The near win effect on observing behaviour in simulated slot-machine gambling: The role of conditioned reinforcement

<p>Slot machines are a remarkably popular mode of gambling even though they are programmed to make a profit by paying out less money than is put in. One common feature of slot machines, which may increase the likelihood of persistent gambling in the face of this monetary loss, is the near win. This study’s aim was to investigate the conditioned reinforcing properties of near wins using an observing response procedure in the context of a simulated slot machine. In an observing response procedure, participants can use an observing button to produce a stimulus correlated with the availability of reinforcement (S+) or a stimulus correlated with no reinforcement or less reinforcement (S-). The percentage of observing responses made for each stimulus is thought to reflect the reinforcing efficacy of the reinforcer correlated with each stimulus. Experiment 1 successfully tested the procedure with an obvious reinforcer - wins - and found consistently more observing for the S+. In Experiment 2 and 3 the S+ was correlated with near wins, and in Experiment 2 only those with slot-machine experience had consistently more observing for the S+. Experiment 3 increased the probability of wins to enhance the reinforcing efficacy of near wins, but failed to find consistently more observing for the S+, regardless of slot machine or scratchie card experience. These results indicated that near wins are not conditioned reinforcers. However, participants tended to bet more following near wins than losses, which suggested that near wins may instead function as discriminative stimuli.</p>

The near win effect on observing behaviour in simulated slot-machine gambling: The role of conditioned reinforcement

<p>Slot machines are a remarkably popular mode of gambling even though they are programmed to make a profit by paying out less money than is put in. One common feature of slot machines, which may increase the likelihood of persistent gambling in the face of this monetary loss, is the near win. This study’s aim was to investigate the conditioned reinforcing properties of near wins using an observing response procedure in the context of a simulated slot machine. In an observing response procedure, participants can use an observing button to produce a stimulus correlated with the availability of reinforcement (S+) or a stimulus correlated with no reinforcement or less reinforcement (S-). The percentage of observing responses made for each stimulus is thought to reflect the reinforcing efficacy of the reinforcer correlated with each stimulus. Experiment 1 successfully tested the procedure with an obvious reinforcer - wins - and found consistently more observing for the S+. In Experiment 2 and 3 the S+ was correlated with near wins, and in Experiment 2 only those with slot-machine experience had consistently more observing for the S+. Experiment 3 increased the probability of wins to enhance the reinforcing efficacy of near wins, but failed to find consistently more observing for the S+, regardless of slot machine or scratchie card experience. These results indicated that near wins are not conditioned reinforcers. However, participants tended to bet more following near wins than losses, which suggested that near wins may instead function as discriminative stimuli.</p>

Categorizing

This chapter examines the psychological processes involved in stereotyping, or categorization. As the American psychologist Gordon Allport noted, the ability to categorize is critical to survival, helping people process information and respond in a timely way without reinventing the mental wheel. That said, such heuristics, or mental shortcuts, sometimes lead to false hypotheses and/or self-fulfilling prophecies. Moreover, in the cognitive approach to stereotyping, prejudice is a byproduct of categorical thinking—a person’s way of simplifying information, and not from pathological personality traits or conditioned behaviors. Therefore, by understanding the cognitive processes and “redirecting them,” prejudice might be eliminated. One way to accomplish this is through decategorization strategies that encourage people to see each other as distinct individuals. Personalization, that is, relaying information that expresses a person’s unique qualities, is one method researchers suggest might help people recognize that their stereotypes of another group are incorrect. This has led some researchers to use controlled psychology experiments to study “implicit” prejudice, or subconscious bias. The most common of such measures is the Implicit Association Test (IAT), which assesses strengths of associations between concepts by observing response latencies in computer-administered categorization tasks.

Role of the medial prefrontal cortex and nucleus accumbens in an operant model of checking behaviour and uncertainty

Background: Excessive checking is a common, debilitating symptom of obsessive–compulsive disorder. To further examine cognitive processes underpinning checking behaviour, and clarify how and why checking develops, we designed a novel operant paradigm for rats, the observing response task. The present study used the observing response task to investigate checking behaviour following excitotoxic lesions of the medial prefrontal cortex, nucleus accumbens core and dorsal striatum, brain regions considered to be of relevance to obsessive–compulsive disorder. Methods: In the observing response task, rats pressed an ‘observing’ lever for information (provided by light onset) about the location of an ‘active’ lever that provided food reinforcement. Following training, rats received excitotoxic lesions of the regions described above and performance was evaluated post-operatively before histological processing. Results: Medial prefrontal cortex lesions selectively increased functional checking with a less-prominent effect on non-functional checking and reduced discrimination accuracy during light information periods. Rats with nucleus accumbens core lesions made significantly more checking responses than sham-lesioned rats, including both functional and non-functional checking. Dorsal striatum lesions had no direct effect on checking per se, but reduced both active and inactive lever presses, and therefore changed the relative balance between checking responses and instrumental responses. Conclusions: These results suggest that the medial prefrontal cortex and nucleus accumbens core are important in the control of checking, perhaps via their role in processing uncertainty of reinforcement, and that dysfunction of these regions may therefore promote excessive checking behaviour, possibly relevant to obsessive-compulsive disorder.