Reinforced variation and selection

Neuringer, Allen

doi:10.3758/bf03213386

Cited by 74 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Pigeons were initially reinforced for varying fourresponse sequences across two keys under a Lag 5 contingency (Neuringer, 1993). After the pigeons had learned to vary, 2 of the 16 possible sequences were selected for special treatment (e.g., LRRR and RLLL), with one of these always reinforced (regardless of whether its emission had satisfied the Lag 5 variability contingency) and the other never reinforced (again, independently of whether it met the variability contingency).…”

Section: Operant Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinforced Variability in Animals and People: Implications for Adaptive Action.

Neuringer¹

2004

American Psychologist

Self Cite

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Operant Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinforced Variability in Animals and People: Implications for Adaptive Action.

Neuringer¹

2004

American Psychologist

Self Cite

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Behavior theory assumes that any discriminable dimension of performance can be reinforced, including rate, duration, force, variability, novelty, and so forth. Neuringer and others (Machado, 1989;Morris, 1987;Neuringer, 1986Neuringer, , 1991Neuringer, , 1993Page & Neuringer, 1985) have found that when sequences of responding are rewarded on the basis of their approximation to a random distribution, animals and humans come to respond more randomly. The question remains regarding whether reward can also be used to increase the generation of novel behaviors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

Eisenberger¹,

Cameron²

1996

American Psychologist

715

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

“…One answer is that variability not only accompanies learning but is itself a learned aspect of behavior (Neuringer, 1993;Stokes, 1995b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of different acquisition procedures on response variability

Stokes

Mechner

Balsam

1999

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three experiments with college students, the effects of different acquisition procedures on response variability were studied. The computer keypressing task involved learning a sequence with a minimum number of presses on a subset of the keyboard. Procedures differed in type of training and in the number, size, and sequence of training steps. Experiment 1 showed that instructions and shaping in three steps generated less variability in the number of responses made in each keypress sequence than shaping in six steps. Subsequent experiments showed that a large increase in the response requirement early in shaping increased variability. Postacquisition variability remained unchanged in the number of responses per sequence-the aspect of responding on which reinforcement was contingent-but declined in location and timing of keypressing. The results are discussed in terms of the implicit reinforcement of variability and how the acquisition of qualitatively different response strategies could influence variability.

show abstract

Reinforced variation and selection

Cited by 74 publications

References 26 publications

Reinforced Variability in Animals and People: Implications for Adaptive Action.

Reinforced Variability in Animals and People: Implications for Adaptive Action.

Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

Effects of different acquisition procedures on response variability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About