Navegando por Assunto "Propriedades formais das regras"

Agora exibindo 1 - 3 de 3

Acesso aberto (Open Access)
Efeitos de regras apresentadas na forma de ordem, de sugestão e de acordo sobre o comportamento não-verbal de adultos
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2010-06-14) FARIAS, Andréa Fonseca; PARACAMPO, Carla Cristina Paiva; http://lattes.cnpq.br/9018003546303132
The present study investigated the effects of rules presented in the form of order, suggestion and agreement on non-verbal behavior of adults. Twenty four undergraduate were exposed to a matching-to-sample procedure; the task consisted in pointing to each on of the comparison stimuli in a given sequence. In Phase 1 of Experiments I and II, rules were presented in the form of order, suggestion and agreement. In Experiment I, the order, suggestion or agreement described only one of the two response sequences which produced points (exchangeble for money). In Experiment II, these rules described both response sequences which produced points, one of them being the ordered, suggested or agreed sequence, and the other, the alternative sequence. In Phase 2 ou both experiments, there was unsignalized changes in the contingencies of reinforcement. The results showed that the order, suggestion or agreement produced novel behavior. Additionally, showed that behavior established by order or agreement are more probable of being maitained after changes in the contingencies, when compared to behavior established by suggestion. It is discussed that the maitanance of rule-following is due, in part, to the formal properties of the rules.
Acesso aberto (Open Access)
Efeitos de Regras que Relatam Justificativas Sobre o Comportamento de Seguir Regras
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2012-10-09) MATSUO, Gilsany Leão; ALBUQUERQUE, Luiz Carlos de; http://lattes.cnpq.br/5261537967195189
The present study investigated the effects of rules that provide justifications on the rule- following. 12 undergraduate students were exposed to a matching-to-sample procedure, The task consisted of pointing, in a sequence, to each of three comparison stimuli that had only one thing in common with the sample stimulus and differed in other characteristics. Participants were exposed to four experimental conditions that differed only as the order of presentation of the rules. Were presented to participants rules describing minimal justifications (JMI), monetary justification (JMO), social justification (JSO) and monetary justification more social justification (JMO + SO). The rules always describing two options for response, with different response cost: a greater response effort (EFCFCE) and another with less response effort (EFC). The rule with a minimal justification (JMI) had no justification for issuing any sequence. The other rules presented justifications for issuing a sequence of higher cost (EFCFCE). The results showed that 80% of the participants have chosen sequence higher cost (EFCFCE) when exposed to rules with justifications (JMO; JSO; JMO+SO). And 75% of participants chose sequence of lower cost (EFC) when exposed to rule with minimal justification (JMI). It is concluded that effects of rule-following is due, in part, to the formal properties of the rules.
Acesso aberto (Open Access)
Efeitos de uma história de reforço contínuo e das propriedades formais de regras sobre o seguimento de regras
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2011-11-24) COSTA, Adelina Santana Nery da; ALBUQUERQUE, Luiz Carlos de; http://lattes.cnpq.br/5261537967195189
The present study aimed to assess the effects of a) a history of an alternative behavior to that specified by the rule, established by differential reinforcement and maintained in CRF before the presentation of the rule; b) schedule of reinforcement programmed to strengthen the non-following rules (it means the alternative behavior) after presentation of rule and c) the formal properties of rules (it means the future social consequences, implicitly reported in the rules) on the discrepant rule following contingencies. Twenty-four college students were exposed to a procedure for choosing in agreement with the model. The task was to point out the comparison stimuli in sequence. Students were distributed in four conditions. In each condition, in Phase 1, the correct sequence (it means alternative to the behavior specified by the rule) was established by differential reinforcement in continuous schedule of reinforcement and maintained in this scheme. In Phases 2 and 3, the contingencies were kept unchanged, while the rules were manipulated. In Phases 2 and 3, the contingencies were kept unchanged while the rules were manipulated. In Phase 1 of the Conditions 1 and 3, questions were asked about the contingencies. In Conditions 2 and 4, no questions were asked. In Conditions 1 and 2, Phase 2 was initiated with a suggestion and Phase 3 with a order. In Conditions 3 and 4, was the reverse. In Phase 2 100% of participants were lost to follow-up of the discrepant rule of contingencies in form of suggestion and 60% of participants were lost to follow-up of the discrepant rule of contingencies in form of order. The results support the suggestion that the characteristic effect of a certain variable (for example, the story of the continuous reinforcement of the alternative behavior specified by the rule) to make the following discrepant rule sensitive to contingencies and may depend on its combination with other variables. They also suggest that the formal properties of the rules should now be considered as a variable that can interfere with the following rules.