Reinforcement and the organisation of behaviour in golden hamsters: Differential overshadowing of a CS by different responses

Are different responses differentially associable with their consequences? An overshadowing design was used to try to answer this question for three responses previously studied in golden hamsters. In Experiment I, scrabbling was rapidly suppressed by electric shock punishment, and it overshadowed a tone which occurred between scrabbling and shock. In Experiment II, no evidence of response-shock association was obtained when open rearing was the punished response, and open rearing did not overshadow the tone. Punishment had some effect on face washing, but there was no statistically significant overshadowing with this response. These results are consistent with the idea that differences in punishment suppression among these three responses have an associative basis. They also demonstrate the usefulness of a novel paradigm for studying “preparedness” of response-reinforcer associations.     

Psychological Flexibility at Work and Employees' Proactive Work Behaviour: Cross‐Level Moderating Role of Leader Need for Structure

How to promote employees to be proactive behaviourally is a significant issue in the literature because it would benefit organisations in several ways. Drawing on the acceptance and commitment model, we proposed a new antecedent, psychological flexibility that might contribute to employees' proactive work behaviour. Furthermore, we investigated how the contextual role of supervisor need for structure exhibits a cross‐level moderating effect on the relationship between employee psychological flexibility at work and proactive work behaviour based on interactionism. Data from 241 full‐time employees and their corresponding 45 managers indicated that employee psychological flexibility was positively associated with proactive work behaviour. More importantly, the supervisor need for structure played a moderating role, suggesting that employees would demonstrate greater proactive work behaviour especially when the supervisors have a high need for structure. Implications for psychological flexibility, proactivity, and person‐situation interactional research are discussed.