, peak response rate, and choice) correspond to specific characteristics of non-normalized demand curves. The accuracy of these predictions was evaluated in rats' responding for food or water: two reinforcers known to function as complements. Consistent with the first approach, predicted peak normalized response output values obtained under single-schedule conditions ordinally predicted progressive-ratio breakpoints and peak response rates obtained in a separate condition. Combining the minimum-needs hypothesis with the normalized demand analysis helped to interpret prior findings, but was less useful in predicting choice between food and water--two strongly complementary reinforcers. Predictions of the demand analysis had mixed success. Peak response outputs predicted from the non-normalized water demand curves were significantly correlated with obtained peak responding for water in a separate condition, but none of the remaining three predicted correlations was statistically significant. The demand analysis fared better in predicting choice--relative consumption of food and water under single schedules of reinforcement predicted preference under concurrent schedules significantly better than chance. (Contains 3 tables and 7 figures.) [For "Tests of Behavioral-Economic Assessments of Relative Reinforcer Efficacy: Economic Substitutes," see EJ990571.] (As Provided). |
Anmerkungen | 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 |
Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
Update | 2017/4/10 |