Laboratory Studies of Self-Reinforcement (SR) Phenomena

Martin, Jack

doi:10.1080/00221309.1979.9920064

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other social psychological models, such as self-perception theory, assume that behaviors cause cognitions (Bern, 1972). Behavioral models hold that environments cause behaviors (Martin, 1979). Our results support the social learning theory position that determinants of behavior are not unidirectional.…”

Section: Locus Of Control Versus Self-efficacysupporting

confidence: 78%

Specific efficacy expectations mediate exercise compliance in patients with COPD.

Kaplan¹,

Atkins²,

Reinsch³

1984

Health Psychology

235

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social learning theory has generated two different approaches for the assessment of expectancies. Bandura argues that expectancies are specific and do not generalize. Therefore, he prefers measures of specific efficacy expectations. Others endorse the role of generalized expectancies measured by locus of control scales. The present study examines specific versus generalized expectancies as mediators of changes in exercise behavior among 60 older adult patients with Chronic Obstructive PuLmonary Disease. The patients were given a prescription to increase exercise and randomly assigned to experimental groups or control groups. All groups received attention but only experimental groups received training to increase their exercise. After 3 months, groups given specific training for compliance with walking significantly increased their activity in comparison to the control group receiving only attention. These changes were mediated by changes in perceived efficacy for Walking, with efficacy expectations for other behaviors changing as a function of their similarity to walking. A generalized health locus of control expectancy measure was less clearly associated with behavior change. The results are interpreted as supporting Bandura's version of social theory. We previously reported that behavioral and cognitive-behavioral interventions are useful for helping Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients maintain a daily exercise program (Atkins, Kaplan, Timms, Reinsch, & Lofback, in press). In this paper, we investigate the mediation of Requests for reprints should be sent to

show abstract

Section: Locus Of Control Versus Self-efficacysupporting

confidence: 78%

Specific efficacy expectations mediate exercise compliance in patients with COPD.

Kaplan¹,

Atkins²,

Reinsch³

1984

Health Psychology

235

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is rather that the results of this study, like the delayed feedback procedures described earlier (Smith et al, 2006), again suggest a further one-step removal of “reinforcement” as defined in current associative models (i.e., food delivery and consumption) and putative metacognitive performance. Indeed, even describing what constitutes reinforcement is exceptionally difficult in such a study (Jensen, 1963; Martin, 1979) and the associative models described previously, with a focus on food delivery/consumption alone, appear particularly inadequate when applied to primates. Under some circumstances, for example, capuchin monkeys will manipulate freely available apparatuses at higher rates than they ingest freely available food (Premack, 1959).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The misbehaviour of a metacognitive monkey

Sayers

Evans

Menzel

et al. 2015

Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Metacognition, the monitoring of one’s own mental states, is a fundamental aspect of human intellect. Despite tests in nonhuman animals suggestive of uncertainty monitoring, some authors interpret these results solely in terms of primitive psychological mechanisms and reinforcement regimes, where “reinforcement” is invariably considered to be the delivery and consumption of earned food rewards. Surprisingly, few studies have detailed the trial-by-trial behaviour of animals engaged in such tasks. Here we report ethology-based observations on a rhesus monkey completing sparse-dense discrimination problems, and given the option of escaping trials (i.e., responding “uncertain”) at its own choosing. Uncertainty responses were generally made on trials of high objective difficulty, and were characterized by long latencies before beginning visible trials, long times taken for response, and, even after controlling for difficulty, high degrees of wavering during response. Incorrect responses were also common in trials of high objective difficulty, but were characterized by low degrees of wavering. This speaks to the likely adaptive nature of “hesitation,” and is inconsistent with models which argue or predict implicit, inflexible information-seeking or “alternative option” behaviours whenever challenging problems present themselves, Confounding models which suggest that nonhuman behaviour in metacognition tasks is driven solely by food delivery/consumption, the monkey was also observed allowing pellets to accumulate and consuming them during and after trials of all response/outcome categories (i.e., whether correct, incorrect, or escaped). This study thus bolsters previous findings that rhesus monkey behaviour in metacognition tasks is in some respects disassociated from mere food delivery/consumption, or even the avoidance of punishment. These and other observations fit well with the evolutionary status and natural proclivities of rhesus monkeys, but weaken arguments that responses in such tests are solely associated with associative mechanisms, and instead suggest more derived and controlled cognitive processing. The latter interpretation appears particularly parsimonious given the neurological adaptations of primates, as well as their highly flexible social and ecological behaviour.

show abstract

“…Another example of attributing intention in instances of instructional control is goal setting, which is addressed in research on self-reinforcement. Much of the research on self-reinforcement included confounding variables such as demand characteristics, experimenter-set goals or contingencies, feedback, monitoring, and limitations on the subjects' control of all relevant aspects of the procedures (Gross & Wojnilower, 1984;Jones, Nelson, & Kazdin, 1977;Martin, 1979Martin, , 1980Sohn & Lamal, 1982). However, Hayes et al (1985) identified circumstances in which self-reinforcement is effective.…”

Section: Skinner Wrotementioning

confidence: 99%

An intentional interpretive perspective

Neuman

2004

BEHAV ANALYST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To the extent that the concept of intention has been addressed within behavior analysis, descriptions of intention have been general and have not specifically included important distinctions that differentiate a behavior-analytic approach from vernacular definitions of intention. A fundamental difference between a behavior-analytic approach and most other psychological approaches is that other approaches focus on the necessity of intentions to explain behavior, whereas a behavior-analytic approach is directed at understanding the interplay between behavior and environment. Behavior-analytic interpretations include the relations between the observer's behavior and the environment. From a behavior-analytic perspective, an analysis of the observer's interpretations of an individual's behavior is inherent in the subsequent attribution of intention. The present agenda is to provide a behavior-analytic account of attributing intention that identifies the establishing conditions for speaking of intention. Also addressed is the extent to which we speak of intentions when the observed individual's behavior is contingency shaped or under instructional control.

show abstract

Laboratory Studies of Self-Reinforcement (SR) Phenomena

Cited by 6 publications

References 63 publications

Specific efficacy expectations mediate exercise compliance in patients with COPD.

Specific efficacy expectations mediate exercise compliance in patients with COPD.

The misbehaviour of a metacognitive monkey

An intentional interpretive perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About