Revisiting the role of bad news in maintaining human observing behavior.
Results from studies of observing responses have suggested that stimuli maintain observing owing to their special relationship to primary reinforcement (the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis), and not because they predict the availability and nonavailability of reinforcement (the information hypothesis). The present article first reviews a study that challenges that conclusion and then reports a series of five brief experiments that provide further support for the conditioned-reinforcement view. In Experiments 1 through 3, participants preferred occasional good news (a stimulus correlated with reinforcement) or no news (a stimulus uncorrelated with reinforcement) to occasional bad news (a stimulus negatively correlated with reinforcement). In Experiment 4 bad news was preferred to no news when the absence of stimulus change following a response to the bad-news option was reliably associated with good news. When this association was weakened in Experiment 5 the results were intermediate. The results support the conclusion that information is reinforcing only when it is positive or useful. As required by the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis, useless information does not maintain observing.
Fantino
Edmund
E
Department of Psychology-0109, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109, USA. efantino@ucsd.edu
Silberberg
Alan
A
D000328:Adult; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003214:Conditioning, Classical; D003216:Conditioning, Operant; D005108:Extinction, Psychological; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009042:Motivation; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D012055:Reinforcement Schedule; D012054:Reinforcement, Psychology; D012201:Reward; D014796:Visual Perception; D055815:Young Adult