Literature DB >> 10966099

Effects of competitive reward distribution on auditing and competitive responding.

D R Schmitt1.   

Abstract

This study allowed subjects to audit each other's responding during a series of competitive contests. Six pairs of female college students competed in 3-min contests in which the competitive response was a knob pull. A sum of money was divided using a proportional distribution or a 100%/0% reward distribution. In the proportional distribution, a subject's proportion of the sum was her proportion of the total number of responses. Also, in every contest either subject could make a response that would end the contest prematurely and give both subjects the same amount: a sum equal to 33% of the competitive total. Each subject could press either or both of two audit buttons that displayed her own and the other's response total for 10 s. Results replicated earlier findings in showing the superiority of the proportional distribution in total number of competitive responses made. No subject audited continuously, and only 1 audited most of the time. Most audits were interpersonal, including both own and other's scores. Auditing typically was more frequent in 100%/0% contests in which subjects were more likely to stop the contest when they were far behind. Winners were more likely to audit than were losers. Competitive response rates increased when the differences revealed by audits were small and decreased when they were large. Overall audit patterns were consistent with the view that feedback as "news" is more often sought when it can lead to improved outcomes.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10966099      PMCID: PMC1284787          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  7 in total

1.  Observing behavior in a computer game.

Authors:  D A Case; B O Ploog; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Effects of reward distribution and performance feedback on competitive responding.

Authors:  D Schmitt
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Interpersonal contingencies: Performance differences and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  D R Schmitt
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Effects of the difference between self and coactor scores upon the audit responses that allow access to these scores.

Authors:  R Vukelich; D F Hake
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-07       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Audit responses: responses maintained by access to existing self or coactor scores during non-social, parallel work, and cooperation procedures.

Authors:  D F Hake; R Vukelich; S J Kaplan
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-05       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Behavior analysis and decision making.

Authors:  E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Does competition enhance or inhibit motor performance: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  M B Stanne; D W Johnson; R T Johnson
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 17.737

  7 in total
  2 in total

1.  Jeab at 50: coevolution of research and technology.

Authors:  Kennon A Lattal
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Interpersonal and Group Contingencies.

Authors:  Tom Cariveau; Colin S Muething; Whitney Trapp
Journal:  Perspect Behav Sci       Date:  2020-02-18
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.