Mazur James E
Psychology Department, Southern Connecticut State University, New Haven, Connecticut 06515, USA.
J Exp Anal Behav. 2005 May;83(3):263-79. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2005.69-04.
In Experiment 1 with rats, a left lever press led to a 5-s delay and then a possible reinforcer. A right lever press led to an adjusting delay and then a certain reinforcer. This delay was adjusted over trials to estimate an indifference point, or a delay at which the two alternatives were chosen about equally often. Indifference points increased as the probability of reinforcement for the left lever decreased. In some conditions with a 20% chance of food, a light above the left lever was lit during the 5-s delay on all trials, but in other conditions, the light was only lit on those trials that ended with food. Unlike previous results with pigeons, the presence or absence of the delay light on no-food trials had no effect on the rats' indifference points. In other conditions, the rats showed less preference for the 20% alternative when the time between trials was longer. In Experiment 2 with rats, fixed-interval schedules were used instead of simple delays, and the presence or absence of the fixed-interval requirement on no-food trials had no effect on the indifference points. In Experiment 3 with rats and Experiment 4 with pigeons, the animals chose between a fixed-ratio 8 schedule that led to food on 33% of the trials and an adjusting-ratio schedule with food on 100% of the trials. Surprisingly, the rats showed less preference for the 33% alternative in conditions in which the ratio requirement was omitted on no-food trials. For the pigeons, the presence or absence of the ratio requirement on no-food trials had little effect. The results suggest that there may be differences between rats and pigeons in how they respond in choice situations involving delayed and probabilistic reinforcers.
在对大鼠进行的实验1中,按压左侧杠杆会导致5秒的延迟,然后可能获得强化物。按压右侧杠杆会导致一个可调整的延迟,然后获得一定的强化物。在多次试验中对该延迟进行调整,以估计无差异点,即两种选择被选择的频率大致相等时的延迟。随着左侧杠杆强化概率的降低,无差异点增加。在某些食物出现概率为20%的条件下,在所有试验的5秒延迟期间,左侧杠杆上方的灯会亮起,但在其他条件下,该灯仅在以获得食物结束的试验中亮起。与之前对鸽子的研究结果不同,在无食物试验中延迟灯的有无对大鼠的无差异点没有影响。在其他条件下,当试验间隔时间较长时,大鼠对20%概率选项的偏好降低。在对大鼠进行的实验2中,使用了固定间隔时间表而非简单延迟,并且在无食物试验中固定间隔要求的有无对无差异点没有影响。在对大鼠进行的实验3和对鸽子进行的实验4中,动物在一个固定比率为8(在33%的试验中可获得食物)的时间表和一个在100%的试验中可获得食物的调整比率时间表之间进行选择。令人惊讶的是,在无食物试验中省略比率要求的条件下,大鼠对33%概率选项的偏好降低。对于鸽子来说,在无食物试验中比率要求的有无影响很小。结果表明,在涉及延迟和概率性强化物的选择情境中,大鼠和鸽子的反应方式可能存在差异。