We are talking about Herrnstein's Matching Law in my Theories of Learning class this week and as I was in the restroom, I started contemplating the fact that whenever two rolls are equally available, they dwindle at approximately the same rate. Of course, that defeats the purpose of two rolls which is so you can use up one and then use the back up until the janitor can re-stock the other roll. Some toilet roll racks have been designed to actively thwart this tendency by making it so the new roll doesn't drop into place until the old one is used up and removed.
In those situations where both are always available, I wonder if this is an example of the Matching Law in which the number responses made to each choice will match the work required to achieve the reinforcement. Therefore, if both require the same amount of work, you would expect both rolls to be depleted at a similar rate. If one was more difficult to obtain (or contained a lower quality of toilet paper), I wonder if matching would still hold (the degree to which one was superior or easier to access would match the rate at which it was used) or if people would just use the easier to access or the superior quality until it ran out and then switch to the other one? Rick Dr. Rick Froman, Chair Division of Humanities and Social Sciences Box 3055 x7295 rfro...@jbu.edu http://tinyurl.com/DrFroman Proverbs 14:15 "A simple man believes anything, but a prudent man gives thought to his steps." --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
