For those of you who are interested in topics like this, or who sometimes find yourselves teaching them, please consider subscribing to TBA-L, a new email and online discussion forum dealing with topics like classical and operant conditioning, reinforcement, punishment, extinction, schedules of reinforcement, etc. The question being discussed here would find an interested and expert audience on TBA-L.
To subscribe, send the command SUBSCRIBE TBA-L FIRSTNAME LASTNAME (substituting your own first name and last name, of course) to [EMAIL PROTECTED] We'd be delighted for you to join us! Pat Williams ---------- Patrick S. Williams, Ph.D. TBA-L List Manager TBA: http://academic.dt.uh.edu/~williams/tba -----Original Message----- From: Mike Scoles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 11:27 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: Video lottery terminals and reinforcement schedule Stephen's distinction between a variable ratio and random ratio is one that I was not aware of, but then I don't teach operant methods. I wonder if the selection of one of these schedules is based on the technology that is used. In a lab setting, the "true" variable ratio would be easy to program using a film programmer (does anyone still use those?) or one using audio tape. This schedule would also be easy to program with a computer, but the random ratio would be much easier. Of course, the film/tape programming does not provide a random "true" ratio, but one could be programmed with a computer, where the sampling of ratios could be done with or without replacement. A number of (fascinating?) research questions come to mind. Would subjects (or participants) respond differently to: a) a fixed sequence of ratios of different lengths b) a random sequence of ratios of different lengths i. selected with replacement ii. selected without replacement c) a random ratio schedule, where the probability of reinforcement is constant d) how would the results under (a) and (b) be affected by the number and range of ratios I bet the answers to all of these questions are available in forgotten issues of JEAB. Stephen Black wrote: > . . . if it was programmed on VR, then if one produces many > responses without payout, the probability of a payout must rise > (i.e. you must be getting to the end of a long ratio). So if one > player gives up, it means that the next player would have a > better chance. Because of this, on reflection, I doubt that this > is how it's done. > > There's another schedule, called a random ratio, which seems more > likely. This reinforces each response with a preset probability > of winning. -- ***************************************************************** * Mike Scoles * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Department of Psychology * voice: (501) 450-5418 * * University of Central Arkansas * fax: (501) 450-5424 * * Conway, AR 72035-0001 * * ********* http://www.coe.uca.edu/psych/scoles/index.html ******** --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
