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.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (168.8 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Case D. A., Ploog B. O., Fantino E. Observing behavior in a computer game. J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 Nov;54(3):185–199. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.54-185. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fantino E. Behavior analysis and decision making. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 May;69(3):355–364. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1998.69-355. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hake D. F., Vukelich R., Kaplan S. J. Audit responses: responses maintained by access to existing self or coactor scores during non-social, parallel work, and cooperation procedures. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 May;19(3):409–423. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-409. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schmitt D. R. Interpersonal contingencies: Performance differences and cost-effectiveness. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Sep;48(2):221–234. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schmitt D. Effects of reward distribution and performance feedback on competitive responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 May;69(3):263–273. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1998.69-263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stanne M. B., Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T. Does competition enhance or inhibit motor performance: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 1999 Jan;125(1):133–154. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.1.133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vukelich R., Hake D. F. Effects of the difference between self and coactor scores upon the audit responses that allow access to these scores. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jul;22(1):61–71. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]