Rivals without a cause? Relative performance feedback creates destructive competition despite aligned incentives

Whether people compete or cooperate with each other has consequences for their own performance and that of organizations. To explain why people compete or cooperate, previous research has focused on two main factors: situational outcome structures and personality types. Here, we propose that—above and beyond these two factors—situational cues, such as the format in which people receive feedback, strongly affect whether they act competitively, cooperatively, or individualistically. Results of a laboratory experiment support our theorizing: After receiving ranking feedback, both students and experienced managers treated group situations with cooperative outcome structures as competitive and were in consequence willing to forgo guaranteed financial gains to pursue a—financially irrelevant—better rank. Conversely, in dilemma situations, feedback based on the joint group outcome led to more cooperation than ranking feedback. Our study contributes to research on competition, cooperation, interdependence theory, forced ranking, and the design of information environments.     

Estimation of indifference points with an adjusting-delay procedure.

In a series of conditions, pigeons chose between 1.5 s and 3 s of access to grain, each preceded by some delay. The delay that preceded the small reinforcer was constant throughout a condition. The delay that preceded the large reinforcer was increased or decreased a number of times each session in order to estimate an "indifference point," a delay at which the subject chose each alternative about equally often. The experiment was designed to determine whether variations in any of four features of this adjusting-delay procedure would systematically alter the estimated indifference points. The four features were the total trial duration, the number of center-key responses necessary to begin a trial, the number of choice trials that preceded each change in the adjusting delay, and step size--the size of each increment and decrement in the delay. Manipulation of the first three features had no systematic effects on the indifference points. As step size was increased from 0.5 s to 6 s, within-session variability of the adjusting delay steadily increased, and the 6-s step size produced larger indifference-point estimates for some subjects. The results suggest that, within certain limits, these procedural features can be altered without affecting the indifference-point estimates, but that the use of a large step size can distort the estimates. Some theoretical implications of the relative constancy of indifference points across these procedural variations are discussed.     

Typical delay determines waiting time on periodic-food schedules: Static and dynamic tests

Pigeons and other animals soon learn to wait (pause) after food delivery on periodic-food schedules before resuming the food-rewarded response. Under most conditions the steady-state duration of the average waiting time, t, is a linear function of the typical interfood interval. We describe three experiments designed to explore the limits of this process. In all experiments, t was associated with one key color and the subsequent food delay, T, with another. In the first experiment, we compared the relation between t (waiting time) and T (food delay) under two conditions: when T was held constant, and when T was an inverse function of t. The pigeons could maximize the rate of food delivery under the first condition by setting t to a consistently short value; optimal behavior under the second condition required a linear relation with unit slope between t and T. Despite this difference in optimal policy, the pigeons in both cases showed the same linear relation, with slope less than one, between t and T. This result was confirmed in a second parametric experiment that added a third condition, in which T + t was held constant. Linear waiting appears to be an obligatory rule for pigeons. In a third experiment we arranged for a multiplicative relation between t and T (positive feedback), and produced either very short or very long waiting times as predicted by a quasi-dynamic model in which waiting time is strongly determined by the just-preceding food delay.     

Reciprocal peer management: Improving staff instruction in a vocational training program

To test the feasibility and utility of involving peers as sources of feedback, 6 subjects, instructors in a vocational program for adults with mental retardation, participated in a staff training and management program. Subjects' teaching interactions were assessed during baseline, in-service training (on effective teaching), return-to-baseline, peer management, and follow-up phases. Peer management was introduced in multiple baseline fashion across pairs of subjects. Members of each pair were trained to monitor peer teaching, to record and graph data, to provide feedback, and to set goals with the peer. Each pair then performed these procedures on the job for several weeks, during which time 4 of the 6 subjects increased their use of effective teaching methods (over baseline). However, inconsistencies in the magnitude and durability of these increases require that the study be viewed as inconclusive, although it has heuristic value as a promising model for involving co-workers in staff management programs.     

PROMOTING STIMULUS CONTROL WITH TEXTUAL PROMPTS AND PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK FOR PERSONS WITH MILD DISABILITIES

We assessed whether written task analyses would serve as textual prompts for performing functional tasks by persons with mild disabilities. Several variables that could influence the effectiveness of textual prompts to promote stimulus control were examined across four groups. A consistent finding was that written specific task analyses combined with end-of-trial performance feedback were effective for promoting the acquisition and generalization of several tasks. Performance transferred immediately to natural discriminative stimuli when the written task analyses and feedback were withdrawn for most tasks and participants. For 2 participants, transfer of stimulus control was accomplished by prompt fading, using individualized written task analyses either with or without performance feedback (Group 1). When feedback was not provided, the effectiveness of written specific task analyses was inconsistent across groups. In contrast to the controlling effects of written specific task analyses, written generic task analyses, which specified only major task outcomes, when combined with performance feedback (Group 1) did not control responding. Overall, this research demonstrated the effectiveness of written specific task analyses and performance feedback to promote stimulus control for persons with mild disabilities.     

MAINTAINING PERFORMANCE OF AUTISTIC CLIENTS IN COMMUNITY SETTINGS WITH DELAYED CONTINGENCIES

To facilitate the classroom and workshop integration of three autistic clients, we examined the feasibility of teaching them to respond appropriately without the continual presence of specially trained treatment providers. Within a multiple baseline design, a 4-step treatment process was implemented to promote durable responsive performance. Results indicated that the therapist could be removed from the treatment environment and that appropriate behavior could be successfully maintained in community settings with only infrequent and delayed contingencies.     

Delayed temporal discrimination in pigeons: A comparison of two procedures

A within-subjects comparison was made of pigeons' performance on two temporal discrimination procedures that were signaled by differently colored keylight samples. During stimulus trials, a peck on the key displaying a slanted line was reinforced following short keylight samples, and a peck on the key displaying a horizontal line was reinforced following long keylight samples, regardless of the location of the stimuli on those two choice keys. During position trials, a peck on the left key was reinforced following short keylight samples and a peck on the right key was reinforced following long keylight samples, regardless of which line stimulus appeared on the correct key. Thus, on stimulus trials, the correct choice key could not be discriminated prior to the presentation of the test stimuli, whereas on position trials, the correct choice key could be discriminated during the presentation of the sample stimulus. During Phase 1, with a 0-s delay between sample and choice stimuli, discrimination learning was faster on position trials than on stimulus trials for all 4 birds. During Phase 2, 0-, 0.5-, and 1.0-s delays produced differential loss of stimulus control under the two tasks for 2 birds. Response patterns during the delay intervals provided some evidence for differential mediation of the two delayed discriminations. These between-task differences suggest that the same processes may not mediate performance in each.     

DOES EFFORT PLAY A ROLE IN THE EFFECT OF RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS ON DELAYED MATCHING TO SAMPLE?

The possible role of "effort" in the accuracy of pigeons' performance on a delayed matching-to-sample procedure was investigated by examining the effects of response requirements that accompanied a trial-initiating stimulus and that accompanied a sample stimulus. In the first experiment, the effect of varying the size of a fixed-ratio requirement for responses during an initiating stimulus was compared to that of varying a similar requirement for responses during the sample stimulus. Accuracy increased reliably with increases in the ratio scheduled during the sample stimulus, but was not significantly affected by increases in the ratio scheduled on the key during the initiating stimulus. In another phase of Experiment 1, sample duration was held constant while the ratio requirement was varied during the initiating stimulus. Again, accuracy of matching to sample was not significantly affected by the size of the ratio scheduled during the initiating stimulus. Experiment 2 provided a systematic replication of these results in another group of pigeons and included a more detailed analysis of responding. These results support the view that increases in sample-response requirement facilitate accuracy of delayed matching by increasing the durations of exposure to the sample stimuli, and do not support a role of effort in the sample-response effect. In Experiment 3, the facilitative effect of responses on the sample but not of those on the initiating stimulus was replicated using a simultaneous matching-to-sample procedure. This finding provides further evidence against an interpretation of response-requirement effects that appeals to effort; the finding also suggests that sample exposure might affect initial discrimination of the sample rather than remembering the sample.     

More on concurrent interval-ratio schedules: a replication and review.

It has been suggested that the failure to maximize reinforcement on concurrent variable-interval, variable-ratio schedules may be misleading. Inasmuch as response costs are not directly measured, it is possible that subjects are optimally balancing the benefits of reinforcement against the costs of responding. To evaluate this hypothesis, pigeons were tested in a procedure in which interval and ratio schedules had equal response costs. On a concurrent variable time (VT), variable ratio-time (VRT) schedule, the VT schedule runs throughout the session and the VRT schedule is controlled by responses to a changeover key that switches from one schedule to the other. Reinforcement is presented independent of response. This schedule retains the essential features of concurrent VI VR, but eliminates differential response costs for the two alternatives. It therefore also eliminates at least one significant ambiguity about the reinforcement maximizing performance. Pigeons did not maximize rate of reinforcement on this procedure. Instead, their times spent on the alternative schedules matched the relative rates of reinforcement, even when schedule parameters were such that matching earned the lowest possible overall rate of reinforcement. It was further shown that the observed matching was not a procedural artifact arising from the constraints built into the schedule.     

Delayed reinforcement as an indiscriminable contingency in verbal/nonverbal correspondence training

We investigated the programming of generalization and maintenance of correspondence between verbal and nonverbal behavior in a preschool setting. Four children participated in a series of multiple-baseline designs. In Experiment 1, delayed reinforcement of verbal behavior effectively controlled maintenance of correspondence with previously trained responses and also resulted in generalization of correspondence to one untrained response. As the latter effect was limited, Experiment 2 was a further assessment of the effects of delayed reinforcement of generalization of correspondence to untrained responses, and consistent generalization was shown. Experiment 2 also showed that generalization, if lost, could be recovered through use of "booster training," in which the original contingencies were reinstated for a brief period. Experiment 3 provided replications, with two additional children, of the effects of delayed reinforcement on maintenance of correspondence. Results are discussed in terms of using delayed reinforcement as an indiscriminable contingency.