adjusting schedules again (Chris Cherpas)

[From Chris Cherpas (960403.1830 PT)]
    [re: > Rick Marken (960403.1810)]

Rick: the plot of your feedback function is closer to what I would
expect of a "typical" adjusting schedule (if there is such a thing).

About "reinforcement theory:" Again, don't assume that the only
theory is that of maximizing overall reinforcement rate. There's
only a small band of "behavioral economics" types who take that
stand.

Then again, you may not care.

Best regards,
cc

[From Rick Marken (960404.1030)]

Chris Cherpas (960403.1830 PT)

About "reinforcement theory:" Again, don't assume that the only theory is
that of maximizing overall reinforcement rate. There's only a small band of
"behavioral economics" types who take that stand.

I have been laboring under the impression that the essence of reinforcement
theory is the idea that reinforcement selects behavior. A theory that says
organisms maximize reinforcement rate must be a PCT theory, it seems to me.
In order to _maximize_ reinforcement rate an organism must control for a
particular state of a perception of reinforcement rate, the state that is
"maximum", right?

I know that there are reinforcement theorists (like Staddon) who talk about
organisms maximizing reinforcement rate -- that is, they talk like control
theorists -- but I have never heard of these theorists making the kinds of
observations that would test such a theory; they never test (by applying
disturbances to the putative controlled variable) to determine whether
reinforcement rate is being maintained at a (local?) maximum.

I think it's pretty unlikely that lower organisms can actually control for a
perception as complex as "maximum reinforcement rate"; in order to control
this variable an organism would have to be able to determine which rate
constitutes "maximum" in any particular situation. This would involve (at
least) comparing the current reinforcment rate to previous rates resulting
from a range of response rates to determine which reinforcement rate
constitutes the (local) maximum.

While I think it's highly unlikely that lower organisms can control for
maximum reinforcement rate, I think its likely that they do control some
perceptual aspect of reinforcment. If reinforcement theorists are just
arguing about which perceptual aspect of reinforcement organisms control
(maximimum overall reinforcement rate, optimal reinforcement rate -- whatever
_that_is, reinforcment rate, ratio of reinforcment rate to perceived
fullness, etc) then I don't undertsand why they aren't more receptive to
PCT, which tells them _how_ organisms control these perceptions. And I also
don't understand why they so often slip back into talking about reinforcement
controlling behavior if they know that an organism's behavior is controlling
some perceptual aspect of reinforcment?

Then again, you may not care.

It's not that I don't care. I 'm just not smart enough to keep up with the
explanations given by reinforcement theorists (I have the same problem with
religionists; I'm just not smart enough to handle all those complex
arguments so I am deprived of the comforts of faith).

Best

Rick