Search

Previous research has demonstrated that individuals improve their performance of a task after observing and evaluating others perform that task, a phenomenon known as the observer effect. Most of the research has demonstrated this when the observers were aware that their performance of the task was also being observed, suggesting that reactivity may play an important role. The current study examined this by evaluating the impact that observing others’ safety performance had on the observers’ subsequent safety performance under reactivity and nonreactivity conditions. Results suggest that the observer effect might be more robust when observers are aware that their performance is also being evaluated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of mixed-preference reinforcer delivery (i.e., the random delivery of a set of items with varying degrees of preference for each individual) with employees has been found to produce moderate levels of responding in an analog setting; however, mixed reinforcer delivery may not conform to the recommendations made by some popular writers in organizational behavior management. The current investigation used a progressively thinning high-preference stimulus delivery procedure to investigate the use of mixed reinforcer delivery with 5 employees. Results indicated that most participants did not reliably complete work when the percent chance of earning a high-preference item dropped below 100%. These results do not support the use of varied reinforcers in applied settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the frequency with which performance feedback interventions are used in organizational behavior management, component analyses of such feedback are rare. It has been suggested that evaluation of performance and objective details about performance are two necessary components for performance feedback. The present study was designed to help clarify which components are required for maximal effectiveness by comparing four conditions: (a) combined evaluative and objective feedback, (b) evaluative feedback alone, (c) objective feedback alone, and (d) no feedback. A total of 105 undergraduate students were recruited to work on a simulated bank check processing task while being exposed to one of the four feedback conditions. The number of checks correctly processed served as the dependent variable. Results suggest that a combination of objective and evaluative feedback is necessary for maximal performance. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]