Fantino Edmund, Romanowich Paul
Department of Psychology-0109, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109, USA.
J Exp Anal Behav. 2007 May;87(3):409-21. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2007.44-06.
We review the nature of conditioned reinforcement, including evidence that conditioned reinforcers maintain choice behavior in concurrent schedules and that they elevate responding in the terminal links of concurrent-chains schedules. A question has resurfaced recently: Do theories of choice in concurrent-chains schedules need to include a term reflecting greater preference for higher rates of conditioned reinforcement? The review of several studies addressing this point suggests that such a term is inappropriate. Elevated rates of conditioned reinforcement (and responding) in the terminal links of concurrent-chains schedules do not lead to greater preference in the initial link leading to the higher rate of conditioned reinforcement. If anything, the opposite preference is likely to occur. This result is not surprising, since the additional putative conditioned reinforcers in the terminal link are not correlated with a reduction in time to primary reinforcement nor with an increase in value.
我们回顾了条件强化的本质，包括条件强化物在并发程序中维持选择行为以及它们提高并发链程序终端环节反应率的证据。最近一个问题再次出现：并发链程序中的选择理论是否需要包含一个反映对更高条件强化率有更大偏好的术语？对几项涉及这一点的研究的回顾表明，这样一个术语是不合适的。并发链程序终端环节中条件强化（和反应）率的提高并不会导致在通向更高条件强化率的初始环节中产生更大的偏好。如果有什么不同的话，可能会出现相反的偏好。这一结果并不令人惊讶，因为终端环节中额外的假定条件强化物与初级强化时间的减少或价值的增加均无关联。
