scholarly journals Effects of prior response-contingent reinforcement on superstitious behavior

1988 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gloria D. Eldridge ◽  
Joseph J. Pear ◽  
Laine J. Torgrud ◽  
Blair H. Evers
1973 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 447-450
Author(s):  
John Raymond Blair ◽  
Bruce R. Fox

Institutionalized mentally retarded children performed on a two-choice discrimination task under one of 6 conditions of reward (response-contingent consumable, response-contingent nonconsumable, token-consumable, token-nonconsumable, token, social). The results indicated that response-contingent nonconsumable rewards were not more distracting than response-contingent consumable rewards nor was the presentation of material rewards by the token-reinforcement procedure less distracting than the response-contingent reinforcement procedure. Further, social reinforcement was less effective than response-contingent nonconsumable rewards; however, no differences were found between social reinforcement and the other material rewards regardless of reinforcement procedure.


1972 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 535-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Raymond Blair

Third-grade middle-class children performed a size-discrimination task under one of 5 reward conditions (consumable, nonconsumable, token-consumable, token-nonconsumable, token) or a control condition. The reward groups were comparable in performance and markedly superior to the control group. Contrary to expectations, response-contingent nonconsumable rewards were not more distracting than response-contingent consumable rewards nor was the token-reward system for presenting these material rewards less distracting than the response-contingent reinforcement procedure.


2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Donti ◽  
C. Katsikas ◽  
N. A. Stavrou ◽  
M. Psychountaki

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document