Abstract
The results of many human operant conditioning experiments appear to show that humans are less sensitive than nonhumans to operant consequences, suggesting species discontinuities in basic behavioral processes. A reanalysis of 31l data sets from 25 studies employing variable-interval schedules of reinforcement designed to assess sensitivity to reinforcement corroborates the claim that human behavioral allocation among alternatives often deviates from predictions based on rates of experimentally programmed consequences. Close inspection of the studies in question, however, suggests that methodological issues contribute heavily to the differences noted so far between humans and nonhumans and that an explanation based upon species discontinuities is not tenable.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baron, A., Perone, M., &Galizio, M. (1991). Analyzing the reinforcement process at the human level: Can application and behavioristic interpretation replace laboratory research?Behavior Analyst,14, 95–105.
Baum, W. M. (1974). On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,22, 231–242.
Baum, W. M. (1975). Time allocation in human vigilance.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,23, 45–53.
Baum, W. M. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,32, 269–281.
Beardsley, S. D., &McDowell, J. J. (1992). Application of Herrnstein’s hyperbola to time allocation of naturalistic human behavior maintained by naturalistic social reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,57, 177–185.
Bradshaw, C. M., Ruddle, H. V., &Szabadi, E. (1981). Studies of concurrent performances in humans. In C. M. Bradshaw, E. Szabadi, & C. F. Lowe (Eds.),Quantification of steady-state operant behavior (pp. 132–149). Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland.
Bradshaw, C. M., &Szabadi, E. (1978). Changes in operant behavior in a manic-depressive patient.Behavior Therapy,9, 950–954.
Bradshaw, C. M., &Szabadi, E. (1988). Quantitative analysis of human operant behavior. In G. Davey & C. Cullen (Eds.),Human operant conditioning and behavior modification (pp. 225–259). London: Wiley.
Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., &Bevan, P. (1976). Behavior of humans in variable-interval schedules of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,26, 135–141.
Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., &Bevan, P. (1977). Effect of punishment on human variable-interval performance.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,27, 275–279.
Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., &Bevan, P. (1978). Effect of variableinterval punishment on the behavior of humans in variable interval schedules of monetary reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,29, 161–166.
Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., &Bevan, P. (1979). The effect of punishment on free-operant behavior in humans.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,31, 71–81.
Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., Bevan, P., &Ruddle, H. V. (1979). The effect of signalled reinforcement availability on concurrent performances in humans.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,32, 65–74.
Brewer, W. F. (1974). There is no convincing evidence for operant or classical conditioning in adult humans. In W. B. Weimer & D. S. Palermo (Eds.),Cognition and the symbolic processes (pp. 1–33). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Buskist, W., &Miller, H. (1981). Concurrent operant performance in humans: Matching when food is the reinforcer.Psychological Record,31, 95–100.
Buskist, W., Newland, M. C., &Sherburne, T. (1991). Continuity and context.Behavior Analyst,14, 111–116.
Chambers, J. M., Cleveland, W. S., Kleine, B., &Tukey, P. A. (1983).Graphical methods for data analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Ciminero, A. R., Nelson, R. O., &Lipinski, D. P. (1977). Self-monitoring procedures. In A. R. Ciminero, K. S. Calhoun, & H. E. Adams (Eds.),Handbook of behavioral assessment (pp. 195–233). New York: Wiley.
Cliffe, M. J., &Parry, S. J. (1980). Matching to reinforcer value: Human concurrent variable interval performance.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,32, 557–570.
Cohen, R., Polsgrove, L., Reith, H., &Heinen, J. R. K. (1981). The effects of self-monitoring, public graphing, and token reinforcement on the social behaviors of underachieving children.Education & Treatment of Children,4, 125–138.
Conger, R., &Killeen, P. (1974). Use of concurrent operants in small group research.Pacific Sociological Review,17, 399–416.
Critchfield, T. S., &Vargas, E.A. (1991). Self-recording, instructions, and public self-graphing: Effects on swimming in the absence of coach verbal interaction.Behavior Modification,15, 95–112.
Daniels, A. C. (1994).Bringing out the best in people. New York. McGraw-Hill.
Davison, M., &McCarthy, D. (1988).The matching law. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
deVilliers, P. A. (1977). Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.),Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 233–287). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Donahoe, W., Burgos, J., &Palmer, D. (1993). A selectionist approach to reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,60, 17–40.
Evans, S. M., Critchfield, T. S., &Griffiths, R. R. (1991). Abuse liability assessment of anxiolytics/hypnotics: Rationale and laboratory lore.British Journal of Addictions,86, 1625–1632.
Galizio, M., &Buskist, W. F. (1988). Laboratory lore and research practices in the experimental analysis of human behavior: Selecting reinforcers and arranging contingencies.Behavior Analyst,11, 65–69.
Herrnstein, R. J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,4, 267–272.
Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,13, 243–266.
Heyman, G. (1994). Reinforcer magnitude (sucrose concentration) and the matching law theory of response strength.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,61, 505–516.
Heyman, G., &Monaghan, M. (1987). Effects of changes in response requirement and deprivation on the parameters of the matching law equation: New data and review.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,13, 384–394.
Horne, P. J., &Lowe, C. F. (1993). Determinants of human performance on concurrent schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,59, 29–60.
Hyten, C., &Madden, G. J. (1993). The scallop in human fixed interval research: A review of problems with data description.Psychological Record,43, 471–500.
Hyten, C., Madden, G. J., &Field, D. P. (1994). Exchange delays and impulsive choice in adult humans.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,62, 225–232.
Hyten, C., &Reilly, M. P. (1992). The renaissance of the experimental analysis of human behavior.Behavior Analyst,15, 109–114.
Kollins, S. H., Lane, S. D., &Shapiro, S. K. (1997). Experimental analysis of childhood psychopathology: A laboratory matching analysis of the behavior of children diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Psychological Record,47, 25–44.
Lovaas, O. I. (1993). The development of a treatment research project for developmentally delayed and autistic children.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,26, 617–630.
Mace, F. C., McCurdy, B., &Quigley, E. A. (1990). A collateral effect of reward predicted by matching theory.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,23, 187–205.
Mace, F. C., Neef, N. A., Shade, D., &Mauro, B. C. (1994). Limited matching on concurrent schedule reinforcement of academic behavior.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,27, 585–596.
Martens, B. K., Halperin, S., Rummel, J., &Kilpatrick, D. (1990). Matching theory applied to contingent teacher attention.Behavioral Assessment,12, 139–155.
Martens, B., &Houk, J. (1989). The application of Herrnstein’s law of effect to disruptive and on-task behavior of a retarded adolescent girl.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,51, 17–27.
Martens, B. K., Lochner, D. G., &Kelly, S. Q. (1992). The effects of variable-interval reinforcement on academic engagement: A demonstration of matching theory.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,25, 143–151.
Mash, E. J., &Barkley, R. A. (1989).Treatment of childhood behavior disorders: A behavioral perspective. New York: Guilford.
McCarthy, D., &Davison, M. (1981). Signal detection and matching. In M. L. Commons & J. A. Nevin (Eds.),Quantitative analysis of behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 393–417). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
McDowell, J. J. (1982). The importance of Herrnstein’s mathematical statement of the law of effect for behavior therapy.American Psychologist,37, 771–779.
Meehl, P. E. (1951). On the circularity of the law of effect.Psychological Bulletin,47, 52–75.
Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,37, 149–155.
Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations.Behavior Analyst,16, 191–206
Morse, W. H., &Kelleher, R. T. (1977). Determinants of reinforcement and punishment. In W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.),Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 174–200). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Myerson, J., &Green, L. (1995). Discounting of delayed rewards: Models of individual choice.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,64, 257–262.
Myerson, J., &Hale, S. (1984). Practical implications of the matching law.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,17, 367–380.
Navarick, D. J. &Chellsen, J. (1983). Matching versus undermatching in the choice behavior of humans.Behaviour Analysis Letters,3, 325–335.
Neef, N., Mace, F. C., Shea, M., &Shade, D. (1992). Effects of reinforcer quality on time allocation: Extensions of matching theory to educational settings.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,25, 691–699.
Newland, M. C. (in press). Quantifying the molecular structure of behavior: Separate effects of caffeine, cocaine, and adenosine agonists on interresponse times and lever-press durations.Behavioural Pharmacology.
Newland, M. C., Sheng, Y., Lögdberg, B., &Berlin, M. (1994). Prolonged behavioral effects ofin utero exposure to lead or methylmercury: Reduced sensitivity to changes in reinforcement contingencies during behavioral transitions and in steady state.Toxicology & Applied Pharmacology,126, 6–15.
Pierce, W. D., &Epling, W. F. (1983). Choice, matching, and human behavior: A review of the literature.Behavior Analyst,6, 57–76.
Rescorla, R. A. (1991). Associations between an instrumental discriminative stimulus and multiple outcomes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,18, 95–104.
Ruddle, H., Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., &Bevan, P. (1979). Behaviour of humans in concurrent schedules programmed on spatially separated operanda.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,31, 509–517.
Schmitt, D. R. (1974). Effects of reinforcement rate and reinforcer magnitude on choice behavior of humans.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,21, 409–419.
Schroeder, S. R., &Holland, J. G. (1969). Reinforcement of eye movement with concurrent schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,12, 897–903.
Shull, R. L., &Lawrence, P. S. (1991). Preparations and principles.Behavior Analyst,14, 133–138.
Silberberg, A., Thomas, J. R., &Berendzen, N. (1991). Human choice on concurrent variable interval variable ratio schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,56, 575–584.
Skinner, B. F. (1938).The behavior of organisms. New York. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Skinner, B. F. (1953).Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.
Skinner, B. F. (1957).Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Takahashi, M., &Iwamoto, T. (1986). Human concurrent performances: The effects of experience, instructions, and schedule correlated stimuli.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,45, 257–267.
Timberlake, W., &Allison, J. (1974). Response deprivation: An empirical approach to instrumental performance.Psychological Review,81, 146–164.
Tucker, J. A., Vuchinich, R. E., &Gladsjo, J. A. (1991). Environmental influences on relapse in substance use disorders.International Journal of the Addictions,25, 1017–1050.
Ullmann, L. P., &Krasner, L. (1966).Case studies in behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Wearden, J. H. (1988). Some neglected problems in the analysis of human behavior. In G. Davey & C. Cullen (Eds.),Human operant conditioning and behavior modification (pp. 197–224). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Wurster, R. M., &Griffiths, R. R. (1979). Human concurrent performances: Variation of reinforcer magnitude and rate of reinforcement.Psychological Record,29, 341–354.
Young, A. M., &Herling, S. (1986). Drugs as reinforcers: Studies in laboratory animals. In S. R. Goldberg & I. P. Stolerman (Eds.),Behavioral analysis of drug dependence (pp. 9–67). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Zeiler, M. D. (1994). Temporal control in fixed-interval schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,61, 1–9.
Ziriax, J. M., Snyder, J. R., Newland, M. C., &Weiss, B. (1993). Amphetamine modifies the microstructure of concurrent behavior.Experimental & Clinical Psychopharmacology,1, 121–132.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03210806.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kollins, S.H., Newland, M.C. & Critchfield, T.S. Human sensitivity to reinforcement in operant choice: How much do consequences matter?. Psychon Bull Rev 4, 208–220 (1997). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209395
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209395