Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-kfd97 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-27T11:12:36.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stochastic Learning Theories for a Response Continuum with Non-Determinate Reinforcement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Patrick Suppes  and
Joseph L. Zinnes
Patrick Suppes
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Joseph L. Zinnes
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Continuous analogues of the finite linear and stimulus sampling theories are developed for non-determinate reinforcement schedules. Closed-form expressions are derived for the asymptotic response distribution and certain sequential statistics. Computations for a target experiment are given to illustrate the character of the theoretical results.

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , December 1961 , pp. 373 - 390
Copyright
Copyright © 1961 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Group Psychology Branch of the Office of Naval Research.

References

Suppes, P. A linear learning model for a continuum of responses. In Bush, R. R. and Estes, W. K. (Eds.), Studies in mathematical learning theory. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1959, 400–414.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. Stimulus sampling theory for a continuum of responses In Arrow, K. J., Karlin, S., and Suppes, P. (Eds.), Mathematical methods in the social sciences. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1960, 348–365.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. and Frankmann, R. W. Test of stimulus sampling theory for a continuum of responses with unimodal noncontingent determinate reinforcement. J. exp. Psychol., 1961, 60, 122–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar