The effect of rate of reinforcement and time in session on preference for variability

Pigeons pecked keys on concurrent-chains schedules that provided a variable interval 30-sec schedule in the initial link. One terminal link provided reinforcers in a fixed manner; the other provided reinforcers in a variable manner with the same arithmetic mean as the fixed alternative. In Experiment 1, the terminal links provided fixed and variable interval schedules. In Experiment 2, the terminal links provided reinforcers after a fixed or a variable delay following the response that produced them. In Experiment 3, the terminal links provided reinforcers that were fixed or variable in size. Rate of reinforcement was varied by changing the scheduled interreinforcer interval in the terminal link from 5 to 225 sec. The subjects usually preferred the variable option in Experiments 1 and 2 but differed in preference in Experiment 3. The preference for variability was usually stronger for lower (longer terminal links) than for higher (shorter terminal links) rates of reinforcement. Preference did not change systematically with time in the session. Some aspects of these results are inconsistent with explanations for the preference for variability in terms of scaling factors, scalar expectancy theory, risk-sensitive models of optimal foraging theory, and habituation to the reinforcer. Initial-link response rates also changed within sessions when the schedules provided high, but not low, rates of reinforcement. Within-session changes in responding were similar for the two initial links. These similarities imply that habituation to the reinforcer is represented differently in theories of choice than are other variables related to reinforcement.     

Structure mapping and relational language support children's learning of relational categories

Learning relational categories--whose membership is defined not by intrinsic properties but by extrinsic relations with other entities--poses a challenge to young children. The current work showed 3-, 4- to 5-, and 6-year-olds pairs of cards exemplifying familiar relations (e.g., a nest and a bird exemplifying home for) and then tested whether they could extend the relational concept to another category (e.g., choose the barn as a home for a horse). It found that children benefited from (a) hearing a (novel) category name in a relational construction and (b) comparing category members. The youngest group--3-year-olds--learned the category only when given a combination of relational language and a series of comparisons in a progressive alignment sequence.