Premium
INTERPERSONAL CONTINGENCIES: PERFORMANCE DIFFERENCES AND COST‐EFFECTIVENESS
Author(s) -
Schmitt David R.
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.75
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1938-3711
pISSN - 0022-5002
DOI - 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-221
Subject(s) - reinforcement , contingency , contingency management , psychology , competition (biology) , interpersonal communication , social psychology , ecology , intervention (counseling) , linguistics , philosophy , psychiatry , biology
Three reinforcement contingencies were compared with regard to performance differences and cost‐effectiveness (i.e., responses per unit reinforcer). Pairs of college students were studied under individual, cooperative, or competitive contingencies using a concurrent setting that included one of these three contingencies as one alternative and a lower paying individual contingency as the other alternative. With the individual and the cooperative contingencies, overall response rates were typically high; under competitive contingencies the overall response rates were substantially lower. Subjects responded at very high rates when competing, but chose not to compete most of the time. Competition and cooperation produced the most cost‐effective responding, assessed as the number of responses made per $.01 of reinforcer. High overall rates of competitive responding were obtained when the contests were longer and the lower paying alternative contingency was not available.