Matching law

Last updated

In operant conditioning, the matching law is a quantitative relationship that holds between the relative rates of response and the relative rates of reinforcement in concurrent schedules of reinforcement. For example, if two response alternatives A and B are offered to an organism, the ratio of response rates to A and B equals the ratio of reinforcements yielded by each response. [1] This law applies fairly well when non-human subjects are exposed to concurrent variable interval schedules (but see below); its applicability in other situations is less clear, depending on the assumptions made and the details of the experimental situation. The generality of applicability of the matching law is subject of current debate. [2]

Contents

The matching law can be applied to situations involving a single response maintained by a single schedule of reinforcement if one assumes that alternative responses are always available to an organism, maintained by uncontrolled "extraneous" reinforcers. For example, an animal pressing a lever for food might pause for a drink of water.

The matching law was first formulated by R.J. Herrnstein (1961) following an experiment with pigeons on concurrent variable interval schedules. [3] Pigeons were presented with two buttons in a Skinner box, each of which led to varying rates of food reward. The pigeons tended to peck the button that yielded the greater food reward more often than the other button, and the ratio of their rates to the two buttons matched the ratio of their rates of reward on the two buttons.

Mathematical statement

If R1 and R2 are the rate of responses on two schedules that yield obtained (as distinct from programmed) rates of reinforcement Rf1 and Rf2, the strict matching law holds that the relative response rate R1 / (R1 + R2) matches, that is, equals, the relative reinforcement rate Rf1 / (Rf1 + Rf2). That is,

This relationship can also be stated in terms of response and reinforcement ratios:

Alternatively stated, it states that there exists a constant for an individual animal, such that for any . That is, for an individual animal, the rate of response is proportional to rate of reinforcement for any task.

Deviations from matching, and the generalized matching law

A recent review by McDowell reveals that Herrnstein's original equation fails to accurately describe concurrent-schedule data under a substantial range of conditions. Three deviations from matching have been observed: undermatching, overmatching, and bias. Undermatching means that the response proportions are less extreme than the law predicts. Undermatching can happen if subjects too often switch between the two response options, a tendency that may be strengthened by reinforcers that happen to occur just after a subject switches. A changeover delay may be used to reduce the effectiveness of such post-switch reinforcers; typically, this is a 1.5 second interval after a switch when no reinforcer is presented. Overmatching is the opposite of undermatching, and is less common. Here the subjects response proportions are more extreme than reinforcement proportions. Overmatching may occur if there is a penalty for switching. A final deviation is bias, which occurs when subjects spend more time on one alternative than the matching equation predicts. This may happen if a subject prefers a certain environment, area in a laboratory, or method of responding.

These failures of the matching law have led to the development of the "generalized matching law", which has parameters that reflect the deviations just described. This law is a power function generalization of the strict matching (Baum, 1974), and it has been found to fit a wide variety of matching data.

This is more conveniently expressed in logarithmic form

The constants b and s are referred to as "bias" and "sensitivity" respectively. "Bias" reflects any tendency the subject may have to prefer one response over the other. "Sensitivity" reflects the degree to which the reinforcement ratio actually impacts the choice ratio. When this equation is plotted, the result is straight line; sensitivity changes the slope and bias changes the intercept of this line.

The generalized matching law accounts for high proportions of the variance in most experiments on concurrent variable interval schedules in non-humans. Values of b often depend on details of the experiment set up, but values of s are consistently found to be around 0.8, whereas the value required for strict matching would be 1.0. [4] [5] The concurrent VI VI choice situation involves strong negative feedbacks: the longer the subject refrains from responding to an alternative, the higher his probability of payoff: switching is encouraged.

Processes underlying the distribution of responses

There are three ideas on how humans and animals maximize reinforcement, molecular maximizing, molar maximizing and melioration.

Theoretical importance

The matching law is theoretically important for several reasons. First, it offers a simple quantification of behavior that can be applied to a number of situations. Secondly, offers a lawful account of choice. As Herrnstein (1970) expressed it, under an operant analysis, choice is nothing but behavior set into the context of other behavior. [6] The matching law thus challenges the idea that choice is an unpredictable outcome of free will, just as B.F. Skinner and others have argued. [7] However this challenge becomes serious only if it applies to human behavior, as well as to the behavior of pigeons and other animals. When human participants perform under concurrent schedules of reinforcement, matching has been observed in some experiments, [8] but wide deviations from matching have been found in others. [9] Finally, if nothing else, the matching law is important because it has generated a great deal of research that has widened our understanding of operant control.

Relevance to psychopathology

The matching law, and the generalized matching law, have helped behavior analysts to understand some complex human behaviors, especially the behavior of children in certain conflict situations. [10] [11] James Snyder and colleague have found that response matching predicts the use of conflict tactics by children and parents during conflict bouts. [12] This matching rate predicts future arrests. Even children's use of deviant talk appears to follow a matching pattern. [11]

Notes

  1. ↑ Poling, A., Edwards, T. L., Weeden, M., & Foster, T. (2011). The matching law. Psychological Record, 61(2), 313-322.
  2. ↑ Simon, C., & Baum, W. M. (2017). Allocation of Speech in Conversation. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 107.
  3. ↑ Herrnstein, R.J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of responses as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 4, 267–72.
  4. ↑ Baum, W.M. (1974). On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 231–42.
  5. ↑ Davison, M. & McCarthy, D. (1988). The matching law: A research review. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  6. ↑ Herrnstein, R.J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–66.
  7. ↑ Skinner, B. F. (1971)Beyond Freedom and Dignity, New Yori:Knopf
  8. ↑ Bradshaw, C.M.; Szabadi, E. & Bevan, P. (1976). Behavior of humans in variable-interval schedules of reinforcement Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 26, 135–41.
  9. ↑ Horne, P.J. & Lowe, C.F. (1993). Determinants of human performance on concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 59, 29–60. doi : 10.1901/jeab.1993.59-29
  10. ↑ Strand, P.S. (2001) Momentum, Matching, and Meaning: Toward a Fuller Exploitation of Operant Principles. The Behavior Analyst Today, 2(3), 170–84
  11. 1 2 James Snyder, Mike Stoolmiller, Gerald R. Patterson, Lynn Schrepferman, Jessica Oeser, Kassy Johnson, and Dana Soetaert (2003): The Application of Response Allocation Matching to Understanding Risk Mechanisms in Development: The Case of Young Children's Deviant Talk and Play, and Risk for Early-Onset Antisocial Behavior. The Behavior Analyst Today, 4(4), 435–45 "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-08-24. Retrieved 2011-11-17.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  12. ↑ Snyder, J.J. & Patterson, G.R. (1995). Individualized differences in social aggression: A test of the reinforcement hypothesis in the natural environment. Behavior Therapy, 26, 371–91.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">B. F. Skinner</span> American psychologist and social philosopher (1904–1990)

Burrhus Frederic Skinner was an American psychologist, behaviorist, inventor, and social philosopher. He was the Edgar Pierce Professor of Psychology at Harvard University from 1958 until his retirement in 1974.

Operant conditioning, also called instrumental conditioning, is a learning process where voluntary behaviors are modified by association with the addition of reward or aversive stimuli. The frequency or duration of the behavior may increase through reinforcement or decrease through punishment or extinction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reinforcement</span> Consequence affecting an organisms future behavior

In behavioral psychology, reinforcement refers to consequences that increase the likelihood of an organism's future behavior, typically in the presence of a particular antecedent stimulus. For example, a rat can be trained to push a lever to receive food whenever a light is turned on. In this example, the light is the antecedent stimulus, the lever pushing is the operant behavior, and the food is the reinforcer. Likewise, a student that receives attention and praise when answering a teacher's question will be more likely to answer future questions in class. The teacher's question is the antecedent, the student's response is the behavior, and the praise and attention are the reinforcements.

Radical behaviorism is a "philosophy of the science of behavior" developed by B. F. Skinner. It refers to the philosophy behind behavior analysis, and is to be distinguished from methodological behaviorism—which has an intense emphasis on observable behaviors—by its inclusion of thinking, feeling, and other private events in the analysis of human and animal psychology. The research in behavior analysis is called the experimental analysis of behavior and the application of the field is called applied behavior analysis (ABA), which was originally termed "behavior modification."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Herrnstein</span> American psychologist (1930–1994)

Richard Julius Herrnstein was an American psychologist at Harvard University. He was an active researcher in animal learning in the Skinnerian tradition. Herrnstein was the Edgar Pierce Professor of Psychology until his death, and previously chaired the Harvard Department of Psychology for five years. With political scientist Charles Murray, he co-wrote The Bell Curve, a controversial 1994 book on human intelligence. He was one of the founders of the Society for Quantitative Analysis of Behavior.

The experimental analysis of behavior is a science that studies the behavior of individuals across a variety of species. A key early scientist was B. F. Skinner who discovered operant behavior, reinforcers, secondary reinforcers, contingencies of reinforcement, stimulus control, shaping, intermittent schedules, discrimination, and generalization. A central method was the examination of functional relations between environment and behavior, as opposed to hypothetico-deductive learning theory that had grown up in the comparative psychology of the 1920–1950 period. Skinner's approach was characterized by observation of measurable behavior which could be predicted and controlled. It owed its early success to the effectiveness of Skinner's procedures of operant conditioning, both in the laboratory and in behavior therapy.

Behaviorism is a systematic approach to understand the behavior of humans and other animals. It assumes that behavior is either a reflex elicited by the pairing of certain antecedent stimuli in the environment, or a consequence of that individual's history, including especially reinforcement and punishment contingencies, together with the individual's current motivational state and controlling stimuli. Although behaviorists generally accept the important role of heredity in determining behavior, deriving from Skinner's three levels of selection: phylogeny, ontogeny, and culture, they focus primarily on environmental events. The cognitive revolution of the late 20th century largely replaced behaviorism as an explanatory theory with cognitive psychology, which unlike behaviorism views internal mental states as explanations for observable behavior.

In economics, hyperbolic discounting is a time-inconsistent model of delay discounting. It is one of the cornerstones of behavioral economics and its brain-basis is actively being studied by neuroeconomics researchers.

The law of effect, or Thorndike's law, is a psychology principle advanced by Edward Thorndike in 1898 on the matter of behavioral conditioning which states that "responses that produce a satisfying effect in a particular situation become more likely to occur again in that situation, and responses that produce a discomforting effect become less likely to occur again in that situation."

In operant conditioning, the delay reduction hypothesis is a quantitative description of how choice among concurrently available chained schedules of reinforcement is allocated. The hypothesis states that the greater improvement in temporal proximity to reinforcement correlated with the onset of a stimulus, the more effectively that stimulus will function as a conditional reinforcer.

In ecology, an ideal free distribution (IFD) is a theoretical way in which a population's individuals distribute themselves among several patches of resources within their environment, in order to minimize resource competition and maximize fitness. The theory states that the number of individual animals that will aggregate in various patches is proportional to the amount of resources available in each. For example, if patch A contains twice as many resources as patch B, there will be twice as many individuals foraging in patch A as in patch B.

Behavioral momentum is a theory in quantitative analysis of behavior and is a behavioral metaphor based on physical momentum. It describes the general relation between resistance to change and the rate of reinforcement obtained in a given situation.

Melioration theory in behavioral psychology is a theoretical algorithm that predicts the matching law. Melioration theory is used as an explanation for why an organism makes choices based on the rewards or reinforcers it receives. The principle of melioration states that animals will invest increasing amounts of time and/or effort into whichever alternative is better. To meliorate essentially means to "make better".

Quantitative analysis of behavior is the application of mathematical models--conceptualized from the robust corpus of environment-behavior-consequence interactions in published behavioral science--to the experimental analysis of behavior. The aim is to describe and/or predict relations between varying levels of independent environmental variables and dependent behavioral variables. The parameters in the models hopefully have theoretical meaning beyond their use in fitting models to data. The field was founded by Richard Herrnstein (1961) when he introduced the matching law to quantify the behavior of organisms working on concurrent schedules of reinforcement.

In behaviorism, rate of reinforcement is number of reinforcements per time, usually per minute. Symbol of this rate is usually Rf. Its first major exponent was B.F. Skinner (1939). It is used in the Matching Law.

In behaviorism, rate of response is a ratio between two measurements with different units. Rate of responding is the number of responses per minute, or some other time unit. It is usually written as R. Its first major exponent was B.F. Skinner (1939). It is used in the Matching Law.

In behavioral psychology, stimulus control is a phenomenon in operant conditioning that occurs when an organism behaves in one way in the presence of a given stimulus and another way in its absence. A stimulus that modifies behavior in this manner is either a discriminative stimulus or stimulus delta. For example, the presence of a stop sign at a traffic intersection alerts the driver to stop driving and increases the probability that braking behavior occurs. Stimulus control does not force behavior to occur, as it is a direct result of historical reinforcement contingencies, as opposed to reflexive behavior elicited through classical conditioning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles Ferster</span>

Charles Bohris Ferster was an American behavioral psychologist. A pioneer of applied behavior analysis, he developed errorless learning and was a colleague of B.F. Skinner's at Harvard University, co-authoring the book Schedules of Reinforcement (1957).

The mathematical principles of reinforcement (MPR) constitute of a set of mathematical equations set forth by Peter Killeen and his colleagues attempting to describe and predict the most fundamental aspects of behavior.

Self-administration is, in its medical sense, the process of a subject administering a pharmacological substance to themself. A clinical example of this is the subcutaneous "self-injection" of insulin by a diabetic patient.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.