On the exponent in the "generalized" matching equation

A power function equation between ratios of behavior and ratios of reinforcement rates has been called a generalized form of Herrnstein's (1961) matching law, even without a formal relationship having been shown between the two equations. The present work uses a functional relationship to prove that when ratios of reinforcement are not equivalent to ratios of behavior, and the transform leading to this inequality is consistent for every pair of reinforcement rates, the result is a power function relationship between response and reinforcement ratios. The label “generalized matching equation” for the power function equation is thus validated formally.     

The law of effect and avoidance: a quantitative relationship between response rate and shock-frequency reduction

Two experiments were conducted to investigate the quantitative relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency in single and multiple variable-interval avoidance schedules. Responses cancelled delivery of shocks that were scheduled by variable-interval schedules. When shock-frequency reduction was taken as the measure of reinforcement, the relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency on single variable-interval avoidance schedules was accurately described by Herrnstein's (1970) equation for responding on single variable-interval schedules of positive reinforcement. On multiple variable-interval avoidance schedules with brief components, asymptotic relative response rate matched relative shock-frequency reduction. The results suggest that many interactions between response rates and shock-frequency reduction in avoidance can be understood within the framework of the generalized matching relation, as applied by Herrnstein (1970) to positive reinforcement.     

Falsification of matching theory's account of single-alternative responding: Herrnstein's k varies with sucrose concentration

Eight rats pressed levers for varying concentrations of sucrose in water under eight variable-interval schedules that specified a wide range of reinforcement rate. Herrnstein's (1970) hyperbolic equation described the relation between reinforcement and responding well. Although the y asymptote, k, of the hyperbola appeared roughly constant over conditions that approximated conditions used by Heyman and Monaghan (1994), k varied when lower concentration solutions were included. Advances in matching theory that reflect asymmetries between response alternatives and insensitive responding were incorporated into Herrnstein's equation. After fitting the modified equation to the data, Herrnstein's k also increased. The results suggest that variation in k can be detected under a sufficiently wide range of reinforcer magnitudes, and they also suggest that matching theory's account of response strength is false. The results support qualitative predictions made by linear system theory.     

Feedback functions, optimization, and the relation of response rate to reinforcer rate

The present experiment arranged a series of inverted U-shaped feedback functions relating reinforcer rate to response rate to test whether responding was consistent with an optimization account or with a one-to-one relation of response rate to reinforcer rate such as linear system theory's rate equation or Herrnstein's hyperbola. Reinforcer rate was arranged according to a quadratic equation with a maximum at a unique response rate. The experiment consisted of two phases, during which 6 Long Evans rats lever pressed for food. In the first phase of the experiment, the rats responded on six fixed-interval-plus-quadratic-feedback schedules, and in the second phase the rats responded on three variable-interval-plus-quadratic-feedback schedules. Responding in both phases was inconsistent with a one-to-one relation of response rate to reinforcer rate. Instead, different response rates were obtained at equivalent reinforcer rates. Responding did vary directly with the vertex of the feedback function in both phases, a finding consistent with optimization of reinforcer rate. The present results suggest that the feedback function relating reinforcer rate to response rate imposed by a reinforcement schedule can be an important determinant of behavior. Furthermore, the present experiment illustrates the benefit of arranging feedback functions to investigate assumptions about the variables that control schedule performance.     

Relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency in variable-interval schedules: the effect of the concentration of sucrose reinforcement

Four rats were exposed to variable-interval schedules specifying a range of different reinforcement frequencies, using sucrose of two different concentrations and distilled water as the reinforcer. With sucrose, the rates of responding of all four rats were increasing negatively accelerated functions of reinforcement frequency, the data conforming closely to Herrnstein's equation; this was also true of the data from three of the four rats when distilled water was used as the reinforcer. The values of both constants in Herrnstein's equation were related to the sucrose concentration: the asymptotic response rate decreased, and the reinforcement frequency corresponding to the half-maximal response rate increased, with decreasing sucrose concentration.     

Studies of wheel-running reinforcement: parameters of Herrnstein's (1970) response-strength equation vary with schedule order

Six male Wistar rats were exposed to different orders of reinforcement schedules to investigate if estimates from Herrnstein's (1970) single-operant matching law equation would vary systematically with schedule order. Reinforcement schedules were arranged in orders of increasing and decreasing reinforcement rate. Subsequently, all rats were exposed to a single reinforcement schedule within a session to determine within-session changes in responding. For each condition, the operant was lever pressing and the reinforcing consequence was the opportunity to run for 15 s. Estimates of k and R(O) were higher when reinforcement schedules were arranged in order of increasing reinforcement rate. Within a session on a single reinforcement schedule, response rates increased between the beginning and the end of a session. A positive correlation between the difference in parameters between schedule orders and the difference in response rates within a session suggests that the within-session change in response rates may be related to the difference in the asymptotes. These results call into question the validity of parameter estimates from Herrnstein's (1970) equation when reinforcer efficacy changes within a session.     

Effect of punishment on human variable-interval performance

Three female human subjects pressed a button for monetary reinforcement in a range of variable-interval schedules specifying different frequencies of reinforcement. On alternate days, responding was also punished (by subtracting money) according to a variable-ratio 34 schedule. In the absence of punishment, rate of responding was an increasing negatively accelerated function of reinforcement frequency; the relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency conformed to Herrnstein's equation. The effect of the punishment schedule was to suppress responding at all frequencies of reinforcement. This was reflected in a change in the values of both constants in Herrnstein's equation: the value of the theoretical maximum response-rate parameter was reduced, while the parameter describing the reinforcement frequency corresponding to the half-maximal response rate was increased.     

Performances on ratio and interval schedules of reinforcement: Data and theory

Two differences between ratio and interval performance are well known: (a) Higher rates occur on ratio schedules, and (b) ratio schedules are unable to maintain responding at low rates of reinforcement (ratio “strain”). A third phenomenon, a downturn in response rate at the highest rates of reinforcement, is well documented for ratio schedules and is predicted for interval schedules. Pigeons were exposed to multiple variable-ratio variable-interval schedules in which the intervals generated in the variable-ratio component were programmed in the variable-interval component, thereby “yoking” or approximately matching reinforcement in the two components. The full range of ratio performances was studied, from strained to continuous reinforcement. In addition to the expected phenomena, a new phenomenon was observed: an upturn in variable-interval response rate in the midrange of rates of reinforcement that brought response rates on the two schedules to equality before the downturn at the highest rates of reinforcement. When the average response rate was corrected by eliminating pausing after reinforcement, the downturn in response rate vanished, leaving a strictly monotonic performance curve. This apparent functional independence of the postreinforcement pause and the qualitative shift in response implied by the upturn in variable-interval response rate suggest that theoretical accounts will require thinking of behavior as partitioned among at least three categories, and probably four: postreinforcement activity, other unprogrammed activity, ratio-typical operant behavior, and interval-typical operant behavior.     

Undermatching and overmatching as deviations from the matching law

A model of performance under concurrent variable-interval reinforcement schedules that takes as its starting point the hypothetical “burst” structure of operant responding is presented. Undermatching and overmatching are derived from two separate, and opposing, tendencies. The first is a tendency to allocate a certain proportion of response bursts randomly to a response alternative without regard for the rate of reinforcement it provides, others being allocated according to the simple matching law. This produces undermatching. The second is a tendency to prolong response bursts that have a high probability of initiation relative to those for which initiation probability is lower. This process produces overmatching. A model embodying both tendencies predicts (1) that undermatching will be more common than overmatching, (2) that overmatching, when it occurs, will tend to be of limited extent. Both predictions are consistent with available data. The model thus accounts for undermatching and overmatching deviations from the matching law in terms of additional processes added on to behavior allocation obeying the simple matching relation. Such a model thus enables processes that have been hypothesized to underlie matching, such as some type of reinforcement rate or probability optimization, to remain as explanatory mechanisms even though the simple matching law may not generally be obeyed.     

Effects of adding a second reinforcement alternative: implications for Herrnstein's interpretation of r(e)

Herrnstein's hyperbola describes the relation between response rate and reinforcer rate on variable-interval (VI) schedules. According to Herrnstein's (1970) interpretation, the parameter r(e) represents the reinforcer rate extraneous to the alternative to which the equation is fitted (the target alternative). The hyperbola is based on an assumption that extraneous reinforcer rate remains constant with changes in reinforcer rate on the target alternative (the constant-r(e) assumption) and that matching with no bias and perfect sensitivity occurs between response and reinforcer ratios. In the present experiment, 12 rats pressed levers for food on a series of 10 VI schedules arranged on the target alternative. Across conditions, six VI values and extinction were arranged on a second alternative. Reinforcer rate on the second alternative, r2, negatively covaried with reinforcer rate on the target alternative for five of the six VI values on the second alternative, and significant degrees of bias and undermatching occurred in response ratios. Given covariation of reinforcer rate on the second and target alternatives, the constant-r(e) assumption can be maintained only by assuming that reinforcer rate from unmeasured background sources, rb, covaries with reinforcer rate on the second alternative such that their sum, r(e), remains constant. In a single-schedule arrangement, however, r(e) equals rb and thus rb is assumed to remain constant, forcing a conceptual inconsistency between single- and concurrent-schedule arrangements. Furthermore, although an alternative formulation of the hyperbola can account for variations in bias and sensitivity, the modified equation also is based on the constant-r(e) assumption and therefore suffers from the same logical problem as the hyperbola when reinforcer rate on the second alternative covaries with reinforcer rate on the target alternative.     

The effect of punishment on free-operant choice behavior in humans

During Phase I, three female human subjects pressed a button for monetary reinforcement in five variable-interval schedules specifying different frequencies of reinforcement. On alternate days, responding was also punished (by subtracting money) according to a variable-ratio 34 schedule. In the absence of punishment, response rates conformed to Herrnstein's equation for single variable-interval schedules. Punishment suppressed responding at all frequencies of reinforcement. This was reflected in a change in the values of both constants in Herrnstein's equation: the value of the theoretical maximum response-rate parameter was reduced, and the parameter describing the reinforcement frequency corresponding to the half-maximal response rate was elevated. During Phase II, the same five schedules (A) were in operation (without punishment), but in addition, a concurrent variable-interval schedule (B) of standard reinforcement frequency was introduced. On alternate days, responding in Component B was punished according to a variable-ratio 34 schedule. In the absence of punishment, absolute response rates conformed to equations proposed by Herrnstein to describe performance in concurrent schedules; the ratios of the response rates in the two components and the ratios of the times spent in the two components conformed to the Matching Law. When responding in Component B was punished, response rates in Component B were reduced and those in Component A were elevated, these changes being reflected in distortions of the matching relationship.     

Choice as time allocation

When pigeons' standing on one or the other side of a chamber was reinforced on two concurrent variable-interval schedules, the ratio of time spent on the left to time spent on the right was directly proportional to the ratio of reinforcements produced by standing on the left to reinforcements produced by standing on the right. The constant of proportionality was less than unity for all pigeons, indicating a bias toward the right side of the chamber. The biased matching relation obtained here is comparable to the matching relation obtained with concurrent reinforcement of key pecks. The present results, together with related research, suggest that the ratio of time spent in two activities equals the ratio of the “values” of the activities. The value of an activity is the product of several parameters, such as rate and amount of reinforcement, contingent on that activity.     

Behavior of humans in variable-interval schedules of reinforcement

During Phase I, human subjects pressed a button for monetary reinforcement in five variable-interval schedules, each of which specified a different frequency of reinforcement. The rate of responding was an increasing, negatively accelerated function of reinforcement frequency; the data conformed closely to Herrnstein's equation. During Phase II, the same five schedules were in operation, but in addition a concurrent variable-interval schedule (B) was introduced, responses on which were always reinforced at the same frequency. Response rate in component A increased while the response rate in B decreased, as a function of the reinforcement frequency in component A. Relative response rates in the two component schedules matched the relative frequencies of reinforcement. Comparing the absolute response rates in component A during Phase I and Phase II it was found that introduction of the concurrent schedule did not affect the value of the theoretical maximum response rate, but did increase the value of the reinforcement frequency needed to obtain any particular submaximal response rate.     

The matching law in and within groups of rats

In each of the two experiments, a group of five rats lived in a complex maze containing four small single-lever operant chambers. In two of these chambers, food was available on variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. In Experiment I, nine combinations of variable intervals were used, and the aggregate lever-pressing rates (by the five rats together) were studied. The log ratio of the rates in the two chambers was linearly related to the log ratio of the reinforcement rates in them; this is an instance of Herrnstein's matching law, as generalized by Baum. Summing over the two food chambers, food consumption decreased, and response output increased, as the time required to earn each pellet increased. In Experiment II, the behavior of individual rats was observed by time-sampling on selected days, while different variable-interval schedules were arranged in the two chambers where food was available. Individual lever-pressing rates for the rats were obtained, and their median bore the same “matching” relationship to the reinforcement rates as the group aggregate in Experiment I. There were differences between the rats in their distribution of time and responses between the two food chambers; these differences were correlated with differences in the proportions of reinforcements the rats obtained from each chamber.     

Choice, matching, and human behavior: A review of the literature

This review concerns human performance on concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Studies indicate that humans match relative behavior to relative rate of reinforcement. Herrnstein's proportional matching equation describes human performance but most studies do not evaluate the equation at the individual level. Baum's generalized matching equation has received strong support with humans as subjects. This equation permits the investigation of sources of deviation from ideal matching and a few studies have suggested variables which control such deviations in humans. While problems with instructional control are raised, the overall findings support the matching law as a principle of human choice.     

Reinforcer magnitude (sucrose concentration) and the matching law theory of response strength

This experiment investigated the relationship between reinforcer magnitude (sucrose concentration) and response rate. The purpose was to evaluate the behavior of two parameters of an equation that predicts absolute response rate as a function of reinforcement rate and two free parameters. According to Herrnstein's (1970) theory of reinforced behavior, one parameter of this "response-strength equation" measures the efficacy of the reinforcer maintaining responding and the other parameter measures motoric components of response rate, such as response duration. Seven rats served as subjects. Experimental sessions consisted of a series of five different variable-interval schedules of reinforcement, each in effect for 5 minutes. Within each session, obtained reinforcement rates varied over more than a 30-fold range, from about 20 per hour to 700 per hour. The reinforcer was sucrose solution, and, between sessions, its concentration was varied from 0.0 to 0.64 molar (0 to 21.9%). For sucrose concentrations of 0.16 to 0.64 m, response rate was a negatively accelerated function of reinforcement rate. Increases in sucrose concentration increased response rates maintained by low but not high reinforcement rates. This pattern of changes corresponds to a change in the reinforcement-efficacy parameter of the response-strength equation. In contrast, the motor-performance parameter did not change as a function of sucrose concentration. These findings are inconsistent with the results of a similar study (Bradshaw, Szabadi, & Bevan, 1978) but support Herrnstein's theory of reinforced behavior.     

Response and time allocation in concurrent second-order schedules

Six pigeons were trained on two-key concurrent variable-interval schedules in which the required response was the completion of a fixed number of key pecks. When the required number of pecks was equal on the two keys, response- and time-allocation ratios under-matched obtained reinforcement rate ratios. A similar result was found when the required number of pecks was unequal, except that performance, measured in response terms, was biased to the shorter required number of pecks and was less sensitive to reinforcement-rate changes. No such differences were found in the data on time spent responding. When the variable-interval schedules were kept constant and the required numbers of pecks were systematically varied, response ratios changed inversely with the ratio of the required number of pecks, but time-allocation ratios varied directly with the same independent variable. Thus, on response measures, pigeons “prefer” the schedule with the smaller peck requirement, but on time measures they “prefer” the schedule with the larger peck requirement. This finding is inconsistent with a commonsense notion of choice, which sees response and time-allocation measures as equivalent.