Choice, time allocation, and response rate during stimulus generalization

Six pigeons were trained to discriminate between two noise intensities using a procedure that assessed choice, time allocation, and response rate simultaneously and independently. Responses on the left or right key (R1 or R2) were respectively correct in the presence of two different intensities, S1 and S2. After a correct response, reinforcement became available for pecks on the center key. Reinforcement density for R1¦S1 relative to R2¦S2 was varied across experimental conditions. Generalization tests followed extensive training at each condition. As a function of stimulus intensity, proportions of initial choices of R2, of time spent in R2-initiated components, and of center-key responses emitted in R2-initiated components all yielded sigmoidal gradients of similar slope, which shifted slightly in location when relative reinforcement density changed. Changeovers were maximal where initial choice proportions approximated 0.5. Gradients relating the absolute number of center-key responses to stimulus intensity were also roughly sigmoidal, but were more sensitive to changes in reinforcement density. Gradients of momentary response rate also depended on reinforcement density. During training, large but transitory shifts in choice responding occurred when reinforcement density changed, while differences in momentary response rate developed slowly, suggesting separate control of choice and response rate by the contingencies of reinforcement.     

The utility of verbal and behavioral assessments of value.

Subjects lived in a laboratory apartment for up to 30 days, engaging in ordinary activities such as reading, sewing, and artwork. The amount of time devoted to each activity was recorded and compared with periodic verbal ratings of the amount of time devoted to the activities. The verbal and observational assessments of the time distribution were very similar, but there were some discrepancies. Based on self-reports and on observation of time actually devoted to the activities, contingencies were arranged in which time devoted to one activity produced time available for a second activity. When the contingency relation was based on behavioral assessment, predictions of time redistribution were more accurate than when the relations were based on verbal assessment. The close correspondence between observed distributions of time and verbally assessed distributions was probably due to the well-specified situation and rigorous assessment methods. Contrary to some cognitive-behavioral accounts, the contingency results suggest that verbal assessment is not necessarily preferable to observation when the two make discrepant predictions. It is suggested that verbal reports might be used more often in behavior analysis in place of lengthy or difficult observations, and attention is drawn to a personality model that parallels important components of behavior analysis.     

过去时间的心理结构

４０８名大学生被试用秒、分、小时、日、星期、年和月７个时间单位和模糊统计试验方法对４０个不定的过去时间修饰词作经验赋值,结果显示：（１）过去时间和未来时间在心理结构上是对称的,分为三个心理时间段,即以秒和分为计时单位的“较近的过去”和“较近的未来”,以小时、日和月为计时单位的“近的过去”和“近的未来”,和以年为计时单位的“远的过去”和“远的未来”。（２）随着时间修饰词的词义离现在由近至远,其词义地     

Links between self-reported and laboratory behavioral impulsivity

Havik, M., Jakobson, A., Tamm, M., Paaver, M., Konstabel, K., Uusberg, A., Allik, J., Ööpik, V. & Kreegipuu, K. (2012). Links between self‐reported and laboratory behavioral impulsivity. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 53, 216–223. A major problem in the research considering impulsivity is the lack of mutual understanding on how to measure and define impulsivity. Our study examined the relationship between self‐reported impulsivity, behavioral excitatory and inhibitory processes and time perception. Impulsivity – fast, premature, thoughtless or disinhibited behavior – was assessed in 58 normal, healthy participants (30 men, mean age 21.9 years). Self‐reported impulsivity as measured by Adaptive and Maladaptive Impulsivity Scale (AMIS) and behavioral excitatory and inhibitory processes as measured by Stop Signal Task were not directly related. Time perception, measured by the retrospective Time Estimation Task, was related to both. The length of the perceived time interval was positively correlated to AMIS Disinhibition subscale and negatively to several Stop Signal Task parameters. The longer subjects perceived the duration to last, the higher was their score on Disinhibition scale and the faster were their reactive responses in the Stop Signal Task. In summary our findings support the idea of cognitive tempo as a possible mechanism underlying impulsive behavior.     

学习判断与学习时间分配的关系

学习判断与学习时间分配的关系是元认知领域的重要问题, 对学习判断的研究在于使个体了解自己的学习和记忆活动, 从而有效控制学习过程, 合理分配学习时间, 这是元记忆监测影响控制的典型例子。近来有研究者提出学习时间分配不仅表现控制功能, 而且还表现监测功能。于是围绕学习时间的双重功能, 他们提出了元记忆监测与控制至少存在两种关系模型—— MC(监测影响控制)模型和CM(控制影响监测)模型, 后来又提出了两模型相互协同作用的合并动态模型—— 连续波浪型模式和同时发生模型。未来的研究应在继续验证MC模型和完善CM模型的基础上, 尝试检验两模型的合并动态模型。     

Fixed-time schedule effects in combination with response-dependent schedules

We evaluated the effects of fixed-interval (FI), fixed-time (FT), and conjoint (combined) FI FT reinforcement schedules on the responding of 3 adults who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. Responding on vocational tasks decreased for 2 of 3 participants under FT alone relative to FI alone. Responding under FI FT resulted in response persistence for 2 of 3 participants. Results have implications for the maintenance of desirable behavior, as well as for situations in which FT treatment has been implemented for problem behavior and problem behavior is nevertheless reinforced by caregivers.     

未来时间洞察力的目标作用

未来时间洞察力是个体对未来时间的认知、体验和行动（或行动倾向）的一种人格特质,其目标不仅架起了现在与未来的桥梁,也影响个体的认知与行为,并且不同目标还具有不同的动力作用。但个体如何建构未来目标、确立优势目标等,需做进一步研究。     

Limited information estimation and testing of discretized multivariate normal structural models

Discretized multivariate normal structural models are often estimated using multistage estimation procedures. The asymptotic properties of parameter estimates, standard errors, and tests of structural restrictions on thresholds and polychoric correlations are well known. It was not clear how to assess the overall discrepancy between the contingency table and the model for these estimators. It is shown that the overall discrepancy can be decomposed into a distributional discrepancy and a structural discrepancy. A test of the overall model specification is proposed, as well as a test of the distributional specification (i.e., discretized multivariate normality). Also, the small sample performance of overall, distributional, and structural tests, as well as of parameter estimates and standard errors is investigated under conditions of correct model specification and also under mild structural and/or distributional misspecification. It is found that relatively small samples are needed for parameter estimates, standard errors, and structural tests. Larger samples are needed for the distributional and overall tests. Furthermore, parameter estimates, standard errors, and structural tests are surprisingly robust to distributional misspecification. This research was supported by the Department of Universities, Research and Information Society (DURSI) of the Catalan Government, and by grants BSO2000-0661 and BSO2003-08507 of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology.     

Modeling response signal and response time data

The diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978) and the leaky competing accumulator model (LCA, Usher & McClelland, 2001) were tested against two-choice data collected from the same subjects with the standard response time procedure and the response signal procedure. In the response signal procedure, a stimulus is presented and then, at one of a number of experimenter-determined times, a signal to respond is presented. The models were fit to the data from the two procedures simultaneously under the assumption that responses in the response signal procedure were based on a mixture of decision processes that had already terminated at response boundaries before the signal and decision processes that had not yet terminated. In the latter case, decisions were based on partial information in one variant of each model or on guessing in a second variant. Both variants of the diffusion model fit the data well and both fit better than either variant of the LCA model, although the differences in numerical goodness-of-fit measures were not large enough to allow decisive selection between the models.     

Residence time and choice in concurrent foraging schedules

Five pigeons were trained on a concurrent-schedule analogue of the “some patches are empty” procedure. Two concurrently available alternatives were arranged on a single response key and were signaled by red and green keylights. A subject could travel between these alternatives by responding on a second yellow “switching” key. Following a changeover to a patch, there was a probability (p) that a single reinforcer would be available on that alternative for a response after a time determined by the value of λ, a probability of reinforcement per second. The overall scheduling of reinforcers on the two alternatives was arranged nonindependently, and the available alternative was switched after each reinforcer. In Part 1 of the experiment, the probabilities of reinforcement, ρ_red and ρ_green, were equal on the two alternatives, and the arranged arrival rates of reinforcers, λ_red and λ_green, were varied across conditions. In Part 2, the reinforcer arrival times were arranged to be equal, and the reinforcer probabilities were varied across conditions. In Part 3, both parameters were varied. The results replicated those seen in studies that have investigated time allocation in a single patch: Both response and time allocation to an alternative increased with decreasing values of λ and with increasing values of ρ, and residence times were consistently greater than those that would maximize obtained reinforcer rates. Furthermore, both response- and time-allocation ratios undermatched mean reinforcer-arrival time and reinforcer-frequency ratios.