Interindividual Performance in Metacontingencies

Abstract

e primary unit of analysis in metacontingencies are interlockingbehavioral contingencies (IBCs) measured by their aggregate product (AP). e experimental literature has demonstrated selection APs by factors external to the group (also known as "cultural consequences"). By contrast, social interactions occurring inside of IBCs have received li le examination, although they constitute a key element to understand di erent types of social dynamics. In this study interindividual performance and verbal interactions of individuals inside of IBCs were examined. Communication between participants in dyads was experimentally manipulated such that some dyads wore noise-cancelling headphones while working together and other group of dyads used * All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study. Datasets analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. 1.

Effects of Metacontingencies on Cooperative Behavior: A Systematic Replication Using Innovative Procedures during Isolation

“…1 ). However, verbal interactions with secondary adjustment functions (Kantor, 1977 ), such as persuasion or the use of humor to evoke cooperation (Ardila-Sánchez et al, 2020 ) may affect other interlocked behavior measures, like trial durations and/or the number of moves per trial to produce the APs. This effect, if it happened, was not systematic in the present study, because differences between groups were not significant for both measures of baseline ( t -test, p = 0.09 for trial duration; p = 0.48 for moves) and shaping conditions ( t -test, p = 0.48 for trial duration; p = 0.14 for moves).…”

“…In the present study, two experimental groups were exposed to the same experimental conditions and varying the access to verbal interactions. Studies regarding communication in metacontingencies suggest that it may facilitate the establishment and maintenance of peer cooperation and, in consequence, promote a significant increase in performance efficiency (e.g., Ardila-Sánchez et al, 2020 ; Costa et al, 2012 ; Sampaio, 2020 ). In group 1, dyads were allowed to communicate (as in the original study), and in group 2 they were not allowed.…”

O Estudo Experimental das Relações entre Cultura e Comportamento Verbal: uma Revisão de Escopo

“…Vasconcelos, 2015;Bispo, 2017;Braga-Bispo et al, 2021;Correia, 2018;Magalhães, 2013;Nogueira, 2018;Pin, 2017;Soares et al, 2018;Tadaiesky & Tourinho, 2012;Vichi et al, 2009). Treze trabalhos (47%) manipularam condições experimentais com ou sem possibilidade de interação verbal (Almeida et al, 2020;Ardila-Sánchez et al, 2020;Borba et al, 2014;Costa, 2009;Costa et al, 2012;Hosoya & Tourinho, 2016;Leite, 2014;Nogueira & Vasconcelos, 2016;Nogueira, 2009Nogueira, , 2014Sampaio, 2016Sampaio, , 2020Sampaio et al, 2013).…”

“…A grande maioria dos estudos (n = 21; 75%) permitiu interações verbais durante toda a sessão 3 (Almeida et al, 2020;Andreozzi, 2009;Ardila-Sánchez et al, 2020;Baia & Vasconcelos, 2015;Bispo, 2017;Borba et al, 2014;Braga-Bispo et al, 2021;Correia, 2018;Leite, 2014Leite, , 2009Magalhães, 2013;Nogueira, 2018;Oda, 2009;Pin, 2017;Sampaio, 2016Sampaio, , 2020Sampaio et al, 2013;Smith et al, 2011;Soares et al, 2018;Tadaiesky & Tourinho, 2012;Vichi et al, 2009). Por outro lado, sete estudos (25%) determinaram um tempo específico de interação verbal durante o intervalo das tentativas ou no período de substituição de membros (Camargo & Haydu, 2016;Costa, 2009;Costa et al, 2012;Hosoya & Tourinho, 2016;Nogueira & Vasconcelos, 2016;Nogueira, 2009Nogueira, , 2014.…”

“…Os 28 trabalhos incluídos nesta revisão implementaram o CV durante as CCEs. Somado a isso, seis estudos também envolveram a apresentação antecedente e externa de regras ou instruções distintas (Andreozzi, 2009;Ardila-Sánchez et al, 2020;Braga-Bispo et al, 2021;Camargo & Haydu, 2016;Leite, 2009;Smith et al, 2011) e cinco pesquisas ainda manipularam informações verbais apresentadas de forma consequente (Bispo, 2017;Camargo & Haydu, 2016;Sampaio, 2016Sampaio, , 2020Soares et al, 2018).…”