冲动选择的机制:实验探索和模型绘制实证地形图。

IF 1.9 4区 心理学 Q3 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Learning & Behavior Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-13 DOI:10.3758/s13420-023-00577-1
Travis R Smith, Robert Southern, Kimberly Kirkpatrick
{"title":"冲动选择的机制:实验探索和模型绘制实证地形图。","authors":"Travis R Smith, Robert Southern, Kimberly Kirkpatrick","doi":"10.3758/s13420-023-00577-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Impulsive choice is preference for a smaller-sooner (SS) outcome over a larger-later (LL) outcome when LL choices result in greater reinforcement maximization. Delay discounting is a model of impulsive choice that describes the decaying value of a reinforcer over time, with impulsive choice evident when the empirical choice-delay function is steep. Steep discounting is correlated with multiple diseases and disorders. Thus, understanding the processes underlying impulsive choice is a popular topic for investigation. Experimental research has explored the conditions that moderate impulsive choice, and quantitative models of impulsive choice have been developed that elegantly represent the underlying processes. This review spotlights experimental research in impulsive choice covering human and nonhuman animals across the domains of learning, motivation, and cognition. Contemporary models of delay discounting designed to explain the underlying mechanisms of impulsive choice are discussed. These models focus on potential candidate mechanisms, which include perception, delay and/or reinforcer sensitivity, reinforcement maximization, motivation, and cognitive systems. Although the models collectively explain multiple mechanistic phenomena, there are several cognitive processes, such as attention and working memory, that are overlooked. Future research and model development should focus on bridging the gap between quantitative models and empirical phenomena.</p>","PeriodicalId":49914,"journal":{"name":"Learning & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10497727/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mechanisms of impulsive choice: Experiments to explore and models to map the empirical terrain.\",\"authors\":\"Travis R Smith, Robert Southern, Kimberly Kirkpatrick\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13420-023-00577-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Impulsive choice is preference for a smaller-sooner (SS) outcome over a larger-later (LL) outcome when LL choices result in greater reinforcement maximization. Delay discounting is a model of impulsive choice that describes the decaying value of a reinforcer over time, with impulsive choice evident when the empirical choice-delay function is steep. Steep discounting is correlated with multiple diseases and disorders. Thus, understanding the processes underlying impulsive choice is a popular topic for investigation. Experimental research has explored the conditions that moderate impulsive choice, and quantitative models of impulsive choice have been developed that elegantly represent the underlying processes. This review spotlights experimental research in impulsive choice covering human and nonhuman animals across the domains of learning, motivation, and cognition. Contemporary models of delay discounting designed to explain the underlying mechanisms of impulsive choice are discussed. These models focus on potential candidate mechanisms, which include perception, delay and/or reinforcer sensitivity, reinforcement maximization, motivation, and cognitive systems. Although the models collectively explain multiple mechanistic phenomena, there are several cognitive processes, such as attention and working memory, that are overlooked. Future research and model development should focus on bridging the gap between quantitative models and empirical phenomena.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning & Behavior\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10497727/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning & Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-023-00577-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-023-00577-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

冲动性选择是指当较小的较早结果(SS)比较大的较晚结果(LL)能带来更大的强化最大化时,冲动性选择的偏好。延迟折现是冲动选择的一种模型,它描述了强化物的价值随时间的推移而递减,当经验选择-延迟函数陡峭时,冲动选择就很明显。陡峭贴现与多种疾病和失调有关。因此,了解冲动选择的基本过程是一个热门的研究课题。实验研究已经探索了缓和冲动选择的条件,并建立了冲动选择的定量模型,这些模型优雅地表现了冲动选择的基本过程。本综述将重点介绍人类和非人类动物在冲动性选择方面的实验研究,涉及学习、动机和认知等领域。文中讨论了旨在解释冲动选择内在机制的当代延迟折现模型。这些模型侧重于潜在的候选机制,包括感知、延迟和/或强化物敏感性、强化最大化、动机和认知系统。虽然这些模型共同解释了多种机制现象,但有几个认知过程(如注意力和工作记忆)被忽略了。未来的研究和模型开发应侧重于缩小定量模型与经验现象之间的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mechanisms of impulsive choice: Experiments to explore and models to map the empirical terrain.

Impulsive choice is preference for a smaller-sooner (SS) outcome over a larger-later (LL) outcome when LL choices result in greater reinforcement maximization. Delay discounting is a model of impulsive choice that describes the decaying value of a reinforcer over time, with impulsive choice evident when the empirical choice-delay function is steep. Steep discounting is correlated with multiple diseases and disorders. Thus, understanding the processes underlying impulsive choice is a popular topic for investigation. Experimental research has explored the conditions that moderate impulsive choice, and quantitative models of impulsive choice have been developed that elegantly represent the underlying processes. This review spotlights experimental research in impulsive choice covering human and nonhuman animals across the domains of learning, motivation, and cognition. Contemporary models of delay discounting designed to explain the underlying mechanisms of impulsive choice are discussed. These models focus on potential candidate mechanisms, which include perception, delay and/or reinforcer sensitivity, reinforcement maximization, motivation, and cognitive systems. Although the models collectively explain multiple mechanistic phenomena, there are several cognitive processes, such as attention and working memory, that are overlooked. Future research and model development should focus on bridging the gap between quantitative models and empirical phenomena.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Learning & Behavior
Learning & Behavior 医学-动物学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Learning & Behavior publishes experimental and theoretical contributions and critical reviews concerning fundamental processes of learning and behavior in nonhuman and human animals. Topics covered include sensation, perception, conditioning, learning, attention, memory, motivation, emotion, development, social behavior, and comparative investigations.
期刊最新文献
Divergence in bonobo and chimpanzee social life. Early-life group size influences response inhibition, but not the learning of it, in Japanese quails. Why might animals remember? A functional framework for episodic memory research in comparative psychology Sexual selection for single song repertoires Measuring spontaneous episodic future thinking in children: Challenges and opportunities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1