ANSC 3314

Introduction to Matching Law

  • The matching law describes how behavior allocation is related to reinforcement rates.
    • It suggests a proportional relationship between the behavior on one option and the reinforcement received.
    • Reinforcement is quantified using mathematical expressions.

Mathematical Representation of Matching Law

  • Behavior on option A is represented as b_a; reinforcement on option A is r_a.
  • The relationship can be expressed as:
    • rac{b_a}{b_a + b_b} = rac{r_a}{r_a + r_b}
    • This means the proportion of behavior on one choice matches the proportion of reinforcement for that choice compared to others.

Generalized Matching Law

  • The matching law can be extended further through generalized matching laws.
  • Use case example: Teacher’s attention toward students based on reinforcement.
    • More reinforcement from attentive students (e.g., smiles, nods) leads to more attention provided to them.

Experimental Evidence of Matching Law

  • In social settings, participants tend to interact with conversationalists who provide more positive reinforcement.
  • Example: During conversations, participants shift their gaze toward individuals who provide higher reinforcement (high nodding and engagement).

Linear Graph of Matching Law

  • If plotted, the relationship yields a linear graph showing relative rates of behavior vs. relative rates of reinforcement.
  • As reinforcement for option A increases, so does the relative rate of behavior allocated to it.

Variable Interval vs. Variable Ratio Schedules

  • Matching law is more pronounced under variable interval (VI) schedules than under fixed or variable ratio schedules.
  • Example scenario: One person offers $5 for a bracelet, another $20.
    • Most will choose to sell to the $20 payer to maximize reinforcement.
  • Under variable interval schedules, reinforcement is given at varying times (e.g., every 30 or 60 minutes).

Optimal Foraging Theory Comparison

  • The principle of matching law parallels the concept of optimal foraging theory in biology, which observes similar behavioral patterns in animals.

Predicting Behavior Allocation with Two Options

  • Example: Given two interactions:
    • Person A: VI 30 seconds -> 2 reinforcers/min
    • Person B: VI 60 seconds -> 1 reinforcer/min
  • Matching law predicts behavior would be 66% towards A and 33% towards B, based on reinforcement allocations.

Behavioral Implications for Training

  • Important to realize that behavior reflects choice influenced by available reinforcement rates.
    • Using the dog example: if a dog ignores commands, it may be receiving higher reinforcement from alternative behaviors.
  • To increase compliance, one needs to adjust reinforcement: either increase the reinforcement for desired behavior or decrease reinforcement for undesired behaviors.

Example of Behavior Choice

  • A scenario is utilized to illustrate:
    • Dog is trained with kibble at home but may ignore commands outdoors due to more appealing distractions (i.e., squirrels).
  • The implication is that higher quality or quantity of reinforcement is necessary to maintain expected behaviors.

Generalizing Matching Law to Multiple Options

  • The model can also be generalized to a quantitative law of effect.
  • For multiple options, the formula adjusts to:
    • rac{b_a}{b_a + b_{all}}
    • Where all other options are summed as extraneous reinforcement.

Hyperbolic Function in Matching Law

  • As reinforcement increases, behavioral response also increases but not linearly; it follows a hyperbolic relationship where after certain points, the rate of increase diminishes (asymptotic behavior).
  • The behavior graph remains asymptotic at a maximum value (k), with an inflection point indicating the onset of diminishing returns, tied back to reinforcement of extraneous environmental factors.

Reinforcement Parameters in Different Environments

  • Understanding individual circumstances can help predict behaviors:
    • Higher environmental reinforcements necessitate higher adjustments in desired behavior reinforcements.
  • Example: More engaging or competitive environments require increased reinforcement to sustain desired behaviors.

Conclusion

  • Matching law highlights that behavior allocations are based on relative reinforcement strength in different adjustable scales.
  • This understanding can aid interactions between trainers and clients, helping to strategize reinforcement effectively to maximize desired behaviors.