Variable and random ratio schedules of reinforcement are conceptually contrasted and experimentally compared in a computer simulated “slot machine” task. 20 subjects did not behave differentially in terms of either choice of game or employment of strategy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CataniaA. C. (Ed.) Contemporary research in operant behavior. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1968.
2.
CataniaA. C.ReynoldsG. S.A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1968, 11, 327–383.
3.
FersterC. B.PerrottM. C.Behavior principles. New York: New Century, 1968.
4.
MatthewsB. A.ShimoffE.CataniaA. C.SagvoldenT.Uninstructed human responding: Sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1977, 27, 453–467.
5.
McConnellJ. V.Understanding human behavior. (2nd ed.) New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1977.
6.
NolanW. I.The facts on slots. Las Vegas: Gambler's Book Club, 1970.
7.
SkinnerB. F.Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969.
8.
ThompsonT.GrabowskiJ. G.Reinforcement schedules and multioperant analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1972.
9.
WhaleyD. L.MalottR. W.Elementary principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1971.
