QUANTITATIVE-ANALYSES OF CHOICE IN RAT AND PIGEON

Studies of choice in nonhuman animals that presented concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules of reinforcement were quantitatively reviewed. Empirical parameters representing bias and sensitivity in the generalized matching equation were calculated across studies and compared. Undermatching was the most common relationship observed. No consistent bias was shown. An analysis of moderating variables also revealed that the laboratory in which an experiment was conducted, and the year of publication were related to the sensitivity parameter. This reanalysis confirms that a proportional relationship between the ratios of response rates and ratios of reinforcement rates is not an accurate description of concurrent VI VI performance.