|
| Recent Research on Verbal Behavior |
| Sunday, May 30, 2004 |
| 10:30 AM–11:50 AM |
| Beacon D |
| Area: EAB/TPC; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Michael R. Johnston (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: . |
| |
| Compound Stimuli and Competing Responses in Humans: An Investigation in Audience Control |
| SCOTT A. HERBST (University of Nevada, Reno), Linda J. Parrott Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: This presentation examined the effects of simultaneously presenting stimuli associated with competing responses. During training conditions, unique contextual cues were shown on a computer screen and participants used a mouse to click on one of three available responses. In the first training condition, an “X” response resulted in points awarded while a “Y” response resulted in point loss. In the second condition, this contingency was reversed. During test conditions, contextual cues associated with competing responses were shown simultaneously. Data concerning response allocation and latency to responding are presented and implications of these data are discussed. |
| |
| Systematic Study of the Efficacy of Several Methodological Elements of a Behavioral Contingency in a Human Operant Setting |
| MICHAEL R. JOHNSTON (University of Nevada, Reno), Linda J. Parrott Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: Experimental work conducted with animals shows great regularity in terms of schedule controlled behavior. The results of human operant work show more variability and are often disparate from said animal patterns. One potential explanation for this lies in the methodological differences between human and animal experiments. That is, the use of appetitive schedules of reinforcement with food-deprived animals is a highly relied upon methodology that delivers a very predictable result. However, given the wide variety of methodologies used in human operant literature, and the wide variety of results obtained, perhaps some of the discrepancies between human and animal performance may be due to these methodological incongruities. The present study employed a systematic investigation of human operant methods in a search for the most efficacious types of antecedents, responses, and consequences, without ignoring the role of motivation (i.e., establishing operations) for producing schedule behavior more akin to animal-like patterns. By varying these types of elements, data indicates an important contribution of the methodology used in a human operant setting and this approach may help explain some of the differences between humans and animal responding on certain schedules of reinforcement. |
| |
| Human Choice Behavior: An Investigation of Matching and Optimizing Accounts |
| DONALD R. KARR (University of Nevada, Reno), W. Larry Williams (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: A universal fundamental mechanism that governs choice behavior of all organisms remains to be discovered or, at least, to be widely accepted. In this study, dominant theories including Herrnstein’s strict matching law and Baum’s generalized matching law are reviewed and applied to data as applicable. Two adult males participated in two one-hour computerized choice experiments having two choice alternatives. The experimental design was inspired by Mazur’s 1981 study with pigeons, which was designed to provide evidence that optimization is not the basic mechanism underlying choice behavior. The first experiment in the present study was designed to shape choice behavior in such a way that participants’ choice behavior would tend toward matching. Implicit in the design of the first experiment was the intent to foster a bias in favor of the richer choice alternative. The second experiment was designed to mirror the first except that the contingencies were altered, analogous to Mazur’s experiment, in such a way that a tendency to match would result is a loss of total reinforcement. Results of the second experiment indicated that neither participant exhibited matching behavior, rather their behaviors trended toward optimization. Real-time oral comments of participants were recorded and compared with their choice behaviors. |
| |
| Distance Learning and Behavior Analysis: Are We Ready for Change? |
| HEIDI LANDABURU (University of Nevada, Reno), Linda J. Parrott Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: The goals of education have shifted from supplying students with knowledge and expertise in a particular subject matter to self-directed or just-in-time learning. Self-directed learning is aimed at teaching the student how to learn. Distance learning and web-based instruction provide educational environments that allow for the type of self-directed learning that is going to be required in future job settings (Romiszowski, 1997). The utilization of virtual classrooms is going to have a large impact on current higher education practices. These changes and their impact on the future of Behavior Analysis will be discussed and analyzed. |
|
| |