University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1985 Fall;18(3):201-14. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-201.
Two studies were conducted to identify mechanisms responsible for observed "self-reinforcement" effects. In Experiment 1, using a studying task, self-reinforcement procedures did not work when they were private (i.e., when others are not aware of the goals or contingencies), but did work when they were public. Self-delivery of consequences added nothing to the effectiveness of the procedure. The data suggested that public goal setting was the critical element in the procedure's effectiveness. In Experiment 2, an applied extension, goal setting alone was effective in modifying over a long time period studying behaviors of people with significant studying difficulties, but only when the goals were known to others. Overall, the two experiments make more plausible the view that self-reinforcement procedures work by setting a socially available standard against which performance can be evaluated. The procedure itself functions as a discriminative stimulus for stringent or lenient social contingencies. The application of this mechanism to other problems of applied significance is briefly discussed.
两项研究旨在确定导致观察到的“自我强化”效应的机制。在实验 1 中，使用学习任务，当自我强化程序是私密的（即他人不知道目标或结果）时，它不起作用，但当它是公开的时候，它就起作用了。自我施加结果对程序的有效性没有任何作用。数据表明，公开的目标设定是该程序有效性的关键因素。在实验 2 中，作为一个实际应用的扩展，单独的目标设定在长时间内有效地改变了有严重学习困难的人的学习行为，但只有当目标为他人所知时才有效。总的来说，这两项实验使自我强化程序通过设定一个可供社会使用的标准来评估绩效的观点更具说服力。该程序本身作为严格或宽松的社会条件作用的辨别刺激。简要讨论了将这种机制应用于其他具有实际意义的问题。
