Discipline and the use of sanctions

Children must be taught how to act, and it is easy to assume that such teaching requires the use of rewards and punishments. Yet research shows that rewards and punishments are likely to have unintended and, often, undesirable consequences. The paper discusses some of this research and casts the results into a context that integrates language learning, value transmission, and behavior. Alternatives to the use of sanctions are suggested.     

Externalizing psychopathology and behavioral disinhibition: working memory mediates signal discriminability and reinforcement moderates response bias in approach-avoidance learning

Research has suggested that reduced working memory capacity plays a key role in disinhibited patterns of behavior associated with externalizing psychopathology. In this study, participants (N = 365) completed 2 versions of a go/no-go mixed-incentive learning task that differed in the relative frequency of monetary rewards and punishments for correct and incorrect active-approach responses, respectively. Using separate structural equation models for conventional (hit and false alarm rates) and signal detection theory (signal discriminability and response bias) performance indices, distinct roles for working memory capacity and changes in payoff structure were found. Specifically, results showed that (a) working memory capacity mediated the effects of externalizing psychopathology on false alarms and discriminability of go versus no-go signals; (b) these effects were not moderated by the relative frequency of monetary rewards and punishments; (c) the relative frequency of monetary rewards and punishments moderated the effects of externalizing psychopathology on hits and response bias for go versus no-go responses; and (d) these effects were not mediated by working memory capacity. The findings implicate distinct roles for reduced working memory capacity and poorly modulated active approach and passive avoidance in the link between externalizing psychopathology and behavioral disinhibition.     

A review of paradoxical performance effects: Choking under pressure in sports and mental tests

Paradoxical performance effects (‘choking under pressure’) are defined as the occurrence of inferior performance despite striving and incentives for superior performance. Experimental demonstrations of these effects on tasks analogous to athletic performance and the theories that may explain them are reviewed. At present, attentional theories seem to offer the most complete explanation of the processes underlying paradoxical performance effects. In particular, choking may result from distraction or from the interference of self-focused attention with the execution of automatic responses. Experimental findings of paradoxical performance decrements are associated with four pressure variables: audience presence, competition, performance-contingent rewards and punishments, and ego relevance of the task. The mediating factors of task complexity, expectancies, and individual differences are discussed.     

A Brief History of Dissonance Theory

Prior to the construction of the theory of cognitive dissonance, the dominant view in American experimental psychology held that behavior, including verbal attitude statements, was learned and shaped by rewards and/or punishments. Dissonance theory took a surprisingly different view by stating that behaviors and reasons for engaging in them could be strengthened by minimizing the very rewards or threatened punishments that produced the behaviors. Many hundreds of experimental studies later, the main argument of dissonance theory is well supported, although researchers disagree about the necessary and sufficient conditions. The present paper traces the major lines of research, including contributions from around the world, and the major controversies among some of the researchers.     

Cessation of alcohol and drug use among adolescents: A social learning model

This investigation tests the ability of Akers’ (1977) social learning theory of deviance to account for the cessation of alcohol or drug use among adolescents. For each of five substances, two‐group discriminant function analyses showed that social learning variables were successful in discriminating adolescents who ceased using from their counterparts who continued to use. Peer associations were generally most discriminating with normative definitions and social rewards or punishments also contributing to differentiation. Positive or negative effects of the substances as well as imitation bore little relationship to cessation. Social learning theory was as explanatory for stronger drugs as it was for alcohol and marijuana. Policy and program implications are suggested.     

Reward, punishment, and cooperation: a meta-analysis

How effective are rewards (for cooperation) and punishment (for noncooperation) as tools to promote cooperation in social dilemmas or situations when immediate self-interest and longer term collective interest conflict? What variables can promote the impact of these incentives? Although such questions have been examined, social and behavioral scientists provide different answers. To date, there is no theoretical and/or quantitative review of rewards and punishments as incentives for cooperation in social dilemmas. Using a novel interdependence-theoretic framework, we propose that rewards and punishments should both promote cooperation, and we identify 2 variables—cost of incentives and source of incentives—that are predicted to magnify the effectiveness of these incentives in promoting cooperation.A meta-analysis involving 187 effect sizes revealed that rewards and punishments exhibited a statistically equivalent positive effect on cooperation (d =0.51 and 0.70, respectively). The effectiveness of incentives was stronger when the incentives were costly to administer, compared to free. Centralization of incentives did not moderate the effect size. Punishments were also more effective during iterated dilemmas when participants continued to interact in the same group, compared to both (a) iterated dilemmas with reassignment to a new group after each trial and (b) one-shot dilemmas. We also examine several other potential moderators, such as iterations, partner matching, group size, country, and participant payment. We discuss broad conclusions, consider implications for theory, and suggest directions for future research on rewards and punishment in social dilemmas.     

Delay of gratification in psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders.

Delay of gratification is a prototypical measure of self-control that merits systematic investigation in psychopaths. White male prisoners were provided with repeated opportunities to select an immediate response with uncertain reward or a delayed response with a higher rate of reward under one of three incentive conditions. Psychopaths' performance depended on their level of trait anxiety and incentive condition: Whereas low-anxious psychopaths were relatively unwilling to delay when omission of expected rewards also incurred monetary punishments, they displayed relatively superior performance when the task involved rewards only. Findings complement those for passive avoidance learning in psychopaths and suggest that inhibitory self-control in low-anxious psychopaths is somewhat impaired under conditions involving a combination of monetary rewards and punishments.     

Visual selective attention and the effects of monetary rewards

Outcomes of actions, in the form of rewards and punishments, are known to shape behavior. For example, an action followed by reward will be more readily elicited on subsequent encounters with the same stimuli and context -- a phenomenon known as the law of effect. These consequences of rewards (and punishments) are important because they reinforce adaptive behaviors at the expense of competing ones, thus increasing fitness of the organism in its environment. However, it is unknown whether similar influences regulate covert mental processes, such as visual selective attention. Visual selective attention allows privileged processing of task-relevant information, while inhibiting distracting contextual elements. Using variable monetary rewards as arbitrary feedback on performance, we tested whether acts of attentional selection, and in particular the resulting aftereffects, can be modulated by their consequences. Results show that the efficacy of visual selective attention can be sensibly adjusted by external feedback. Specifically, although lingering inhibition of distractors is robust after highly rewarded selections, it is eliminated after poorly rewarded selections. This powerful feature of visual selective attention provides attentive processes with both flexibility and self-regulation properties.     

父母物质惩罚对儿童睡眠质量的影响：主观幸福感的中介作用及友谊质量的调节作用

摘 要：为探讨父母物质惩罚与儿童睡眠质量的关系及其作用机制,采用问卷法对438名小学生进行调查。结果发现：（1）父母物质惩罚与儿童主观幸福感、睡眠质量之间呈现显著相关;（2）物质惩罚既能直接预测儿童睡眠质量,也能通过主观幸福感的中介作用预测睡眠质量;（3）友谊质量能在物质惩罚对儿童睡眠质量的中介中起到调节,对高友谊质量的儿童来说,物质惩罚对幸福感的作用不显著。研究结果揭示了作为物质型教养行为之一的物质惩罚对儿童睡眠质量的影响及其作用机制,能为提高儿童的幸福感及睡眠质量提供有效启示。     

A formal cognitive model of the go/no-go discrimination task: evaluation and implications

This article proposes and tests a formal cognitive model for the go/no-go discrimination task. In this task, the performer chooses whether to respond to stimuli and receives rewards for responding to certain stimuli and punishments for responding to others. Three cognitive models were evaluated on the basis of data from a longitudinal study involving 400 adolescents. The results show that a cue-dependent model presupposing that participants can differentiate between cues was the most accurate and parsimonious. This model has 3 parameters denoting the relative impact of rewards and punishments on evaluations, the rate that contingent payoffs are learned, and the consistency between learning and responding. Commission errors were associated with increased attention to rewards; omission errors were associated with increased attention to punishments. Both error types were associated with low choice consistency. The parameters were also shown to have external validity: Attention to rewards was associated with externalizing behavior problems on the Achenbach scale, and choice consistency was associated with low Welsh anxiety. The present model can thus potentially improve the sensitivity of the task to differences between clinical populations.     

Goals and task difficulty expectations modulate striatal responses to feedback

The striatum plays a critical role in learning from reward, and it has been implicated in learning from performance-related feedback as well. Positive and negative performance-related feedback is known to engage the striatum during learning by eliciting a response similar to the reinforcement signal for extrinsic rewards and punishments. Feedback is an important tool used to teach new skills and promote healthful lifestyle changes, so it is important to understand how motivational contexts can modulate its effectiveness at promoting learning. While it is known that striatal responses scale with subjective factors influencing the desirability of rewards, it is less clear how expectations and goals might modulate the striatal responses to cognitive feedback during learning. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the effects of task difficulty expectations and achievement goals on feedback processing during learning. We found that individuals who scored high in normative goals, which reflect a desire to outperform other students academically, showed the strongest effects of our manipulation. High levels of normative goals were associated with greater performance gains and exaggerated striatal sensitivity to positive versus negative feedback during blocks that were expected to be more difficult. Our findings suggest that normative goals may enhance performance when difficulty expectations are high, while at the same time modulating the subjective value of feedback as processed in the striatum.     

Asymmetrical consequences of behavioral change through reward and punishment

Previous research (Greitemeyer & Weiner, 2003 ) has demonstrated that compliance, because of an anticipated reward is attributed more to the person than compliance because of an anticipated punishment. The present research extended these findings to an educational context. Three studies revealed that parents who ask their children to change inappropriate behaviors are more likely to ascribe their children's improvement to the child, if the child was promised a reward, rather than threatened, to receive a punishment if the child did not improve. Moreover, because a child's improved behavior is more likely to be ascribed to the child given a reward as compared to a punishment, parents expect that rewards (as opposed to punishments) are more likely to sustain improved behavior, when the incentive is no longer offered. Finally, participants report to be more likely to induce behavioral change through reward rather than punishment. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The cultural dynamics of rewarding honesty and punishing deception

Recent research suggests that individuals reward honesty more than they punish deception. Five experiments showed that different patterns of rewards and punishments emerge for North American and East Asian cultures. Experiment 1 demonstrated that Americans rewarded more than they punished, whereas East Asians rewarded and punished in equivalent amounts. Experiments 2 and 3 revealed that these divergent patterns by culture could be explained by greater social mobility experienced by Americans. Experiments 4 and 5 examined how certain consequences of social mobility, approach-avoidance behavioral motivations and trust and felt obligation, can lead to disparate reward and punishment decisions within the two cultures. Moreover, Experiment 4 revealed that Americans exhibited stronger evaluative reactions toward deception but stronger behavioral intentions toward honesty; East Asians did not exhibit this evaluative-behavioral asymmetry. The cross-cultural implications for understanding rewards and punishments in an increasingly globalized world are discussed.     

The differential effects of tangible rewards and praise on intrinsic motivation: A comparison of cognitive evaluation theory and operant theory

Substantial research indicates that tangible rewards, such as money, prizes, and tokens, decrease response rates by undermining intrinsic motivation. In contrast, praise appears to increase response rates by enhancing intrinsic motivation. Based on their interpretation of available evidence, many social-cognitive researchers warn not to use tangible rewards in applied settings and to use praise instead. Furthermore, they suggest that the differential effects of the two types of rewards on intrinsic motivation cannot be explained using principles of operant psychology. Cognitive evaluation theory provides one of the most recent and widely cited social-cognitive explanations for the different effects of the two types of rewards on intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985). However, a review of existing research found little support for the explanations based on this theory and revealed three potential confounding effects: (a) temporal contiguity, (b) the number of reward administrations, and (c) discriminative stimuli associated with reward availability. These three confounding factors provide explanations for the effects of tangible rewards and praise on intrinsic motivation that are consistent with principles of operant psychology.     

SOCIAL JUSTICE

Social justice (which includes retributive and distributive justice) is most clearly satisfied by a system of Divine rewards and punishments: an omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly just Being could determine in each case how much effort was made and effect the appropriate distribution of rewards and punishments. A correct understanding of social justice naturally leads us to suppose that there is an afterlife, a God, a free choice — though it is logically possible at least that social justice could be satisfied in some future (very advanced) human society. There will still be those who have their doubts about the correctness of any view according to which justice cannot be attained by fallible creatures who have an incomplete knowledge of one another's behaviour. But, surely, these doubts are not sufficient to discredit my view. There is no a priori reason for rejecting such a view. There is nothing about our use of the term ‘justice’ and its cognates which implies that such a view is mistaken. (Otherwise the statement “There is no justice in this world’ would be meaningless.) To the contrary, there are widely held religious views, Christian as well as non-Christian, which take this view quite seriously. If there is no a priori reason for rejecting this view, then there must be some independent reason for rejecting it. In other words, we need some independent reasons for believing that social justice can be attained by fallible creatures with limited knowledge. The mere fact that we might feel uncomfortable with my theory is not reason enough to reject it. Finally, those who do experience this discomfort might ask themselves whether such discomfort stems from their moral experience or whether they are simply intent on finding justice in imperfect human institutions.     

The effects of perceived similarity upon the use of reward and punishment

Subjects were led to perceive a trainee as either similar or dissimilar to themselves. During subsequent influence trials, subjects attempted to assess the causes of the trainee's performance and to employ rewards, punishments, or manipulations of the trainee's environment to optimize her performance. It was predicted that subjects would perceive the performance of dissimilar trainees as caused more by the dispositional factor of motivation than the performance of similar trainees, and that dissimilar trainees would thus be rewarded more upon success as well as punished more upon failure. The hypotheses were supported, and a model of reward-punishment behavior and attribution is discussed.     

The resentful sucker: Do rewards ease the pain?

In a cross-sectional field study we found, as predicted, that performance differences between members of semi-autonomous teams were associated with feelings of unfairness. On the basis of equity theory we hypothesized that the relationship between performance differences and unfairness feelings would be moderated for suckers, i.e., team members with relatively high performances, who feel highly rewarded for their efforts, either with high financial rewards, with high task rewards, or with high social rewards. The results showed that financial rewards had no moderating effects, but high social rewards and low task rewards moderated feelings of unfairness for suckers.     

Introduction to Behavioural Family Therapy for families with young children

This paper presents some suggestions for the implementation of Behavioural Family Therapy for families with young children. It attempts to bridge the gap between clinical research and practice by emphasizing the process of therapy delivery rather than the specific content of the behavioural approach. Suggestions for teaching behaviour management skills, contracting and the effective use of rewards and punishments are given. The common mistakes made by those working with Behavioural Family Therapy are addressed, and suggestions for working with single-parent families are given.     

The difference between punishments and rewards in fostering moral concerns in social decision making

In social decision making, punishing non-cooperation and rewarding cooperation may not only affect cooperation because of instrumental reasons. They may also evoke moral concerns regarding cooperation as they signal that cooperation is socially approved of and non-cooperation socially disapproved of. I argue that punishments do this to a greater extent than rewards as punishments communicate an obligatory rule and rewards communicate a voluntary rule. Indeed, the first experiment shows that, in a social dilemma, the concept of punishment increased cooperation and the concept of a reward did not. The second experiment showed that participants showed more disapproval towards an offender when there was a punishment for non-compliance than when there was a reward for compliance. These findings suggest that punishing non-cooperation more strongly foster moral concerns regarding cooperation than rewarding cooperation. Possible implications for internalizations are discussed.     

Research Note: An Exploratory Analysis of Salesperson Perceptions of the Criteria Used in Performance Appraisals,Job Satisfaction,and Organizational Commitment

In some sales organizations the performance appraisal is treated as a bureaucratic exercise required by some “higher-up” executive. As such, sales managers may essentially conduct appraisals in an arbitrary and perfunctory manner. This behavior could be the result of the manager's perception that conducting performance appraisals requires considerable amounts of time and effort, which provides few rewards, but adds considerably to the manager's level of conflict and stress. The purpose of this research is to examine the relationships existing between one aspect of performance appraisals, salesperson perceptions of the appropriateness of the criteria used, and two other variables, organizational commitment and job satisfaction. A survey of retail salespeople provided the data required to evaluate the relationship between satisfaction, commitment, and the perceived appropriateness of the criteria used. The findings indicate that salesperson satisfaction levels are significantly correlated with the level of the perceived inappropriateness of the evaluation criteria used. However, the findings also indicate that the perceptions of the inappropriateness of the evaluation criteria are not significantly related to the salesperson's level of organizational commitment. Based on these findings, recommendations are made regarding the salesperson's role in the development of the performance appraisal process.