We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Reinforcers Following Greater Effort are Preferred: A Within-Trial Contrast Effect.
- Authors
Zentall, Thomas R.
- Abstract
Justification of effort is a form of cognitive dissonance in which reinforcers are more valued when they are harder to obtain. Presumably, giving the reinforcer greater value justifies the greater effort needed to obtain it. But we have proposed that within-trial contrast between the end of the effort and the reinforcer (or signal for reinforcement) is responsible for this effect. We have found a similar effect in nonsocial tasks with adult humans and children. More important, we have found the effect in pigeons. Furthermore, the model predicts that any relatively aversive event can be used to enhance the value of the reinforcer that follows it. In support, we have found the effect when the prior event consists of more rather than less effort (pecking), a long rather than a short delay, and the absence of food rather than food. We have also found that a pigeon's preference for food at one location can shift to a different location if acquiring food at the new location requires that the pigeon work harder to obtain food at the new location. We have also found that the anticipation of a relatively more aversive event is sufficient to improve the value of a reinforcer that occurs on other trials. The within-trial contrast model may also provide a more parsimonious account of other social psychological phenomena such as, traditional cognitive dissonance effects, intrinsic versus extrinsic reinforcement effects, and learned industriousness effects.
- Subjects
COGNITIVE dissonance; REINFORCEMENT (Psychology); BEHAVIORAL assessment; HUMAN behavior; PIGEONS; BEHAVIORAL research
- Publication
Behavior Analyst Today, 2007, Vol 8, Issue 4, p512
- ISSN
1539-4352
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1037/h0100637