Catano's (1975) study was replicated to assess the effects of the experimenter's vs peers' praise and also the shift from quality to quantity in performance as a function of praise. 60 undergraduates worked on one of two designs in a mirror-tracing apparatus. They received either no praise, praise from the experimenter, or praise from a student assistant (peer condition). Performance (error rate) in the experimenter-praised group on both tasks was superior only to the peer-praised condition and showed improvement both in speed and accuracy. Source of praise and trial-block sequence in times for task completion interacted. Source of praise influenced both quality and quantity of performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamE. E.An analysis of change in performance quality with operant conditioning procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1972, 56, 480–486.
2.
CatanoV. M.Relation of improved performance through verbal praise to source of praise. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1975, 41, 71–74.
3.
CatanoV. M.Effectiveness of verbal praise as a function of expertise of its source. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1976, 42, 1283–1286.
4.
DorseyT. E.KanferF. H.DuerfeldtP. H.Task difficulty and non-contingent reinforcement schedules as factors in self-reinforcement. Journal of General Psychology, 1971, 84, 323–334.
5.
FittsP. M.Cognitive aspects of information processing: III. Set for speed vs accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 71, 849–857.
6.
HoganJ. L.FisherR. H.MorrisonB. J.Social feedback and cooperative game behavior. Psychological Reports, 1974, 34, 1075–1082.
7.
MartinR.BurwitzLNewellK.Money and praise: Do they influence motor learning and performance?Research Quarterly, 1972, 43, 429–442.
8.
TerrisW.MilburnT. W.Praise, evaluative dependence and the experimenter as factors in a free-learning task. Journal of Psychology, 1972, 81, 183–194.
