Choice in a self-control paradigm: Quantification of experience-based differences

Previous quantitative models of choice in a self-control paradigm (choice between a larger, more-delayed reinforcer and a smaller, less-delayed reinforcer) have not described individual differences. Two experiments are reported that provide additional quantitative data on experience-based differences in choice between reinforcers of varying sizes and delays. In Experiment 1, seven pigeons in a self-control paradigm were exposed to a fading procedure that increased choices of the larger, more-delayed reinforcer through gradually decreasing the delay to the smaller of two equally delayed reinforcers. Three control subjects, exposed to each of the small-reinforcer delays to which the experimental subjects were exposed, but for fewer sessions, demonstrated that lengthy exposure to each of the conditions in the fading procedure may be necessary in order for the increase to occur. In Experiment 2, pigeons with and without fading-procedure exposure chose between reinforcers of varying sizes and delays scheduled according to a concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedule. In both experiments, pigeons with fading-procedure exposure were more sensitive to variations in reinforcer size than reinforcer delay when compared with pigeons without this exposure. The data were described by the generalized matching law when the relative size of its exponents, representing subjects' relative sensitivity to reinforcer size and delay, were grouped according to subjects' experience.     

How suboptimal is suboptimal choice?

In a frequently used suboptimal‐choice procedure pigeons choose between an alternative that delivers three food pellets with p = 1.0 and an alternative that delivers ten pellets with p = 0.2. Because pigeons reliably choose the probabilistic (suboptimal) alternative, the procedure has been proposed as a nonhuman analog of human gambling. The present experiments were conducted to evaluate two potential threats to the validity of this procedure. Experiments 1 and 2 evaluated if pigeons obtained food at a lower unit price (i.e., pecks per pellet) on the suboptimal alternative than on the optimal alternative. When pigeons worked under this suboptimal procedure they all preferred the suboptimal alternative despite some pigeons paying a higher price for food on that alternative. In Experiment 2, when the unit price ratio more closely approximated the inverse of the expected value ratio, pigeons continued to prefer the suboptimal alternative despite its economic suboptimality. Experiment 3 evaluated if, in accord with the string‐theory of gambling, the valuation of the suboptimal alternative was increased when pigeons misattributed a subset of the suboptimal no‐food trials to the optimal alternative. When trial sequences were arranged to minimize these possible attribution errors, pigeons still preferred the suboptimal alternative. These data remove two threats to the validity of the suboptimal choice procedure; threats that would have suggested that suboptimal choice reflects economic maximization.     

Pigeons are attracted to a perceived gain without an actual gain

Reference dependence refers to the reduced value of a reward that is less than expected, or the added value of a reward that is greater than expected. There is evidence that when pigeons are offered an alternative that has 1 pellet versus an alternative that has 2 pellets, but one of the two pellets offered will be removed, the pigeons prefer the originally presented 1 pellet (loss aversion). In the present research, we tested for the opposite effect (gain attraction). In Experiments 1 and 2, pigeons could choose between 2 pellets, each one on a distinctive background. If they chose the optimal alternative, they received a second pellet. In Experiment 2, the second pellet obtained was the one not initially chosen (a task sometimes referred to as the ephemeral reward task). Pigeons learned to choose optimally in both experiments. In Experiment 3, we tested the pigeons for reference dependence. Pigeons were given an alternative that offered them one pellet or two pellets, if they chose the one-pellet alternative, they received an additional pellet, and if they chose the two-pellet alternative, they received the two pellets. In keeping with the reference dependence hypothesis, the pigeons preferred the 1-pellet alternative that gave them an extra pellet. These effects are related to similar findings with humans, including the endowment effect.

     

A solution for case iii of the law of comparative judgment

A solution for Case III of the Law of Comparative Judgment, modeled after Thurstone's solution for Case IV but eliminating the restrictive assumption of relatively equal discriminal dispersions, is developed.     

DISCOUNTING OF DELAYED FOOD REWARDS IN PIGEONS AND RATS: IS THERE A MAGNITUDE EFFECT?

Temporal discounting refers to the decrease in the present, subjective value of a reward as the time to its receipt increases. Results from humans have shown that a hyperbola-like function describes the form of the discounting function when choices involve hypothetical monetary rewards. In addition, magnitude effects have been reported in which smaller reward amounts are discounted more steeply than larger amounts. The present research examines the cross-species generality of these findings using real rewards, namely food pellets, with both pigeons and rats. As with humans, an adjusting amount procedure was used to estimate the amount of immediate reward judged equal in value to a delayed reward. Different amounts of delayed food rewards (ranging from 5 to 32 pellets in pigeons and from 5 to 20 pellets in rats) were studied at delays varying from 1 s to 32 s. A simple hyperbola, similar to the hyperbola-like mathematical function that describes the discounting of hypothetical monetary rewards in humans, described the discounting of food rewards in both pigeons and rats. These results extend the generality of the mathematical model of discounting. Rates of discounting delayed food rewards were higher for pigeons than for rats. Unlike humans, however, neither pigeons nor rats showed a reliable magnitude effect: Rate of discounting did not vary systematically as a function of the amount of the delayed reward.     

Duration and rate of reinforcement as determinants of concurrent responding

The duration and frequency of food presentation were varied in concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. In the first experiment, in which pigeons were exposed to a succession of eight different schedules, neither relative duration nor relative frequency of reinforcement had as great an effect on response distribution as they have when they are manipulated separately. These results supported those previously reported by Todorov (1973) and Schneider (1973). In a second experiment, each of seven pigeons was exposed to only one concurrent schedule in which the frequency and/or duration of reinforcement differed on the two keys. Under these conditions, each pigeon's relative rate of response closely matched the relative total access to food that each schedule provided. This result suggests that previous failures to obtain matching may be due to factors such as an insufficient length of exposure to each schedule or to the pigeons' repeated exposure to different concurrent schedules.     

Choice in a "self-control" paradigm: effects of a fading procedure

Pigeons chose between an immediate 2-second reinforcer (access to grain) and a 6-second reinforcer delayed 6 seconds. The four pigeons in the control group were exposed to this condition initially. The four experimental subjects first received a condition where both reinforcers were delayed 6 seconds. The small reinforcer delay was then gradually reduced to zero over more than 11,000 trials. Control subjects almost never chose the large delayed reinforcer. Experimental subjects chose the large delayed reinforcer significantly more often. Two experimental subjects showed preference for the large reinforcer even when the consequences for pecking the two keys were switched. The results indicate that fading procedures can lead to increased “self-control” in pigeons in a choice between a large delayed reinforcer and a small immediate reinforcer.     

Choice and number of reinforcers

Pigeons were exposed to the concurrent-chains procedure in two experiments designed to investigate the effects of unequal numbers of reinforcers on choice. In Experiment 1, the pigeons were indifferent between long and short durations of access to variable-interval schedules of equal reinforcement density, but preferred a short high-density terminal link over a longer, lower density terminal link, even though in both sets of comparisons there were many more reinforcers per cycle in the longer terminal link. In Experiment 2, the pigeons preferred five reinforcers, the first of which was available after 30 sec, over a single reinforcer available at 30 sec, but only when the local interval between successive reinforcers was short. The pigeons were indifferent when this local interval was sufficiently long. The pigeons' behavior appeared to be under the control of local terminal-link variables, such as the intervals to the first reinforcer and between successive reinforcers, and was not well described in terms of transformed delays of reinforcement or reductions in average delay to reinforcement.     

Responding under positive and negative response contingencies in pigeons and crows

Four crows were trained to key peck for food. Then, they were exposed to a positive response contingency that required them to peck the key when it was illuminated briefly (the trial) in order to receive food. This procedure resulted in consistent within-trial pecking. When the contingency changed so that food was presented at the end of a trial when no response occurred, but the trial terminated immediately and food was omitted when a response occurred (negative response contingency), responding decreased markedly. Eight pigeons were studied under the same change in contingencies. These birds varied in their response histories from naive to having several years' experience. The previously naive pigeons also showed rapid declines in responding under the negative contingency; the responding of the birds with extended training histories declined much more slowly. Eventually, however, six of the eight pigeons showed little or no responding under the negative contingency, while they responded consistently when re-exposed to the positive contingency. These findings question the power and the generality of the negative automaintenance phenomenon.     

Testing the Δ-∑ hypothesis in the suboptimal choice task: Same delta with different probabilities of reinforcement

In a concurrent-chain procedure, pigeons choose between 2 initial-link stimuli; one is followed by terminal link stimuli that signal reliably whether food will be delivered after a delay; the other is followed by terminal link stimuli that do not signal whether food will be delivered after the delay. Pigeons prefer the former alternative even when it yields a lower overall probability of food. Recently, we proposed the Delta-Sigma (∆-∑) hypothesis to explain the effect: Preference depends on the difference (∆) between the reinforcement probabilities associated with the terminal link stimuli, and the overall probability of reinforcement (∑) associated with the alternative. The hypothesis predicts that, for constant ∑, animals should prefer alternatives with greater ∆ values regardless of the specific probabilities of reinforcement that determine ∆. In 2 experiments, we tested this prediction by comparing a ∆ = .5 against a ∆ = 0 alternative, with the former obtained with different pairs of reinforcement probabilities across conditions. The results supported the hypothesis when the 2 probabilities defining ∆ were significantly greater than 0, but not when one of them was close to 0. The results challenge our theoretical accounts of suboptimal choice and the variables considered to determine pigeons’ preference.     

Revisiting Case IV: A reassessment of bias and standard errors of Case IV under range restriction

In 2004, Hunter and Schmidt proposed a correction (called Case IV) that seeks to estimate disattenuated correlations when selection is made on an unmeasured variable. Although Case IV is an important theoretical development in the range restriction literature, it makes an untestable assumption, namely that the partial correlation between the unobserved selection variable and the performance measure is zero. We show in this paper why this assumption may be difficult to meet and why previous simulations have failed to detect the full extent of bias. We use meta‐analytic literature to investigate the plausible range of bias. We also show how Case IV performs in terms of standard errors. Finally, we give practical recommendations about how the contributions of Hunter and Schmidt (2004) can be extended without making such stringent assumptions.     

Pigeons' discounting of probabilistic and delayed reinforcers

Pigeons' discounting of probabilistic and delayed food reinforcers was studied using adjusting-amount procedures. In the probability discounting conditions, pigeons chose between an adjusting number of food pellets contingent on a single key peck and a larger, fixed number of pellets contingent on completion of a variable-ratio schedule. In the delay discounting conditions, pigeons chose between an adjusting number of pellets delivered immediately and a larger, fixed number of pellets delivered after a delay. Probability discounting (i.e., subjective value as a function of the odds against reinforcement) was as well described by a hyperboloid function as delay discounting was (i.e., subjective value as a function of the time until reinforcement). As in humans, the exponents of the hyperboloid function when it was fitted to the probability discounting data were lower than the exponents of the hyperboloid function when it was fitted to the delay discounting data. The subjective values of probabilistic reinforcers were strongly correlated with predictions based on simply substituting the average delay to their receipt in each probabilistic reinforcement condition into the hyperboloid discounting function. However, the subjective values were systematically underestimated using this approach. Using the discounting function proposed by Mazur (1989), which takes into account the variability in the delay to the probabilistic reinforcers, the accuracy with which their subjective values could be predicted was increased. Taken together, the present findings are consistent with Rachlin's (Rachlin, 1990; Rachlin, Logue, Gibbon, & Frankel, 1986) hypothesis that choice involving repeated gambles may be interpreted in terms of the delays to the probabilistic reinforcers.     

SOME EFFECTS OF PROCEDURAL VARIATIONS ON CHOICE RESPONDING IN CONCURRENT CHAINS

The present research used pigeons in a three‐key operant chamber and varied procedural features pertaining to both initial and terminal links of concurrent chains. The initial links randomly alternated on the side keys during a session, while the terminal links always appeared on the center key. Both equal and unequal initial‐link schedules were employed, with either differential or nondifferential terminal‐link stimuli across conditions. The research was designed to neutralize initial‐ and terminal‐link spatial cues in order to gain a clearer understanding of the roles of conditioned reinforcement and delayed primary reinforcement in choice. With both equal and unequal initial links and with differential terminal‐link stimuli, all pigeons reliably preferred the chain with the shorter terminal link. However, with equal initial links and nondifferential stimuli, all pigeons were indifferent. With unequal initial links and nondifferential stimuli, some pigeons were also indifferent, while others actually reversed and preferred the chain with the shorter initial link, even though it was followed by the longer terminal link. The decrease if not reversal of the previous preferences implies that preferences in concurrent chains are a function of the conditioned reinforcement afforded by terminal‐link stimuli, rather than delayed primary reinforcement.     

Remarks on the method of paired comparisons: I. The least squares solution assuming equal standard deviations and equal correlations

Thurstone's Case V of the method of paired comparisons assumes equal standard deviations of sensations corresponding to stimuli and zero correlations between pairs of stimuli sensations. It is shown that the assumption of zero correlations can be relaxed to an assumption of equal correlations between pairs with no change in method. Further the usual approach to the method of paired comparisons Case V is shown to lead to a least squares estimate of the stimulus positions on the sensation scale.This research was performed in the Laboratory of Social Relations under a grant made available to Harvard University by the RAND Corporation under the Department of the Air Force, Project RAND.     

Autoshaping and automaintenance of a key-press response in squirrel monkeys

Following exposure for a minimum of 500 to 600 trials, three of four naive squirrel monkeys eventually pressed a response key, illumination of which always preceded delivery of a food pellet. Three other naive monkeys did not press the key when the pellets were delivered randomly with respect to key illumination. Despite some similarities to autoshaping using pigeons, the data indicate many points of difference when squirrel monkeys are used as subjects. Although key-food pairings were shown to be important in the acquisition of the key-press response, they were ineffective in maintaining the response when either a negative response-reinforcer dependency was introduced, or when there was no scheduled response-reinforcer dependency (fixed trial). Not all demonstrations of autoshaping can be considered to be under the control of those processes that are primarily responsible for the phenomena obtained in pigeons.     

Preferences for and against stimuli paired with food.

Pigeons were presented with a concurrent-chains schedule in which terminal-link entries were assigned to two response keys on a percentage basis. The terminal links were fixed delays that sometimes ended with food and sometimes did not. In most conditions, 80% of the terminal links were assigned to one key, but a smaller percentage of the terminal links ended with food for this key, so the number of food reinforcers delivered by the two alternatives was equal. When the same terminal-link stimuli (orange houselights) were used for both alternatives, the pigeons showed a preference for whichever alternative delivered more frequent terminal links. When different terminal-link stimuli (green vs. red houselights) were used for the two alternatives, the pigeons showed a preference for whichever alternative delivered fewer terminal links when terminal-link durations were long, and no systematic preferences when terminal-link durations were short. This pattern of results was consistent with the predictions of Grace's (1994) contextual choice model. Preference for the alternative that delivered more frequent terminal links was usually stronger in the first few sessions of a condition than at the end of a condition, suggesting that the conditioned reinforcing effect of the additional terminal-link presentation was, in part, transitory.     

Responding during reinforcement delay in a self-control paradigm.

Eight pigeons chose between a small, immediate reinforcer and a large, increasingly delayed reinforcer. Responding during the large-reinforcer delays was examined. During large-reinforcer delays, pecks on one key produced the small, immediate reinforcer; pecks on the other key had no effect. Thus, a pigeon could reverse its initial choice of the large, delayed reinforcer, or it could maintain its original choice. Pigeons that made a relatively high number of initial large-reinforcer choices tended to maintain these choices, and those pigeons that actually received a relatively high number of large reinforcers, tended to respond more frequently on the ineffective key during the delay periods. The findings suggest that some previous studies of self-control training in pigeons may have resulted in increased self-control partially due to a lack of opportunity for the pigeons to change their choices.     

Choice with delayed and probabilistic reinforcers: effects of variability, time between trials, and conditioned reinforcers.

In a discrete-trials procedure with pigeons, a response on a green key led to a 4-s delay (during which green houselights were lit) and then a reinforcer might or might not be delivered. A response on a red key led to a delay of adjustable duration (during which red houselights were lit) and then a certain reinforcer. The delay was adjusted so as to estimate an indifference point--a duration for which the two alternatives were equally preferred. Once the green key was chosen, a subject had to continue to respond on the green key until a reinforcer was delivered. Each response on the green key, plus the 4-s delay that followed every response, was called one "link" of the green-key schedule. Subjects showed much greater preference for the green key when the number of links before reinforcement was variable (averaging four) than when it was fixed (always exactly four). These findings are consistent with the view that probabilistic reinforcers are analogous to reinforcers delivered after variable delays. When successive links were separated by 4-s or 8-s "interlink intervals" with white houselights, preference for the probabilistic alternative decreased somewhat for 2 subjects but was unaffected for the other 2 subjects. When the interlink intervals had the same green houselights that were present during the 4-s delays, preference for the green key decreased substantially for all subjects. These results provided mixed support for the view that preference for a probabilistic reinforcer is inversely related to the duration of conditioned reinforcers that precede the delivery of food.     

The Δ–∑ hypothesis: How contrast and reinforcement rate combine to generate suboptimal choice

When given a choice between two alternatives, each offering food after the same delay with different but signaled probabilities, pigeons often prefer the low probability alternative. This preference is surprising because pigeons fail to maximize the rate of food intake; they exhibit a suboptimal preference. We advance a new explanation, the Δ–∑ hypothesis, in which the difference in probability of reinforcement within terminal links (Δ) and the overall reinforcement probability rate of each alternative (∑) are the key variables responsible for such suboptimal preference. We tested the Δ–∑ hypothesis in two experiments. In Experiment 1, we manipulated the Δs while maintaining constant all other parameters of the task, in particular the ∑s. We predicted a preference for the alternative with the larger Δ. In Experiment 2, we examined the effect of the overall reinforcement probabilities, the ∑s, while maintaining constant all other parameters of the task, in particular the Δs. We predicted a preference for the larger ∑. The results of both experiments support the Δ–∑ hypothesis.     

Suboptimal choice in a percentage-reinforcement procedure: effects of signal condition and terminal-link length.

Pigeons' choice between reliable (100%) and unreliable (50%) reinforcement was studied using a concurrent-chains procedure. Initial links were fixed-ratio 1 schedules, and terminal links were equal fixed-time schedules. The duration of the terminal links was varied across conditions. The terminal link on the reliable side always ended in food; the terminal link on the unreliable side ended with food 50% of the time and otherwise with blackout. Different stimuli present during the 50% terminal links signaled food or blackout outcomes under signaled conditions but were uncorrelated with outcomes under unsignaled conditions. In signaled conditions, most pigeons displayed a nearly exclusive preference for the 100% alternative when terminal links were short (5 or 10 s), but with terminal links of 30 s or longer, preference for the 100% alternative was sharply reduced (often to below .5). In unsignaled conditions, most pigeons showed extreme preference for the 100% alternative with either short (5 s) or longer (30 s) terminal links. Thus, pigeons' choice between reliable and unreliable reinforcement is influenced by both the signal conditions on the unreliable alternative and the duration of the terminal-link delay. With a long delay and signaled outcomes, many pigeons display a suboptimal tendency to choose the unreliable side.