Interpersonal relations: Cooperation and competition.

Social relations between two persons require that consequences each receives depend at least in part on the responses of the other. Historically, research in several areas has focused on two contingencies, cooperation and competition, in which reinforcement is determined by the responses of both participants. A major research question in social psychology and applied behavior analysis has been: Which contingency is more effective with regard to the quantity or quality of some response? Although this question has not been addressed in the experimental analysis of behavior, this area provides a perspective and method to more fully investigate the relevant controlling variables. Among these are the frequency of opportunities to audit the performances of others, information (or lack of it) provided by social or nonsocial stimuli with regard to reinforcement and performance, degree of face-to-face interaction, types of reinforcement contingencies, and number of participants. A neglected dependent variable is cost effectiveness-amount of behavior maintained by a given reinforcer amount. The larger agenda for the experimental analysis of interpersonal relations includes a variety of forms of reinforcement interdependence that raise issues of basic and applied interest.

[1]  G. Marwell,et al.  Withdrawal and reward reallocation as responses to inequity , 1972 .

[2]  D. Schmitt Performance Under Cooperation or Competition , 1981 .

[3]  K Egerman,et al.  Effects of team arrangement on team performance: a learning-theoretic analysis. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  R. Slavin Classroom Reward Structure: An Analytical and Practical Review , 1975 .

[5]  Linda D. Molm,et al.  A Behavioral Analysis of the Dynamics of Social Exchange in the Dyad , 1979 .

[6]  L. A. Hayes The use of group contingencies for behavioral control: a review. , 1976, Psychological bulletin.

[7]  Robert L. Hamblin,et al.  Interdependence, differential rewarding, and productivity. , 1963 .

[8]  M. Speltz,et al.  Procedural variations in group contingencies: effects on children's academic and social behaviors. , 1982, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[9]  D F Hake,et al.  Acquisition and maintenance of trusting behavior. , 1981, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  D. Hake,et al.  Effects of the difference between self and coactor scores upon the audit responses that allow access to these scores. , 1974, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  A Contingency Change Analysis of the Disruption and Recovery of Social Exchange and Cooperation , 1981 .

[12]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. , 1981 .

[13]  C. F. Bond,et al.  Social facilitation: a meta-analysis of 241 studies. , 1983, Psychological bulletin.

[14]  B. A. Matthews Magnitudes of score differences produced within sessions in a cooperative exchange procedure. , 1977, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[15]  B. A. Matthews,et al.  Expansion of Exchange , 1979 .

[16]  D. Hake,et al.  A CLASSIFICATION AND REVIEW OF COOPERATION PROCEDURES1 , 1972 .

[17]  R. L. Burgess,et al.  An Experimental Analysis of Some Structural Determinants of Equitable and Inequitable Exchange Relations , 1974 .

[18]  Analysis of discriminative control by social behavioral stimuli. , 1983, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[19]  D. Schmitt Some conditions affecting the choice to cooperate or compete. , 1976, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[20]  Milton E. Rosenbaum,et al.  Group Productivity and Process: Pure and Mixed Reward Structures and Task Interdependence. , 1980 .

[21]  D. Hake,et al.  Audit responses: responses maintained by access to existing self or coactor scores during non-social, parallel work, and cooperation procedures. , 1973, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[22]  D. Pumroy,et al.  A brief review of classroom group-oriented contingencies. , 1975, Journal of applied behavior analysis.