Rats’ Choice in a Coordination Task

Q3 Psychology
Alejandro Segura, A. Clavijo, A. Bouzas
{"title":"Rats’ Choice in a Coordination Task","authors":"Alejandro Segura, A. Clavijo, A. Bouzas","doi":"10.46867/ijcp.2019.32.00.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We designed a free-operant choice procedure that represents a technical improvement to assess the control of mutual reinforcement contingencies over the choice of coordinated behavior. We demonstrate the advantages of the new procedure with eight rats that were trained to continuously move a steel ball from end to end of a gutter. Subjects were assigned to pairs and had to choose between two response options: one in which reinforcement was contingent upon an individual response, and another in which reinforcement depended on the coordination of intra-pair behavior. We evaluated (a) the effect of reinforcement magnitude over the distribution of responses, and (b) the role of behavioral cues on the rats’ coordinated actions via dividing the experimental chamber in two compartments with a clear/opaque partition. The coordinated actions were more likely when the larger reinforcer was initially associated with the mutual reinforcement option. The visual interaction between subjects did not impact their coordinated actions. The possibility to control organisms’ preference for social or nonsocial alternatives opens potential lines of research. For instance, identifying how the coordination of activities combines with the future value of outcomes to produce stable cooperative equilibria.","PeriodicalId":39712,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46867/ijcp.2019.32.00.09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

We designed a free-operant choice procedure that represents a technical improvement to assess the control of mutual reinforcement contingencies over the choice of coordinated behavior. We demonstrate the advantages of the new procedure with eight rats that were trained to continuously move a steel ball from end to end of a gutter. Subjects were assigned to pairs and had to choose between two response options: one in which reinforcement was contingent upon an individual response, and another in which reinforcement depended on the coordination of intra-pair behavior. We evaluated (a) the effect of reinforcement magnitude over the distribution of responses, and (b) the role of behavioral cues on the rats’ coordinated actions via dividing the experimental chamber in two compartments with a clear/opaque partition. The coordinated actions were more likely when the larger reinforcer was initially associated with the mutual reinforcement option. The visual interaction between subjects did not impact their coordinated actions. The possibility to control organisms’ preference for social or nonsocial alternatives opens potential lines of research. For instance, identifying how the coordination of activities combines with the future value of outcomes to produce stable cooperative equilibria.
大鼠在协调任务中的选择
我们设计了一个自由操作的选择程序,它代表了一种技术改进,以评估相互强化偶然事件对协调行为选择的控制。我们用8只老鼠证明了新方法的优点,这些老鼠被训练连续地将一个钢球从排水沟的一端移动到另一端。受试者被分成两组,必须在两种反应选项中做出选择:一种是基于个人反应的强化,另一种是基于对内行为的协调。我们评估了(a)强化强度对反应分布的影响,以及(b)行为线索对大鼠协调行动的作用,方法是将实验室分为两个透明/不透明的隔间。当较大的强化物最初与相互强化选项相关联时,协调行动更有可能发生。受试者之间的视觉互动并不影响他们的协调行动。控制生物体对社会性或非社会性选择的偏好的可能性打开了潜在的研究方向。例如,确定活动的协调如何与结果的未来价值相结合,以产生稳定的合作均衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信