Suppr超能文献

未能在鸽子身上重现“职业道德”效应。

Failure to replicate the 'work ethic" effect in pigeons.

作者信息

Vasconcelos Marco, Urcuioli Peter J, Lionello-DeNolf Karen M

机构信息

Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, 703 Third Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2081, USA.

出版信息

J Exp Anal Behav. 2007 May;87(3):383-99. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2007.68-06.

Abstract

We report six unsuccessful attempts to replicate the "work ethic" phenomenon reported by Clement, Feltus, Kaiser, and Zentall (2000). In Experiments 1-5, pigeons learned two simultaneous discriminations in which the S+ and S- stimuli were obtained by pecking an initial stimulus once or multiple (20 or 40) times. Subsequent preference tests between the S+ stimuli and between the S- stimuli mostly revealed indifference, on average, between the S+ from the multiple-peck (high-effort) trials and the S+ from the one-peck (low-effort) trials, and likewise between the two respective Sstimuli. Using a slightly different procedure that permitted assessment of the relative aversiveness of low versus high effort, Experiment 6 again revealed a pattern of indifference despite showing that pigeons took considerably longer to begin pecking on high- than on low-effort trials. Our findings call into question the reliability of the original findings and the sufficiency of the hypothesized within-trial contrast mechanism to produce them.

摘要

我们报告了六次尝试复制克莱门特、费尔图斯、凯泽和曾塔尔(2000年)所报告的“职业道德”现象,但均未成功。在实验1 - 5中,鸽子学习了两种同时进行的辨别任务,其中通过啄一次初始刺激或多次(20次或40次)啄击来获得S + 和S - 刺激。随后在S + 刺激之间以及S - 刺激之间进行的偏好测试大多显示,平均而言,多次啄击(高努力)试验中的S + 与单次啄击(低努力)试验中的S + 之间无差异,两个相应的S - 刺激之间也是如此。实验6采用了略有不同的程序,该程序允许评估低努力与高努力的相对厌恶程度,尽管结果显示鸽子在高努力试验中开始啄击的时间比低努力试验中长得多,但再次揭示了无差异的模式。我们的研究结果对原始研究结果的可靠性以及假设的试验内对比机制产生这些结果的充分性提出了质疑。

相似文献

8
To peck or not peck: Which do pigeons prefer?啄还是不啄:鸽子更喜欢哪种?
Learn Behav. 2019 Sep;47(3):217-226. doi: 10.3758/s13420-018-0365-7.
9
Second-order contrast based on the expectation of effort and reinforcement.
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2002 Jan;28(1):64-74.

引用本文的文献

1
Cognitive and behavioral training interventions to promote self-control.促进自我控制的认知和行为训练干预措施。
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2019 Jul;45(3):259-279. doi: 10.1037/xan0000208. Epub 2019 May 9.
4
Capuchin monkeys do not show human-like pricing effects.卷尾猴不会表现出类似人类的定价效应。
Front Psychol. 2014 Dec 2;5:1330. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01330. eCollection 2014.
8
Associative symmetry in a spatial sample-response paradigm.空间样本-反应范式中的联想对称性。
Behav Processes. 2011 Mar;86(3):305-15. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2011.01.002. Epub 2011 Jan 14.
9
Within-trial contrast: The effect of probability of reinforcement in training.试验内对照:训练中强化概率的影响。
Behav Processes. 2009 Oct;82(2):126-32. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.05.006. Epub 2009 Jul 14.
10
Effort discounting in human nucleus accumbens.人类伏隔核中的努力折扣
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2009 Mar;9(1):16-27. doi: 10.3758/CABN.9.1.16.

本文引用的文献

1
When discrimination fails (or at least falters).
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2006 Oct;32(4):359-70. doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.32.4.359.
2
Economic concepts for the analysis of behavior.经济行为分析的概念。
J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Sep;34(2):219-38. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-219.
5
On science and the discriminative law of effect.论科学与效果的辨别法则。
J Exp Anal Behav. 2005 Jan;83(1):85-92. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2005.27-04.
8
"Justification of effort" in rats: effects of physical and discriminative effort on reward value.
Psychol Rep. 2003 Dec;93(3 Pt 2):1095-100. doi: 10.2466/pr0.2003.93.3f.1095.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验