Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Mar;89(2):157-67.
doi: 10.1901/jeab.2008.89-157.

Asymmetry of reinforcement and punishment in human choice

Affiliations

Asymmetry of reinforcement and punishment in human choice

Erin B Rasmussen et al. J Exp Anal Behav. 2008 Mar.

Abstract

The hypothesis that a penny lost is valued more highly than a penny earned was tested in human choice. Five participants clicked a computer mouse under concurrent variable-interval schedules of monetary reinforcement. In the no-punishment condition, the schedules arranged monetary gain. In the punishment conditions, a schedule of monetary loss was superimposed on one response alternative. Deviations from generalized matching using the free parameters c (sensitivity to reinforcement) and log k (bias) were compared in the no-punishment and punishment conditions. The no-punishment conditions yielded values of log k that approximated zero for all participants, indicating no bias. In the punishment condition, values of log k deviated substantially from zero, revealing a 3-fold bias toward the unpunished alternative. Moreover, the c parameters were substantially smaller in punished conditions. The values for bias and sensitivity under punishment did not change significantly when the measure of net reinforcers (gains minus losses) was applied to the analysis. These results mean that punishment reduced the sensitivity of behavior to reinforcement and biased performance toward the unpunished alternative. We concluded that a single punisher subtracted more value than a single reinforcer added, indicating an asymmetry in the law of effect.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Log response ratios (y-axis) plotted against log net-reinforcer ratios (reinforcers delivered minus reinforcers removed; x-axis) for the 5 participants under no-punishment (open circles) and punishment (closed circles) conditions.
Fig 2
Fig 2
Mean log reinforcement ratio in the reinstated no-punishment condition plotted as a function of the mean log reinforcement ratio of the initial no-punishment condition. Each point represents the mean of the last three sessions of each schedule for each participant.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Values for bias (log k; top panel) and sensitivity to reinforcement (c; bottom panel) parameters for the no-punishment (open circles), punishment-net (closed circles), and punishment-obtained analyses (closed diamonds). In the top panel, the horizontal line represents the bias value under perfect matching (log k  =  0); in the bottom panel, the horizontal line represents the sensitivity value under perfect matching (c  =  1). Dashes represent means.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Balsam P.D, Bondy A.S. The negative side effects of reward. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1983;16:283–296. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baum W. On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1974;22:231–242. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baum W, Rachlin H. Choice as time allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1969;12:861–874. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bradshaw C, Szabadi E, Bevan P. The effect of punishment on free-operant choice behavior in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1979;31:71–81. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brownstein A.J, Pliskoff S.S. Some effects of relative reinforcement rate and changeover delay in response-independent concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1968;11:683–688. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources