ABSTRACT
A programação de um tipo de metacontingência envolve reforçamento direto de respostas individuais envolvidas nas contingências comportamentais entrelaçadas (CCEs), já que os culturantes são selecionados por consequências culturais (CC). Outro tipo de programação de metacontingências envolve situações nas quais (CC) exercem um duplo papel, selecionando tanto respostas quanto culturantes. Este estudo verificou se a programação de diferentes tipos de metacontingências produziria diferentes padrões de respostas ou culturantes. Participaram duas tríades de universitários. Na condição A, vigoraram metacontingências com programação de reforçamento direto de respostas. Na condição B, vigoraram metacontingências na qual CC exerce a função de selecionar tanto respostas quanto culturantes. A Tríade 1 foi exposta ao delineamento ABAB. Já enquanto a Tríade 2, ao delineamento BABA. Na condição A, participantes emitiram respostas que eforam reforçadas diretamente e engajaram em culturantes que produziram consequências. Na condição B, houve queda na frequência de respostas e manutenção dos culturantes. Conclui-se que a programação de diferentes tipos de metacontingências produz diferentes efeitos sobre respostas individuais mas não sobre culturantes. Discutem-se ainda potenciais contribuições e limitações do procedimento adotado neste estudo.
The arrangement of a type of metacontingency involves direct reinforcement for individual responses that compound interlocking behavioral contingencies (IBCs) since culturants are selected by cultural consequences (CC). Another type of arrangement involves situations in which CC has a dual role, selecting both responses and culturants. Therefore, there isn't IC. This paper aimed to verify if the arrangement of different types of metacontingencies would produce different patterns of responses or culturants. Two triads of undergraduate students participated in this study. In condition A, metacontingencies that involved direct reinforcement to responses and CC for culturants prevailed. In condition B, the CC selected responses as well as culturants. Triad 1 was exposed to the ABAB design while triad 2 was exposed to the BABA design. In condition A, participants emitted responses and engaged in culturants that produced consequences. In condition B, the frequency of responses decreased and culturants were maintained. We conclude that the arrangement of different types of metacontingencies produces different effects upon individual responses but not upon culturants. We did not see exposition order effects throw conditions. Furthermore, we discuss potential contributions and limitations of the procedure used in this study.
ABSTRACT
Se utilizó un paradigma de elección para evaluar la distribución del comportamiento entrelazado de dos grupos de dos participantes entre respuestas que tenían solo consecuencias operantes y respuestas con consecuencias culturales. En un diseño BABABAB de ensayo discreto, cada participante podría seleccionar una de tres opciones, que entregaba 3 o 5 puntos. En las condiciones B (consecuencia cultural), dos de las opciones tenían efectos adicionales: la opción de tres puntos también sumaba 3 puntos a las ganancias del otro participante, y una de las opciones de 5 puntos quitaba esa cantidad de las ganancias del otro participante. La tercera opción era igual en ambas condiciones y le entregaba 5 puntos al participante que la elegía. Los resultados indicaron que los participantes en ambos grupos inicialmente produjeron combinaciones de respuestas que ganaban 8 puntos para un individuo u otro frecuentemente (y 0 o 3 para el otro), pero la distribución de respuesta cambió hacia combinaciones de 6 puntos para cada individuo. Este paso de refuerzo máximo individual hacia máximo refuerzo grupal indica que las contingencias culturales no actuaron de acuerdo con las contingencias operantes, lo que sugiere la presencia de diferentes mecanismos de selección.
A choice paradigm was used to evaluate allocation of interlocking behavior of two groups of two participants between responses having operant consequences only, and responses having cultural consequences. In a discrete trial BABABAB design, each participant could select one of three options, which delivered either 3 or 5 points. In B (cultural consequence) condition, two of the options had additional effects: the 3-point option also added 3 points to the other participant's earnings, and one of the 5-point options also subtracted 5 points from the other participant's earnings. The third option was unchanged in both conditions and delivered 5 points to the participant who selected it. Results indicated that participants in both groups initially frequently produced response combinations that earned 8 points for one or the other individual (and 0 or 3 points for the other), but allocation of responding increasingly changed to combinations that produced 6 points for each individual. This shift in performances away from maximum individual reinforcement towards maximum group reinforcement indicates cultural contingencies did not act in concert with operant contingencies, suggesting they are different mechanisms of selection.