On the training of originality.

Maltzman, Irving

doi:10.1037/h0046364

Cited by 183 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In one such study, Maltzman (1960) gave college students repeated presentations of a list of words and instructed the students to give a free association to each stimulus word. The students received verbal approval for generating a new word every time they received a repeated presentation of a stimulus word.…”

Section: Extrinsic Rewards and Creativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

Eisenberger¹,

Cameron²

1996

American Psychologist

713

544

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on seemingly overwhelming empirical evidence of the decremental effects of reward on intrinsic task interest and creativity, the use of reward to alter human behavior has been challenged in literature reviews, textbooks, and the popular media. An analysis of a quarter century of research on intrinsic task interest and creativity revealed, however, that (a) detrimental effects of reward occur under highly restricted, easily avoidable conditions," (b) mechanisms of instrumental and classical conditioning are basic for understanding incremental and decremental effects of reward on task motivation; and (c) positive effects of reward on generalized creativity are easily attainable using procedures derived from behavior theory.O bservers of American culture have long noted a I strong emphasis on individualistic values, including taking responsibility for one's own actions, pursuing personal interests, and exploring one's creative potential (e.g., Badia, 1990;Huber, 1971; Tocqueville, 1840Tocqueville, /1990. Consistent with the common presumption that individuals function most effectively and happily when they are guiding their own behavior (see Geller, 1982;Hogan, 1975), an increasingly dominant view has developed over the past quarter century contending that the strengthening of performance by reward (reinforcement) causes the unpleasant experience of being controlled by others and reduces task interest and creativity. Based on seemingly overwhelming empirical evidence of such effects, the value of using reward to alter human behavior has been challenged in literature reviews, textbooks, and the popular media. Conventional ViewThe following sentiments are characteristic of a diverse and growing literature claiming that reward inherently reduces task interest and creativity. According to an article published in the American Psychologist, "reinforcement has two effects. First, predictably, it gains control of [an] activity, increasing its frequency. Second .... when reinforcement is later withdrawn, people engage in the activity even less than they did before reinforcement was introduced" (Schwartz, 1990, p. 10). A widely cited literature review that appeared in the premier social psychology journal, the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, concluded the following: Individuals who have been provided rewards "seem to work harder and produce more activity, but the activity is of a lower quality, contains more errors, and is more stereotyped and less creative than the work of comparable nonrewarded subjects working on the same problems" (Condry, 1977, pp. 471-472).The categorical assertion that rewards lessen task interest and creativity has profound practical implications. Increasingly, one hears and reads about how the use of reward systems in educational settings, hospitals, the workplace, and other institutions may do more harm than good. Articles and books written for laypeople and practitioners in education and business warn of the danger of behavior modification programs and incentive systems when...

show abstract

Section: Extrinsic Rewards and Creativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

Eisenberger¹,

Cameron²

1996

American Psychologist

713

544

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scoring details have been described elsewhere (Maltzman et a i, 1960) . The common (dominant associative responses) and uncommon (frequency of occurrence = 1) associa tions given by the mode l were obtained from the same norms.…”

Section: Northern Illinois Universitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Vicarious learning of common and uncommon associations in children

1965

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…-Accepted by previous editor, Vincent M. LoLordo when a response criterion specifies doing something new (Holman, Goetz, & Baer, 1977;Pyror, Haag, & O'Reilley, 1969) or doing something differently (Blough, 1966;Bryant & Church, 1974;Christenson, Guilford, & Wilson, 1957;Joyce & Chase, 1990;Maltzman, 1960;Morris, 1987;Neuringer, 1986Neuringer, ,1991Neuringer, , 1993Royce, 1898;Schoenfeld, Harris, & Farmer, 1966;Wong, 1977). The greater the difference from prior responding required, the higher the variability (Machado, 1989(Machado, , 1992Page & Neuringer, 1985).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learned variability

Stokes

1995

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential contributors to sustained levels of variability in the topography of the rat's barpress were investigated in two experiments. Behavior was classified into discretely defined components, and changes in components and their sequential organization were analyzed. Experiment 1 showed that topographic variability in the rat is modulated by shifts in reinforcement schedules. Variability decreased between either dipper training or extinction and continuous reinforcement (CRF), and increased between CRF and extinction. Once the press was acquired, variability did not change if the schedule (CRF) did not change. Experiment 2 showed that, regardless of subsequent changes in topographic requirements, rats initially shaped to press under more stringent criteria sustained higher levels of variability during CRF, but not during extinction, than rats shaped with less stringent criteria. The results suggest that subjects learn not only what to do during reinforcement but also how differently or variably to do it.

show abstract

On the training of originality.

Cited by 183 publications

References 28 publications

Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

Vicarious learning of common and uncommon associations in children

Learned variability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About