Transcript Chapter 11 - G. David Gentry

Chapter 10
Powell, et al.
Dying in America
The leading causes of death in 2000 were tobacco (435 000 deaths; 18.1% of total US
deaths), poor diet and physical inactivity (400 000 deaths; 16.6%), and alcohol
consumption (85 000 deaths; 3.5%). Other actual causes of death were microbial
agents (75 000), toxic agents (55 000), motor vehicle crashes (43 000), incidents
involving firearms (29 000), sexual behaviors (20 000), and illicit use of drugs (17 000).
CONCLUSIONS: These analyses show that smoking remains the leading cause of
mortality. However, poor diet and physical inactivity may soon overtake tobacco as the
leading cause of death. These findings, along with escalating health care costs and
aging population, argue persuasively that the need to establish a more preventive
orientation in the US health care and public health systems has become more urgent.
Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, & Gerberding JL.
(JAMA, 2004)
WHY? Note: Tobacco, diet, exercise, alcohol, speed,
sex, illicit drugs. What do they have in common?
Making choices
Radio stations listened to?
Vegetables eaten?
Courses taken?
People converse with?
Path taken from room (car) to class?
Why do we pick the ways we do? Is choice orderly? Can
we have a science of choosing? Do we need a science
of choosing? Can it lead to preventing deaths?
Making choices
Edward Tolman (1938, p 34; cited by Graham,
2002) asserted that “everything important in
psychology . . . can be investigated in essence
through the continued experimental and
theoretical analysis of the determiners of rat
behavior at a choice point in a maze.”
With free operant conditioning procedures now:
1. Choice between two VI’s:
Concurrent VI VI
VI 1 min
FOOD
VI 2 min
FOOD
Procedural concern: COD needed
How would YOU distribute your responding?
2. Choice between two VI’s
VI 1 min
1 FOOD
pellet
VI 1 min
2 FOOD
pellets
How would YOU distribute your responding?
3. Choice between two VI’s
VI 1 min
FOOD A
VI 1 min
FOOD B
How would YOU distribute your responding?
Theories for choice behavior
I.Herrnstein’s Matching Law
A. Matching
B. B1/(B1 + B2) = R1/(R1+ R2)
Theories for choice behavior
C. B1/(B1+ B2) = A1/(A1+ A2)
D. B1/(B1+ B2) = Q1/(Q1+ Q2)
Theories for choice behavior
E. Overmatching
Theories for choice behavior
F. Undermatching
Theories for choice behavior
G. Bias
Theories for choice behavior
H. Single schedule performance?
B1/(B1+ Bo) = R1/(R1+ Ro)
I. Explanation or description?
Theories of Choice Behavior
II.Other theories
A. Melioration: R1/B1 = R2/B2 (go to better
situation)
B. Optimization (matching maximizes overall rate
of reinforcement)
C. Momentary maximizing (molecular)
Concurrent chain schedules
III. Choice between two schedules
A. Preference for FR 20 or VR 20?
1. Preference for FR 20 or VR 20
Initial links
VI 1 min
VI 1 min
Terminal links
FR 20
VR 20
FOOD
FOOD
Concurrent chain schedules
III. Choice between two schedules
B. Preference for free choice or forced choice?
2. Free choice or forced choice
Initial links
VI 1 min
VI 1 min
Terminal links
FI 1 min
FI 1 min
FOOD
FOOD
FOOD
Concurrent chain schedules
III. Choice between two schedules
C. Preference for immediate or delayed
reinforcer?
1. Preference for Delayed or Immediate
Initial links
VI 1 min
VI 1 min
Terminal links
1 Response
FOOD
Immediately
1 Response
FOOD
Delayed 2 sec
Concurrent chain schedules
III. Choice between two schedules
C. Preference for immediate or delayed
reinforcer?
1.Value of immediate reinforcer
2.Value of delayed reinforcer
3.Delay discounting (k)
Concurrent chain schedules
III. Choice between two schedules
D. Preference for smaller immediate or larger
delayed reinforcer?
1 RESP
2” FOOD
4” FOOD
NO DELAY 4” DELAY
Concurrent chain schedules
III. Choice between two schedules
D. Preference for smaller immediate or larger
delayed reinforcer?
1. Impulsiveness
2. Self-control
3. Precommitment
3. Self-Control
W
FR 25
Timeout
1 RESP
2” FOOD
4” FOOD
NO DELAY 4” DELAY
W
Initial links
FR 25
Timeout
1 RESP
4” FOOD
4” DELAY
Self-Control
III. Choice between two schedules
E. How increase “self-control”
1. Make delayed reinforcer “better”
2. Make sooner reinforcer weaker or punitive
3. Precommit