Temporal (In)Stability of Employee Preferences for Rewards

Wine, Byron; Gilroy, Shawn P.; Hantula, Donald A.

doi:10.1080/01608061.2012.646854

Cited by 21 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such analogies often inspire research, as is the case in operant behavioral economics. The basic processes and behavioral contrast effects explored in the present study may well be able to explain such disparate phenomena as phonological evolution in the English language (Martindale, 2006), fairness heuristics in organizations (Goltz, 2013), and shifting employee preferences for rewards (Wine et al, 2012(Wine et al, , 2013(Wine et al, , 2014a. Further, animal foraging groups show behavioral contrast effects (Farmer-Dougan and Dougan, 2005), which points to further connections between the operant behavioral economic work in consumer behavior analysis and matching (Foxall and James, 2003;Foxall and Schrezenmaier, 2003;Foxall et al, 2004Foxall et al, , 2010bFoxall et al, , 2010aCurry et al, 2010; ) and the operant behavioral economic work in financial decision-making.…”

Section: Consistent Withmentioning

confidence: 87%

Matching and Behavioral Contrast in a Two‐Option Repeated Investment Simulation

Hantula

Crowell

2015

Manage Decis Econ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Matching and behavioral contrast were explored in an investment simulation with young adults who made repeated investments in two different markets that provided intermittent, non-predictable returns. In the first phase in which the markets provided equivalent returns, participants matched. In a second phase in which one market ceased to provide returns while the other market remained unchanged, participants showed behavioral contrast by decreasing investment in the non-producing market and dramatically increasing investing in the unchanged market. A third phase restored the original return rates and matching was observed. In a fourth phase, one market ceased to provide returns while the other market remained unchanged, and less robust evidence of behavioral contrast was found. These results replicate and extend previous research are one of the few demonstrations of behavioral contrast in adults, are consistent with matching theory and show that options are valued relatively, not absolutely. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Operant behavioral economics initially analyzed basic laboratory experiments as economic systems (Hursh, 1980(Hursh, , 1984. This research program showed that fundamental economic concepts such as supply, demand, elasticity, labor, and income were characteristics of operant experiments, especially those examining schedules of reinforcement. Later, behavior analysts turned the tables and began to use operant concepts and methods to examine economic behavior and question some of the fundamental assumptions of classical economics (Herrnstein, 1990). This research program inspired two distinct, but related streams of research. One stream of research focuses on consumption decisions, generating a rapidly growing literature in consumer behavior analysis (e.g., Foxall, 2010; Hantula and Wells, 2013) including theoretical developments such as consumer behavioral ecology (Hantula, 2012;Wells, 2012) and the Behavioral Perspective Model (Foxall, 1990). Another stream of research focuses on financial decision-making, especially escalation of commitment ('throwing good money after bad') (Goltz, 1992(Goltz, , 1993(Goltz, , 1999Hantula and Crowell, 1994a;Bragger et al., 1998Bragger et al., , 2003Hantula and DeNicolis-Bragger, 1999;Brecher and Hantula, 2005), or in operant parlance, behavior during an extinction period. Both research streams have shown clearly that an operant analysis of economic behavior is a valid approach, which generates empirical and theoretical challenges to more mainstream accounts of both consumer and financial decision-making.The matching law (Herrnstein, 1970) played an important role in both of these streams of research. In its most basic form, the matching law predicts that behavior will be proportionate to its reinforcement; that is, the relative rate of responding will match the relative *Correspondence to: Department of Psychology, Temple University, Weiss Hall (265-67),

show abstract

Section: Consistent Withmentioning

confidence: 87%

Matching and Behavioral Contrast in a Two‐Option Repeated Investment Simulation

Hantula

Crowell

2015

Manage Decis Econ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wine et al (2012) "Additionally, future research could examine variables that affect and change preferences in employee populations such as availability of substitutable and complementary rewards(Hursh, 1980) and the underutilized concept of satiation and deprivation associated with changes in establishing operations (Olson, Laraway, & Austin, . JOBM = Journal of Organizational Behavior Management; MO = motivating operation; OBM = organizational behavior management;…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivating Operations in theJournal of Organizational Behavior Management:Review and Discussion of Relevant Articles

Lotfizadeh¹,

Edwards²,

Poling³

2014

Journal of Organizational Behavior Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Demonstration of self-control with qualitatively different reinforcers mirrors more naturalistic choice and may make reinforcement interventions more effective. Preferences are rarely stable and vary for any given individual, both for this population (Zhou, Iwata, Goff, & Shore, 2001) and for typically developed individuals (Wine, Gilroy, & Hantula, 2012).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching Self‐control With Qualitatively Different Reinforcers

Passage

Tincani

Hantula

2012

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effectiveness of using qualitatively different reinforcers to teach selfcontrol to an adolescent boy who had been diagnosed with an intellectual disability. First, he was instructed to engage in an activity without programmed reinforcement. Next, he was instructed to engage in the activity under a two-choice fixed-duration schedule of reinforcement. Finally, he was exposed to self-control training, during which the delay to a more preferred reinforcer was initially short and then increased incrementally relative to the delay to a less preferred reinforcer. Self-control training effectively increased time on task to earn the delayed reinforcer.

show abstract

Temporal (In)Stability of Employee Preferences for Rewards

Cited by 21 publications

References 15 publications

Matching and Behavioral Contrast in a Two‐Option Repeated Investment Simulation

Matching and Behavioral Contrast in a Two‐Option Repeated Investment Simulation

Motivating Operations in theJournal of Organizational Behavior Management:Review and Discussion of Relevant Articles

Teaching Self‐control With Qualitatively Different Reinforcers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About