成对的大鼠对同时强化的反应比对交替强化的反应更合作。

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1002/jeab.4240
Rafael Fernando da Silva, Lucas Couto de Carvalho, Kalliu Carvalho Couto, Lucas Codina de Souza, Cristiano Coelho, Deisy das Graças de Souza
{"title":"成对的大鼠对同时强化的反应比对交替强化的反应更合作。","authors":"Rafael Fernando da Silva,&nbsp;Lucas Couto de Carvalho,&nbsp;Kalliu Carvalho Couto,&nbsp;Lucas Codina de Souza,&nbsp;Cristiano Coelho,&nbsp;Deisy das Graças de Souza","doi":"10.1002/jeab.4240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The purpose of this experiment was to explore whether simultaneous access to consequences configures a defining functional feature of coordination. We evaluated whether coordination episodes are maintained when reinforcers are alternately presented to two cooperating rats across these episodes, in contrast to the delivery of reinforcers simultaneously for both rats and independently for each rat. Rat pairs responded under either a tandem fixed-interval (FI) 10-s FI 10-s or a tandem variable-interval (VI) 10-s VI 10-s schedules. In the baseline, lever presses of each rat were individually reinforced according to the tandem FI FI schedule. In two simultaneous reinforcement conditions, reinforcer deliveries depended on coordination episodes under either tandem schedule. In two alternated reinforcement conditions, rats accessed reinforcers in alternation under either tandem schedule. Two main findings are reported: (1) proportions of coordination were consistently higher under the simultaneous than under the alternated reinforcement condition regardless of the type of tandem schedules (FI or VI) and (2) proportions of coordination were similar in the individual and alternated reinforcement conditions. Although the obtained reinforcement rates limit a conclusive evaluation, these findings indicate that the simultaneous delivery of reinforcers (mutual reinforcement) is a critical variable in the operant selection of coordinated responding.</p>","PeriodicalId":17411,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior","volume":"123 2","pages":"233-248"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pairs of rats cooperate more when responding to simultaneous reinforcement than to alternated reinforcement\",\"authors\":\"Rafael Fernando da Silva,&nbsp;Lucas Couto de Carvalho,&nbsp;Kalliu Carvalho Couto,&nbsp;Lucas Codina de Souza,&nbsp;Cristiano Coelho,&nbsp;Deisy das Graças de Souza\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jeab.4240\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The purpose of this experiment was to explore whether simultaneous access to consequences configures a defining functional feature of coordination. We evaluated whether coordination episodes are maintained when reinforcers are alternately presented to two cooperating rats across these episodes, in contrast to the delivery of reinforcers simultaneously for both rats and independently for each rat. Rat pairs responded under either a tandem fixed-interval (FI) 10-s FI 10-s or a tandem variable-interval (VI) 10-s VI 10-s schedules. In the baseline, lever presses of each rat were individually reinforced according to the tandem FI FI schedule. In two simultaneous reinforcement conditions, reinforcer deliveries depended on coordination episodes under either tandem schedule. In two alternated reinforcement conditions, rats accessed reinforcers in alternation under either tandem schedule. Two main findings are reported: (1) proportions of coordination were consistently higher under the simultaneous than under the alternated reinforcement condition regardless of the type of tandem schedules (FI or VI) and (2) proportions of coordination were similar in the individual and alternated reinforcement conditions. Although the obtained reinforcement rates limit a conclusive evaluation, these findings indicate that the simultaneous delivery of reinforcers (mutual reinforcement) is a critical variable in the operant selection of coordinated responding.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior\",\"volume\":\"123 2\",\"pages\":\"233-248\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeab.4240\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeab.4240","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本实验的目的是探讨同时获得结果是否配置了协调的定义功能特征。我们评估了当强化物交替呈现给两只合作的大鼠时,与同时呈现给两只大鼠和每只大鼠单独呈现强化物相比,是否能维持协调事件。大鼠对在串联固定间隔(FI) 10-s - FI 10-s或串联可变间隔(VI) 10-s - VI 10-s计划下有反应。基线时,每只大鼠的杠杆按压按串联FI - FI计划单独加强。在两种同时强化条件下,强化剂的交付取决于任一串联计划下的协调事件。在两种交替强化条件下,大鼠在任一串联计划下交替获取强化物。结果表明:(1)无论何种串联方案(FI或VI),同时强化条件下的协调比例始终高于交替强化条件下的协调比例;(2)个体强化和交替强化条件下的协调比例相似。虽然获得的强化率限制了结结性的评估,但这些发现表明,同时传递强化物(相互强化)是协同反应操作选择的关键变量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Pairs of rats cooperate more when responding to simultaneous reinforcement than to alternated reinforcement

The purpose of this experiment was to explore whether simultaneous access to consequences configures a defining functional feature of coordination. We evaluated whether coordination episodes are maintained when reinforcers are alternately presented to two cooperating rats across these episodes, in contrast to the delivery of reinforcers simultaneously for both rats and independently for each rat. Rat pairs responded under either a tandem fixed-interval (FI) 10-s FI 10-s or a tandem variable-interval (VI) 10-s VI 10-s schedules. In the baseline, lever presses of each rat were individually reinforced according to the tandem FI FI schedule. In two simultaneous reinforcement conditions, reinforcer deliveries depended on coordination episodes under either tandem schedule. In two alternated reinforcement conditions, rats accessed reinforcers in alternation under either tandem schedule. Two main findings are reported: (1) proportions of coordination were consistently higher under the simultaneous than under the alternated reinforcement condition regardless of the type of tandem schedules (FI or VI) and (2) proportions of coordination were similar in the individual and alternated reinforcement conditions. Although the obtained reinforcement rates limit a conclusive evaluation, these findings indicate that the simultaneous delivery of reinforcers (mutual reinforcement) is a critical variable in the operant selection of coordinated responding.

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
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
14.80%
发文量
83
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior is primarily for the original publication of experiments relevant to the behavior of individual organisms.
期刊最新文献
Value-based decision-making and behavioral economic constructs that distinguish people with and without cannabis use history. Temporal and nontemporal control in a midsession reversal task with variable intertrial intervals. A tribute to Peter Killeen: The Sun King of behavior analysis. Odor-visual and visual-visual matching to sample with dogs.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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