累进比率和固定比率时间表下对强化物的偏好：单一安排与并发安排的比较
Preference for reinforcers under progressive- and fixed-ratio schedules: a comparison of single and concurrent arrangements.
作者信息
Glover Ashley C, Roane Henry S, Kadey Heather J, Grow Laura L
机构信息
Marcus Institute, Georgia State University, Georgia, USA.
出版信息
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Summer;41(2):163-76. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-163.
Abstract
Progressive-ratio (PR) schedules were used to identify the break point (i.e., the last schedule value completed) for 2 reinforcers under single and concurrent schedules. After the respective break points were established, the same reinforcers were presented under concurrent fixed-ratio (FR) schedules that were yoked to the break points obtained with the PR schedules. Results suggested that the participants responded more for the high-preference item than for the low-preference item, regardless of the presentation arrangement (single or concurrent presentations). This pattern of responding was maintained when the reinforcers were presented under dissimilar FR schedules. The results suggest that responding for differentially preferred stimuli may vary as a function of differences in schedule requirements.
摘要
采用累进比率（PR）程序来确定在单一和并发程序下两种强化物的断点（即完成的最后一个程序值）。在确定各自的断点后，在与PR程序获得的断点相匹配的并发固定比率（FR）程序下呈现相同的强化物。结果表明，无论呈现安排（单一或并发呈现）如何，参与者对高偏好项目的反应比对低偏好项目的反应更多。当强化物在不同的FR程序下呈现时，这种反应模式得以维持。结果表明，对不同偏好刺激的反应可能会因程序要求的差异而有所不同。
相似文献
1
Preference for reinforcers under progressive- and fixed-ratio schedules: a comparison of single and concurrent arrangements.累进比率和固定比率时间表下对强化物的偏好：单一安排与并发安排的比较
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Summer;41(2):163-76. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-163.
2
Further examination of factors that influence preference for positive versus negative reinforcement.进一步研究影响对正强化与负强化偏好的因素。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2007 Spring;40(1):25-44. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2007.151-05.
3
Evaluation of absolute and relative reinforcer value using progressive-ratio schedules.使用渐进比率程序评估绝对和相对强化物价值。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Summer;41(2):189-202. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-189.
4
Concurrent reinforcement schedules: behavior change and maintenance without extinction.并发强化程序：行为改变与维持而不消退。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Summer;35(2):155-69. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2002.35-155.
5
Reinforcing efficacy of interactions with preferred and nonpreferred staff under progressive-ratio schedules.在累进比率时间表下增强与偏好和非偏好工作人员互动的效果。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Summer;41(2):221-5. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-221.
6
Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity.强化物偏好作为时间表要求和刺激相似性的函数而出现。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):439-49. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-439.
7
Assessing potency of high- and low-preference reinforcers with respect to response rate and response patterns.评估高偏好和低偏好强化物在反应率和反应模式方面的效力。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Summer;41(2):177-88. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-177.
8
Evaluating self-control and impulsivity in children with severe behavior disorders.评估患有严重行为障碍儿童的自我控制能力和冲动性。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Winter;32(4):451-66. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-451.
9
Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness.使用选择评估来预测强化物的有效性。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Spring;29(1):1-9. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-1.
10
Assessment of a response bias for aggression over functionally equivalent appropriate behavior.对功能等效的适当行为中攻击反应偏差的评估。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Spring;33(1):73-7. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-73.
引用本文的文献
1
Differential neural responding to affective stimuli in 6- to 8-year old children at high familial risk for depression: Associations with behavioral reward seeking.6 至 8 岁高家族性抑郁风险儿童对情感刺激的神经反应差异：与行为奖励寻求的关联。
J Affect Disord. 2019 Oct 1;257:445-453. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.06.058. Epub 2019 Jul 2.
2
Examining the reinforcing value of stimuli within social and non-social contexts in children with and without high-functioning autism.考察高功能自闭症儿童和普通儿童在社会和非社会情境下刺激的强化价值。
Autism. 2017 Oct;21(7):881-895. doi: 10.1177/1362361316655035. Epub 2016 Jul 1.
3
Translational Assessment of Reward and Motivational Deficits in Psychiatric Disorders.精神疾病中奖励与动机缺陷的转化评估
Curr Top Behav Neurosci. 2016;28:231-62. doi: 10.1007/7854_2015_5004.
4
Correspondence between single versus daily preference assessment outcomes and reinforcer efficacy under progressive-ratio schedules.单项偏好评估结果与递增比率强化效能之间的对应关系与每日偏好评估结果的关系。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2012 Winter;45(4):763-77. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2012.45-763.
5
Effects of preference and reinforcer variation on within-session patterns of responding.偏好和强化物变化对.session 内反应模式的影响。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2012 Fall;45(3):637-41. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2012.45-637.
6
The Role of Context in the Evaluation of Reinforcer Efficacy: Implications for the Preference Assessment Outcomes.情境在强化物效能评估中的作用：对偏好评估结果的启示
Res Autism Spectr Disord. 2012 Jan;6(1):158-167. doi: 10.1016/j.rasd.2011.04.001.
7
Examination of the influence of contingency on changes in reinforcer value.考察应急性对强化物价值变化的影响。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2011 Fall;44(3):543-58. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2011.44-543.
8
On the relation between reinforcer efficacy and preference.关于强化物效力与偏好的关系。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2010 Mar;43(1):95-100. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2010.43-95.
9
On the correspondence between preference assessment outcomes and progressive-ratio schedule assessments of stimulus value.偏好评估结果与刺激价值递增比率评估之间的一致性。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2009 Fall;42(3):729-33. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-729.
10
Consumption and response output as a function of unit price: manipulation of cost and benefit components.消费和反应输出作为单位价格的函数：成本和收益成分的操纵。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2009 Fall;42(3):609-25. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-609.
本文引用的文献
1
Reinforcement magnitude and pausing on progressive-ratio schedules.递增比例方案中的强化幅度和停顿。
J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Sep;58(2):377-88. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.58-377.
2
Preference for reinforcers under varying schedule arrangements: A behavioral economic analysis.在不同的时间表安排下对强化物的偏好：一种行为经济学分析。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Winter;27(4):597-606. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-597.
3
Replacing relative reinforcing efficacy with behavioral economic demand curves.用行为经济需求曲线取代相对强化效力。
J Exp Anal Behav. 2006 Jan;85(1):73-93. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2006.102-04.
4
Progressive ratio as a measure of reward strength.渐进比率作为奖励强度的一种衡量方法。
Science. 1961 Sep 29;134(3483):943-4. doi: 10.1126/science.134.3483.943.
5
Assessing reinforcers under progressive schedule requirements.在渐进式时间表要求下评估强化物。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2001 Summer;34(2):145-66. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-145.
6
Further evaluation of low-ranked items in stimulus-choice preference assessments.刺激选择偏好评估中低排名项目的进一步评估。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Spring;33(1):105-8. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-105.
7
On the displacement of leisure items by food during multiple-stimulus preference assessments.在多重刺激偏好评估期间休闲物品被食物取代的情况。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Winter;32(4):515-8. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-515.
8
Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: implications for preference assessments.相对与绝对强化效应：对偏好评估的影响
J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Winter;32(4):479-93. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-479.
9
Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity.强化物偏好作为时间表要求和刺激相似性的函数而出现。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):439-49. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-439.
10
Displacement of leisure reinforcers by food during preference assessments.在偏好评估期间，食物对休闲强化物的替代作用。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):475-84. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-475.
Zotero 插件