Kagel J H, Dwyer G P, Battalio R C
Economics Department, University of Houston - University Park, Houston, TX 77004, U.S.A.
Economics Department, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 U.S.A.
Behav Processes. 1985 Jun;11(1):61-77. doi: 10.1016/0376-6357(85)90103-2.
This paper tests two competing hypotheses concerning the motivational forces underlying concurrent choice behavior: a generalized version of Staddon's minimum-distance hypothesis, which characterizes behavior in terms of minimizing the distance to a "bliss" point, and a generalized minimum-needs hypothesis, which emphasizes meeting minimum survival requirements first, after which the organism is free to allocate behavior in any fashion desired. The models specify distinctly different preference structures. The generalized minimum-needs hypothesis is shown to provide a superior fit to molar choice data from experiments involving food and fluid consumption.
斯塔登最小距离假设的广义版本，该假设根据到“极乐”点的距离最小化来描述行为；以及广义最小需求假设，该假设强调首先满足最低生存需求，在此之后生物体可以自由地以任何期望的方式分配行为。这些模型指定了截然不同的偏好结构。结果表明，广义最小需求假设能更好地拟合来自涉及食物和液体消耗实验的总体选择数据。
