Premium
EFFECTS OF REWARD DISTRIBUTION AND PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK ON COMPETITIVE RESPONDING
Author(s) -
Schmitt David R.
Publication year - 1998
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.1998.69-263
Subject(s) - contest , distribution (mathematics) , statistics , competitor analysis , mathematics , schedule , psychology , econometrics , social psychology , computer science , economics , mathematical analysis , management , political science , law , operating system
To implement competitive contingencies, one must select a distribution of unequal rewards and a schedule of feedback for competitors regarding one another's performance. This study investigated three bases for distributing rewards and two performance feedback conditions. Pairs of college students competed over a series of 2‐min contests in which the competitive response was a knob pull. A sum of money was divided using a proportional distribution or one of two fixed reward distributions. In the proportional distribution, a subject's proportion of the sum was his or her proportion of the total number of responses. The two fixed distributions were divisions of 100%/0% or 67%/33%. Also, in every contest either subject could make a response that would end the contest prematurely and give both subjects the same amount—a sum equal to 33% of the competitive total. In the two feedback conditions, cumulative responses by each subject were either shown to both subjects during the contest or were not shown. The proportional distribution was clearly superior to either of the fixed distributions in number of responses produced across contests. The proportional distribution with feedback produced the largest number of competitive responses, and the 100%/0% distribution without feedback produced the smallest number. Differences among distributions typically emerged only during later blocks of contests. Fixed distributions of rewards often produced decelerating rates of responding, with losing competitors ending the contests before they were completed. Response‐rate decreases were greatest for pairs in which the 2 subjects differed most in their response rates and proportion of wins. The presence of feedback had a small effect, increasing responding for some pairs in the 100%/0% distribution. Performance patterns were interpreted in terms of the consequences arranged for the individual participants by the reward distributions and differences in performance between competitors.