Ever wonder why your team behaves the way they do? In this episode of The Management Theory Toolbox, we pull back the curtain on the psychology of reinforcement schedules—techniques that could be the secret sauce to boosting your team’s motivation and performance. Whether you're looking to fine-tune your leadership style or curious about the science behind behavior, this episode is a must-listen!
Episode Summary:
Welcome back to The Management Theory Toolbox! I'm your host, Travis Mallett, and today, we're wrapping up our series on operant conditioning with a deep dive into the powerful concept of reinforcement schedules. These are the invisible forces that shape behavior in the workplace—and beyond.
Joined by Dr. Hank Schlinger, a renowned expert in behavior analysis from California State University, we explore different types of reinforcement schedules, including fixed and variable intervals and ratios, and their profound impact on employee behavior. We’ll discuss real-world applications, like how slot machines and even smartphones use these principles to keep us hooked, and how you can ethically apply them in your organization to boost morale and productivity.
We also address a critical question: Can manipulating reinforcement schedules turn employees into mere machines? Dr. Schlinger sheds light on this ethical dilemma, arguing that when done right, these techniques can actually make your team feel more valued and motivated.
Guest Resources:
- Dr. Hank Schlinger
- Google Scholar - Explore Dr. Schlinger’s extensive research in behavior analysis.
- California State University, Los Angeles Profile - Learn more about Dr. Schlinger’s academic contributions.
- How to Build Good Behavior and Self-Esteem in Children (and other books) - Dr. Schlinger’s latest book, a practical guide for parents and educators.
- www.buildgoodbehavior.com - Website for Dr. Schlinger's latest book.
Key Takeaways:
- Variable Ratio Schedules: These schedules can lead to high levels of persistence in behavior, making them powerful tools in both motivation and habit formation.
- Ethical Considerations: Reinforcement schedules aren’t just about getting what you want; they can also be used to make employees feel acknowledged and valued.
- Real-World Applications: From casinos to classrooms, understanding the science behind reinforcement can help you design more effective and ethical management strategies.
Call to Action:
This week, take a moment to reflect on the reinforcements you’re offering in your workplace. Are you consistently rewarding the behaviors you want to see, or are you leaving it up to chance? Try experimenting with a variable ratio schedule and see if it leads to better results. And remember, it’s not just about productivity—it's about creating a work environment where your team feels genuinely valued.
Thank you for joining us on this episode of The Management Theory Toolbox. Don’t forget to subscribe, leave a review, and share this episode with fellow managers and leaders who are keen to unlock the full potential of their teams. Stay tuned for our next episode, where we’ll explore the impact of social interactions on employee learning. Until then, keep learning, keep growing, and keep adding to your management theory toolbox!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Hank Schlinger (00:01):
And that's free.
It doesn't cost the manageranything.
In that sense, you'reconsciously and intentionally
using reinforcement, but I don'tthink it reduces your employee
to anything.
I think it makes them feel morevalued and more worthy, etc.
Travis Mallett (00:16):
Welcome back to the Management Theory Toolbox.
I'm your host, travis Mallett,and I'm thrilled to have you
join me on this journey ofcontinuous learning and growth
as we navigate the dynamic worldof management.
Now, this isn't your typicalmanagement podcast.
Yes, there are plenty ofresources out there that will
give you the ABCs of how to runa meeting, hire someone or even
(00:38):
how to fake a sick day withoutgetting caught, but here we like
to talk about thebehind-the-scenes topics, those
concepts and ideas whichtranscend specific management
practices, rather than simplyrestate them.
We aren't going to give youspecific tips and tricks for
becoming an effective manager.
Here at the Management TheoryToolbox, we're interested in the
(01:00):
why behind it all thediscoveries of behavioral
science, psychology, businessand economics that will open our
eyes to what's happening behindthe scenes.
In episodes 11 through 14,we've been learning about
operant conditioning, which isone of the ways people learn or
have their behavior shaped.
One of the reasons we've beenstudying this is because the
(01:22):
ability to learn is vital toorganizational survival and
maintaining competitiveadvantage in an ever-evolving
business landscape.
Today, we're going to wrap upour study of operant
conditioning by talking aboutschedules of reinforcement.
To help understand this topic,let's listen to Dwight Schrute's
scheme of positivereinforcement from the Office.
(01:45):
Listen up, come to the centerof the room please.
This is a Schrute buck.
When you have done somethinggood, you will receive one
Schrute buck.
Hank Schlinger (01:56):
1,000 Schrute bucks equals an extra five
minutes for lunch.
Travis Mallett (02:00):
What is the cash value of a Schrute buck?
Excellent question, pam.
Hank Schlinger (02:03):
One one-hundredth of a cent, so
10,000 of your dollars is worthone real dollar.
Travis Mallett (02:09):
Just zip your lid.
Now let us discussprecipitation, Stanley.
When rainfall occurs, does itusually fall in a liquid, solid
or gaseous state?
Liquid, Very good, you haveearned one shroot buck.
I don't want it.
Then you have been have earnedone shroot buck.
I don't want it.
Then you have been deducted 50shroot bucks.
(02:29):
Make it 100.
Hank Schlinger (02:31):
Don't you want to earn shroot bucks?
No, in fact, I'll give you abillion Stanley Nichols if you
never talk to me again.
What's the ratio of StanleyNichols to shroot bucks?
The same as the ratio ofunicorns to leprechauns.
Okay, that's it.
Blast, cancel.
Everybody out.
No wait, what are you doing?
Travis Mallett (02:47):
I'm punishing them.
Aside from the fact thatDwight's Shroop Bucks hold
essentially no real value, anddoesn't take into account
whether the Shroop Buck isreally a positive reinforcer for
everyone.
This scheme is interestingbecause there's no indication of
how many good behaviors ittakes to get rewarded with a
shroop buck.
Maybe Dwight intends to rewardevery single instance of good
(03:10):
behavior with a shroop buck,which would be called a
continuous schedule ofreinforcement.
Or, more likely, it's up to thewhims of Dwight and the shroop
bucks will be handed out in anunpredictable and random fashion
.
If we think about it, there'sall sorts of ways we could
design how often we give peoplereinforcements to encourage or
shape their behavior.
What if we provided thereinforcement every three times
(03:33):
they do a desired behavior?
Or what if the reinforcement isprovided randomly but happens
on average every three times?
Each of these would be adifferent schedule of
reinforcement and could elicit adifferent response from the
receiving person, and this makesme wonder if there's a best
schedule of reinforcement, onewhich gives us the highest
probability of desired behavior.
(03:55):
I actually stumbled across someof these differences while
playing with my four-year-oldson.
See, he loves giving high fivesover and over, but he
especially loves it if he givesa big high five and gets some
dramatic response you got me,you got me, okay.
(04:15):
I've noticed that if I give himthat crazy overreacting
response every single time, hegives me a solid high five.
That's only rewarding thosehigh fives which are good, solid
ones.
He has a particular pattern ofresponse.
This is called a continuousreinforcement schedule.
Every successful attempt isrewarded.
As you might expect from thetenets of operant conditioning,
(04:38):
his response is indeed to focushis attempts on giving good,
solid high fives rather thanweak side swipes, since it's the
solid ones which earn him areaction that he finds hilarious
.
Interestingly, he does thiswith a very specific pattern of
response in terms of frequencyand intensity of the attempts.
But I've also tried using avariable schedule of
(05:00):
reinforcement.
Even if he gives a good, solidhigh five, I don't always react,
only reacting maybe every thirdtime on average, sometimes
waiting until after five solidhigh fives, other times giving
him the response after only two.
Sure enough, this also resultedin him focusing his high fives
on trying to achieve good, solidones, since those are the ones
(05:22):
that yield a funny reaction.
But the pattern of his attemptsin terms of frequency and
intensity is vastly differentfrom the continuous schedule of
reinforcement.
You'll find out what thedifference in his response is
after our guest interview.
Speaking of which, there are alot of different schedules of
reinforcement and they allelicit various patterns of
(05:43):
responding.
So we're going to need somehelp sorting through all this,
and we're fortunate enough tohave with us an expert on this
topic, dr Hank Schlinger.
Hi, hank, and welcome to theshow.
Hank Schlinger (05:54):
Thank you for having me on, I appreciate it.
Travis Mallett (05:56):
Great, I'm really excited to talk to you
today.
There are lots of differenttypes of schedules of
reinforcement and, honestly,it's a bit difficult to keep
track of them all, so I'm reallylooking forward to your help in
sorting through it.
But before we get started, goahead and introduce yourself and
tell us a bit about yourbackground and work.
Hank Schlinger (06:13):
My name is Hank Schlinger.
I'm a professor of psychologyat California State University.
I previously directed themaster's program in applied
behavior analysis.
Currently I'm director andcoordinator of the undergraduate
BCABA program, so it's acertificate program for
undergraduates in behavioranalysis.
Historically I have conductedresearch in basic learning
(06:35):
processes, including schedulesof reinforcement, and a lot of
theoretical work in variousaspects of psychology, including
intelligence, consciousness etc.
All from a behavior analytic orscientific perspective, and
I've published four books.
Two are introductory psychbooks, one is a book on child
development from a behavioralperspective and my most recent
(06:56):
book is a parenting book titledhow to Build Good Behavior and
Self-Esteem in Children.
Travis Mallett (07:01):
Excellent, and thanks again for joining us.
As I mentioned, we're talkingabout schedules of reinforcement
For our listeners who might benew to the topic children.
Excellent, and thanks again forjoining us.
As I mentioned, we're talkingabout schedules of reinforcement
For our listeners who might benew to the topic.
Could you provide a briefoverview of what schedules of
reinforcement are?
Hank Schlinger (07:13):
Sure, I think to begin with it's probably
important to talk about whatreinforcement is, because it's
misunderstood, which may be thefault of people like myself in
terms of disseminating it.
But reinforcement is a basiclaw of behavior and what
reinforcement states is thatconsequences of behavior.
And by consequences I don'tmean bad things, because when I
(07:33):
was growing up my parents wouldsay you misbehavebehavior going
to get the consequences.
I just mean any result ofbehavior determines the future
probability of that behavior,and the probabilities can either
remain the same or they canincrease or decrease depending
upon the consequences.
So, in general, a reinforcer isa consequence or a stimulus
that follows a response andincreases the probability of
(07:57):
similar responses, responsesthat are similar to that
response under similarcircumstances.
On the one hand, it's verysimple and self-evident.
On the other hand, a thoroughunderstanding is not that simple
.
Schedules of reinforcement aresimply rules by which
reinforcers are delivered, sothat's maybe a little simpler.
The idea came, like all greatscientific discoveries, by
accident.
(08:18):
I think the story goes likethis BF Skinner, who was really
the father of behavior analysis,who originally discovered the
basic principles that otherpeople built upon.
I think the story goes that hewas working in the lab with rats
, and the weekend came and herealized that he didn't have
enough food pellets for the rats, and so the stores were closed
(08:39):
and he couldn't buy any more.
So he had to make do with thepellets that he had, and so he
had to stretch them out, and bydoing so he discovered that when
he gave food pellets, insteadof for every single response,
which we call a continuousreinforcement schedule, he had
to give them for every certainnumber of responses, which I'll
talk about as a fixed ratioschedule.
He did that initially just tosave pellets, so that he didn't
(09:02):
run out over the weekend, and bydoing so he discovered some
interesting phenomena,interesting patterns of behavior
in his rats, and, like allgreat scientists, that led him
into a different direction,which was basically
investigating schedules ofreinforcement.
Travis Mallett (09:15):
Excellent.
That's an interesting originstory for the topic, though I'm
not surprised to hear BF Skinnerbrought into this, since I
think you're now the fifth guestin a row to mention him.
But let's go through thissystematically, one at a time,
and start with fixed ratios.
What is a fixed ratio, and howdoes that differ from interval
schedules?
Hank Schlinger (09:34):
So Skinner discovered that you can deliver
a reinforcer after a certainnumber of responses and that
would be the ratio of responsesto reinforcers.
So one reinforcer to oneresponse, that would be an FR1,
fixed ratio one or continuousreinforcement.
Or you could have onereinforcer for 10 responses.
One reinforcer for every 10responses would be a fixed ratio
(09:56):
, 10.
So a fixed ratio, then, is theratio schedule in which
reinforcement occurs after a setor fixed number of responses.
So FR10, every 10th responseproduces a reinforcer.
Now all schedules ofreinforcement produce certain
patterns and rates of responding.
So the rates can vary fromfairly low to extremely high,
(10:18):
and by rate I simply mean numberof responses over time.
And the patterns are patternsthat Skinner discovered because
he used a device called acumulative recorder and
basically what it did was recordthe animal's responses
cumulatively and that enabledhim to see, moment to moment,
how reinforcement affected theanimal's behavior.
So it was really like amicroscope onto the behavior of
(10:41):
his lab animals.
So a fixed ratio scheduleproduces a very interesting
pattern of response and itproduces this in all organisms
in which it has been used, withone possible exception.
Once the animal or human startsresponding, they respond
extremely quickly.
When the reinforcer isdelivered, they pause for a
period of time.
(11:01):
The pause is called apost-reinforcement pause, and
all that means is that afterreinforcement the animal will
stop responding for a period oftime, and so that period of time
during which the animal's notresponding varies directly with
the size of the upcoming ratio.
So if it's a very short ratiothe animal has to do, then the
animal's not responding variesdirectly with the size of the
upcoming ratio.
So if it's a very short ratiothe animal has to do, then the
(11:21):
animal will only pause briefly.
If there's a lot of work, it'sa large ratio the animal has to
complete, then the animal pauseslonger.
So the pause is simply a periodof time with no responding.
Now, the length of the pause isdirectly related to the size of
the ratio, and also there areother factors involved too,
which I don't need to get into.
But, for example, it differsdepending on the species you use
(11:41):
, how food deprived the animalis, how big the reinforcer is.
There are a lot of othervariables that determine the
length of the pause, but theprimary one for our purposes
would be the size of the ratio.
For example, a very small ratiolike an FR1 or an FR5 or an
FR10, depending on the animal.
Small ratio like an FR1 or anFR5 or an FR10, depending on the
animal produces a very shortpause.
(12:02):
The pause is not related tofatigue and it's not related to
food deprivation.
It's related only to the sizeof the ratio.
So, for example, let's talkabout rats.
For a rat, an FR10 produces avery short pause.
An FR50, on the other hand,produces a much longer pause.
The way to look at it is thatit's a lot of work.
So when the rat finishes the 50responses, gets the reinforcer.
(12:22):
You could look at it this waythe rat thinks to himself or
herself what do I have to do nowto get to the next reinforcer?
Oh, I've got to do 50 responses.
I liked it much better when itwas 10 responses.
Obviously, the rat's nottalking to him or herself like
that, but that's what it lookslike.
And then they will eventuallystart responding and once they
do, they respond very quickly intheir 50 responses for the next
(12:44):
reinforcer.
And the relevance of fixed ratioschedules with the pause is
what we humans would callprocrastination.
So when we have only a littlebit of work ahead of us, we're
less likely to procrastinatewhen we have a lot of work ahead
of us.
Interestingly, we're morelikely to procrastinate.
I see this in my students.
When they only have a shortquiz to do for the next day,
(13:07):
they go home and study it prettyquickly.
When they have a big test thenext day, other things become
very reinforcing Washing thedishes, vacuuming the floor.
But once they sit down to startstudying, they study.
So vacuuming the floor.
But once they sit down to startstudying, they study.
So that's the fixed ratioschedule.
I can't think of too many realworld examples with humans where
fixed ratio schedules are used,except possibly in some
industries where a worker has tocomplete a fixed or set number
(13:30):
of things before they get a unitof pay.
So there's your fixed ratioschedule.
Travis Mallett (13:36):
Got it.
So now the contrast to a fixedratio is a variable ratio.
What is a variable ratio?
Schedule of reinforcement.
Hank Schlinger (13:45):
Okay, a variable ratio.
Again, it's the ratio ofresponses to reinforcers.
In this case, instead of theratio being fixed, the ratio is
variable.
It's based on an average numberof responses.
So, talking about fixed ratioand a fixed ratio, 10 would be
every 10th response produces areinforcer.
A variable ratio, 10 means onaverage the 10th response
(14:08):
produces a reinforcer.
So it could be one response, itcould be 20 responses, 5, 30,
and as long as when you add themall up and divide by the number
, you get 10.
The difference between thevariable and fixed ratio is
remarkable.
The variable ratio, for ourpurposes today, eliminates the
post-reinforcement pausing, andthe reason it does so is because
the reinforcer is unpredictable.
(14:29):
The animal doesn't know whenthe next reinforcer will come.
So if they complete a longratio and get a reinforcer, the
very next reinforcer could behad by just responding one time.
So the difference between avariable ratio and a fixed ratio
.
By the way, all of theseschedules are called
intermittent schedules.
One of the main differencesbetween the variable and fixed
ratio schedule is that thevariable ratio schedule produces
(14:52):
very persistent responding.
That means almost nopost-reinforcement pausing.
And we see variable ratioschedules, or something like
them, in slot machines and othertypes of gambling and iPhones
for that matter.
There's been a lot ofdiscussion lately, especially by
I forget the guy's name atGoogle who's talked about how
various apps for phones areprogrammed to keep you on the
(15:15):
phone and they're programmedaccording to something like a
variable ratio schedule becauseyou never know when the
reinforcer is going to come.
And that's the case with slotmachines.
People sitting in slot machines99% of their responses produce
nothing and yet they sit therefor hours responding and putting
money in, and that's becausetheir behavior is on something
very close to a variable ratioschedule.
(15:36):
It generates very persistentresponding.
People persevere a lot onvariable ratio schedules and
mostly that's because of theunpredictability of the
reinforcer.
There are many other examplesof variable ratio schedules in
real life.
Travis Mallett (15:50):
I'm curious if there's any sort of burnout with
that persistence over time,Like if I'm a manager and have
dialed into a highly effectivevariable ratio schedule of
reinforcement.
Is there a risk of burnout duespecifically to this schedule of
reinforcement?
I get that there might be otherfactors that influence burnout,
but I'm curious about specificto this schedule of
(16:12):
reinforcement.
Hank Schlinger (16:13):
No, there's no burnout and the evidence.
Just go to a casino and look atpeople sitting in front of slot
machines or gambling or beingon their phones for hours on end
.
There is what you could callburnout.
On a fixed ratio schedule, ifyou make the ratio high enough,
fast enough, if an animal isresponding, let's say, on a
fixed ratio of five, and youmove them to a fixed ratio of 50
(16:35):
immediately, they'll never makeit to 50, right, so we call
that extinction, so theirbehavior will stop.
But you could get them up to 50gradually if you move from 5 to
, let's say, 8 to 12, to 20 to30.
You can get them where they canrespond 50.
But if you go immediately from5 to 50, then, yes, burnout will
occur.
(16:56):
They will stop responding.
That is very unlikely to occuron variable ratio scheduling.
Travis Mallett (17:00):
Extinction for our listeners who might have
missed it is something that wededicated the entirety of
episode 14 to, with Dr MichaelDomián.
Now, next on the list is fixedinterval schedules.
What are some of thecharacteristics and effects of
fixed interval schedules?
Hank Schlinger (17:17):
So ratio schedules are defined by the
ratio of responses toreinforcers.
Interval schedules depend upontwo things.
One, an interval of time mustpass, but two, a response must
occur.
And there's a misunderstandingabout interval schedules and I
see this in my students all thetime.
They think that an intervalschedule, you just get a
(17:37):
reinforcer after a period oftime.
But that's not true.
You have to make the desiredresponse.
So in a fixed interval schedulethe reinforcer is delivered
after the first response, aftera fixed or set amount of time.
So a fixed interval one minuteschedule, for example one minute
has to pass and then a responsehas to occur.
And it doesn't matter if anyresponses occur during that
(17:59):
interval.
You only have to respond onceafter the interval.
So what I ask my students iswhat's the minimum number of
responses that must occur on afixed interval schedule?
And they usually correctly sayone.
But almost no animal ever justmakes one response.
So after animals have been on aschedule like this for a while,
there's a very consistentpattern that develops.
(18:20):
It's called a scallop, and whatthat looks like is after the
reinforcer occurs for theresponse, then there's a period
of time which looks like apost-reinforcement pause.
There's a period of time whenthe animal doesn't respond, but
then they respond slowly, andthen faster and faster, until
they're responding at abreakneck speed right before the
(18:41):
interval ends and thereinforcer is delivered.
Well, only one response isrequired for reinforcement.
So why is the animal engagingin all that other responding?
That's a phenomenon whichSkinner called superstitious
behavior, because the animal isengaging in that very high rate
of behavior right when thereinforcement is delivered.
The reinforcer is not dependenton that, but it's correlated
(19:03):
with it.
So you get this scallop pattern.
And the reason that happens isthat early on, when the animal
is responding on a fixedinterval schedule, if they
respond immediately afterreinforcement which they all do,
every animal will do that yourespond once you get food and
then you start responding, butthere's no food there because
the 60 second interval hasn'ttimed out yet.
(19:23):
Eventually, responses rightafter reinforcement stop.
That's due to a process calledextinction.
But since animals can't telltime as well as we can they
don't have little watches theydon't know when the 60 seconds
is up.
So they try Is it up yet?
No, not yet.
What about now?
Now, now, no.
And so by the time it is up,they're responding quickly Like
(19:43):
where is that reinforcer.
And then the reinforcer occursand all that responding gets
adventitiously or accidentallyreinforced.
That's why you get that kind ofpattern of responding.
Travis Mallett (19:52):
Of course, the contrast to fixed interval
schedules is variable intervalschedules.
What are variable intervalschedules?
Hank Schlinger (20:00):
So a variable interval is to a fixed.
So a variable interval is to afixed interval as a variable
ratio is to a fixed ratio.
So instead of a fixed intervalof time there's an average
interval of time, a fixedinterval.
One minute schedule means thefirst response after every
minute will be reinforced.
Under a variable intervalschedule it's the first response
after an average interval oftime and just like variable
(20:23):
ratio schedules, variableinterval schedule, it's the
first response after an averageinterval of time and just like
variable ratio schedules,variable interval schedules
generate very persistentresponding.
The difference is variableratio schedules generate fairly
high persistent responding.
Variable interval schedulesgenerate fairly low persistent
responding.
And if you think about the waythe schedules are programmed, it
makes sense Because on avariable ratio schedule and a
(20:43):
fixed ratio for that matter theanimal really controls when they
get the reinforcer.
So if you're on a fixed ratioof 10, you can respond as
quickly or as slowly as you want.
You determine when thereinforcer comes.
You have to make 10 responses.
Same is true on a variableratio schedule.
On a variable interval schedule, the animal doesn't control
that.
It depends on whether areinforcement has been set up by
(21:04):
a clock.
Here's a good example Fishing.
People go out and fish.
You don't catch fish dependingon how many times you throw your
line in the water.
That's not how it works.
It's not every 10 times I throwmy line in the water I get a
fish, or on the average of every10 times.
It depends whether there arefish there and whether there are
(21:27):
fish swimming underneath yourboat or wherever you are.
That translates into time.
If time has passed and a fishhappens to be there when you
throw your line in the water,and of course the fish is hungry
or whatever, then the fishmight bite and so it's
unpredictable.
You don't know when the fishare there, unless, of course,
you can see in the water.
But you don't know when thefish are there, so that keeps
you doing that time and timeagain.
Checking email is anotherexample.
If you don't have an emailprogram that alerts you when
(21:48):
your emails come and you checkyour email yourself, this is
what I find.
I could be working on a paperor doing something, working
creating a test or something,and every few minutes I'll go
check my email.
Very persistent.
I don't check it quickly, it'snot fast, it's very slow, very
persistent behavior, and the oddthing about that is what's the
reinforcer?
For me?
The reinforcer is I get anemail, but most of the emails I
(22:09):
get are junk.
The chances of getting a reallyvaluable email, like the one I
got from you, for example,that's a pretty low probability.
So but there I am, checkingjust like the rat pressed the
lever, checking at a very lowbut very steady and persistent
(22:32):
rate.
Travis Mallett (22:33):
So one particular situation I'm
interested in is verbalinteractions, for example, how a
manager might choose theirwords, like giving praise at
particular moments or at certaintimes, to reinforce desired
behaviors.
Are there ways to use schedulesof reinforcement to optimize
results in our verbalinteractions at work?
Hank Schlinger (22:54):
Yes, but not just verbal behaviors, other
kinds of behaviors in businessand industry.
If you understand aboutreinforcement schedules, I
assume that many managers wouldlike their employees to respond
fairly persistently when they'reworking, that is, don't take a
lot of breaks.
So if you want them to respondin a fairly consistent,
persistent kind of way, then avariable schedule is obviously
(23:16):
your choice.
The problem is translating fromthe basic animal laboratory to
a complex human setting like abusiness or an industry.
Certainly, all of our verbalbehaviors are reinforced by
listeners and they're reinforcedon some kinds of reinforcement
schedules.
It's not clear what they areall the time but for example, as
I talk to you I can see younodding.
(23:36):
Or if I didn't have videos onthen you might ask me a question
, but you don't do that forevery word.
I say right, and sometimes if Istarted talking about things
that were unpleasant oruncomfortable for you, you might
stop nodding or looking at meor responding.
So all of our verbalinteractions are reinforced by
the people that listen to us andgenerally they're not
(23:57):
reinforced on continuousreinforcement schedules.
They're probably reinforced onvariable reinforcement schedules
.
So're probably reinforced onvariable reinforcement schedules
.
So I think it's not just verbalbehaviors in the workforce, but
it's also, whatever thebehaviors are that are required
for that particular setting,that the employers want the
employees to carry out.
Travis Mallett (24:14):
Now, across these schedules of reinforcement
, I get the sense that variableratios seem to produce the best
performance, and actually thereare people in the field who
argue that certain schedules ofreinforcement yield higher or
lower probabilities ofreinforced behavior, which might
be interpreted as showing thatone is better than the others.
Do you believe that that's aconstructive way to rank the
(24:36):
overall effectiveness ofdifferent schedules of
reinforcement?
Hank Schlinger (24:40):
Not really.
I think if you understand therates and patterns that each
schedule generates, then youcould decide If you, for example
, you wanted some individual torespond really quickly in a
short burst and you didn't mindif they took a pause afterwards.
The variable ratio is easier toprogram because the variable
(25:06):
interval schedule you have toprogram a reinforcer after an
average amount of time.
If you're explicitlyprogramming schedules of
reinforcement it's easier toprogram a VR schedule than a VI
schedule.
But I suppose that in normaleveryday interactions either of
those schedules probably are atplay in human interactions.
Travis Mallett (25:26):
I feel like we have a small philosophical
tangent brewing underneath thisconversation, more of a moral or
ethical concern that mightunderline all of our studies of
organizational behavior andpsychology in general,
especially when we start to getvery quantitative about this
controlling the schedule ofreinforcement to elicit a
particular response, drawingdiagrams, figuring out okay,
(25:49):
here's the optimal schedule ofreinforcement to get the pattern
of behavior I want.
Are we in danger of justtreating people as machines to
be programmed?
Just figure out the optimalinputs to get the outputs we
want?
And if so, could that backfirein other ways?
For example, I don't reallylike the thought of being
treated as a machine thatsomeone else can program to get
(26:10):
what they want.
So I wonder if this aspect ofmanagement could backfire
somehow.
Hank Schlinger (26:16):
I think the way to think about reinforcement is
this.
It's like the way that we wouldthink about other laws of
science.
They're at play whether we wantthem to be or believe them to
be or know them to be or not.
Reinforcement is at play in allhuman interactions.
You're reinforcing my behavior,I'm reinforcing your behavior
to the extent that we continueto converse with each other.
(26:38):
Now, I'm not explicitly orconsciously trying to reinforce
your behavior, and I don't thinkyou are trying to do mine that
way either.
And those are happening also inthe workplace too, between
supervisors and employees ormanagers and employees, whether
we know it or not, or whether welike it or not.
The question is this in aworkplace, do employers or
(26:58):
managers want to maximize theproductivity of their employees?
And I think the answer isalmost generally yes, because
that maximizes profits, etcetera.
So what's the way to do that?
The way to do that is to makesure that the behaviors that you
want in your employees makesure that you acknowledge those
behaviors, like I do with my son.
So when my son does somethingthat I want him to do, I'll
(27:21):
praise him or I'll allow himaccess to his iPad or to a TV
show, and I think the differenceis maybe the difference between
what we call positive versusnegative reinforcement.
Positive reinforcement generallymeans that you get something
for doing something In theworkplace.
What do you get?
You typically get money rightbecause you're paid for what you
(27:44):
do.
But if you talk to a lot ofpeople, I think what do you get?
You typically get money rightBecause you're paid for what you
do, but if you talk to a lot ofpeople, I think what people
really like and what they'llwork for is just being
acknowledged by their manager.
Hey man, I noticed that you didthis.
What a great job you did.
That's just terrific.
That's just great that you didthat.
That's free, and it's amazinghow few managers and supervisors
actually acknowledge what theiremployees do, what they're
(28:08):
doing, what they want them to do, and so I don't know that that
has to be programmed accordingto a certain schedule of
reinforcement.
Obviously, if you do it everysingle time, then it might be
less effective, because then ifyou don't do it, then there's
like well, where is it?
So that is generally probablybetter programmed out of the ER
schedule.
You don't want to tell themevery time, every few times,
(28:29):
every 10, 15 times On average.
The reinforcers don't have tobe tangible, they don't have to
be monetary, they can just beacknowledgement.
And I think that a lot ofemployees will complain that
when they do their job the bestthat they can, no one ever
notices, no one ever points itout, no one acknowledges it.
And that's free, it doesn'tcost the manager anything.
In that sense, you'reconsciously and intentionally
(28:52):
using reinforcement, but I don'tthink it reduces your employee
to anything.
I think it makes them feel morevalued and more worthy, et
cetera.
Travis Mallett (29:03):
That makes me think of a manager I knew, and
this was more of a reminder forhim to give positive feedback,
since I think it's, as you said,really easy for managers to
just focus on the problems thatneed to be fixed and not give
the praise when it's due.
But it seems related to theschedules of reinforcement.
So he would put five pennies inhis right pocket and then,
throughout the day, whenever hewould acknowledge a positive
(29:25):
thing an employee had done, hewould keep track by moving a
penny from his right pocket tohis left one, aiming to have
given his five compliments orpraises by the end of the day.
And when I first heard aboutthat I thought this sounds
really useful and veryintentional, but it doesn't
really track any specificschedule of reinforcement.
It might be a good way toengage in some positive
(29:48):
psychology, but I'm wondering ifit lacks some of the
effectiveness because it isn'ttargeting specific behaviors at
specific times to intentionallyelicit a specific pattern of
response.
It's a bit more haphazard,curious.
What your thoughts are on this?
Hank Schlinger (30:03):
I think that, based on the definition of
reinforcement that I gave at thebeginning, you have to look to
see whether it actuallyincreases the productivity of
your employees.
Just doing something like thatmay seem like it's a good idea,
but if it doesn't increase theproductivity, if you don't see a
change in their behaviors, thenit's not a reinforcer, then
you're not doing reinforcement,and that's an important feature
about reinforcement.
(30:23):
What some people think might bea reinforcer may not be one.
Maybe one employee doesn'treally care if you praise them
and acknowledge them, maybethere's something else you could
do.
And so I think there's anintentionality and as a parent,
you want to intentionally makesure you acknowledge and
reinforce behavior of your kidsthat you like and don't do it
when they are engaging inbehavior you don't like.
(30:45):
And the same thing is true inthe workplace.
But you have to know that whatyou think is a reinforcer
actually is increasing thebehavior that you want to see,
and that's when the quantitativepart helps.
You take data.
Here's the productivity of ouremployees.
It's pretty low, or oneemployee or whatever.
Now we're going to institutethis procedure where we're going
(31:05):
to provide praise or some kindof acknowledgement and you
continue taking data and arethese behaviors increasing or
are they not?
And if they're not, stop doingit and do something else and
then keep taking data so thatwhat works and what doesn't.
And there are a number ofpeople in my field who do
organizational behaviormanagement, who do this kind of
thing and have done it fordecades in various business and
(31:26):
industries, and it's extremelyeffective.
Travis Mallett (31:29):
Excellent, thank you.
We're about out of time, so Ijust want to say thank you for
joining us and teaching us aboutschedules of reinforcement.
Before we sign off, can youtell our listeners how they can
find you and your work?
Hank Schlinger (31:41):
I'm all over the internet mostly, I think in
good, positive ways.
They can check me out on GoogleScholar at California State
University, los Angeles.
All my books are on Amazon.
My most recent book has awebsite, wwwbuildgoodbehaviorcom
, so if anybody wants to emailme, they can find my email
address through Cal State LA,and I'm happy to hear from
(32:01):
people.
Travis Mallett (32:02):
Perfect and thank you very much.
Hank Schlinger (32:04):
Thank you, travis, I appreciate being on.
Travis Mallett (32:26):
Wow, that was a lot of information.
So many different ways to givereinforcements and get different
responses.
So did we get an answer to ourquestion is there a best
schedule of reinforcement?
Actually, when I was writingthis episode and preparing for
it, I found contradictoryanswers.
Some organizational behaviortextbooks, along with other
(32:47):
online resources, claim thatvariable ratio schedules are the
best or the most effective, andI wrote my interview questions
with this assumption in mind.
Dr Schlinger challenged thatassumption and pointed out that
it's more complicated than that,as we've come to expect from
our journey on this show.
Whether one schedule ofreinforcement is better or worse
depends on the situation andthe pattern of responding you're
(33:09):
hoping to achieve.
But you may still be wonderingabout how my son responds to the
different schedules ofreinforcement.
When we're playing, when I usecontinuous reinforcement, giving
a big, dramatic reaction forevery big high five, he responds
by giving high fives in analmost consistent rhythm.
They're solid high fives, butnothing too dramatic.
(33:30):
But when I use a variable ratioreinforcement schedule, giving
him that funny reaction everythree times on average, he
furiously speeds up giving solidhigh fives as fast as he
possibly can, and he laughs farmore hysterically when he gets
the anticipated response thanwhen he gets it consistently
every time.
It's quite a dramaticdifference in his reaction
(33:51):
between the two schedules ofreinforcement and I can
confidently say, based on thisvery unscientific experiment,
that perhaps if we'reintentional with how we dole out
rewards or other reinforcers,we might find ourselves getting
closer to what we're looking forand we might just find
ourselves with more enthusiasticand happy employees as a result
.
(34:11):
This week, think about some ofthe rewards or reinforcers you
offer in your workplace.
This could include praise,bonuses, time off, public
recognition or other incentives.
What kind of schedule andreinforcement is currently in
place, if any?
Are we just like Dwight, givingout random rewards haphazardly?
(34:32):
Could we experiment with adifferent schedule of
reinforcement to try to getbetter results?
As usual, these managementtheories are intended to give
you tools to adapt and mold toyour specific circumstances.
So with that, thank you forjoining us on another episode of
the Management Theory Toolbox.
Stay tuned for our next episode, where we broaden our horizon
from operant conditioning andtalk about how social
(34:54):
interactions impact employeelearning.
Until then, keep learning, keepgrowing and keep adding to your
management theory toolbox,thank you.
And that's free.
It doesn't cost the manageranything.
In that sense, you'reconsciously and intentionally
using reinforcement, but I don'tthink it reduces your employee
to anything.
I think it makes them feel morevalued and more worthy, etc.
Travis Mallett (00:16):
Welcome back to the Management Theory Toolbox.
I'm your host, travis Mallett,and I'm thrilled to have you
join me on this journey ofcontinuous learning and growth
as we navigate the dynamic worldof management.
Now, this isn't your typicalmanagement podcast.
Yes, there are plenty ofresources out there that will
give you the ABCs of how to runa meeting, hire someone or even
(00:38):
how to fake a sick day withoutgetting caught, but here we like
to talk about thebehind-the-scenes topics, those
concepts and ideas whichtranscend specific management
practices, rather than simplyrestate them.
We aren't going to give youspecific tips and tricks for
becoming an effective manager.
Here at the Management TheoryToolbox, we're interested in the
(01:00):
why behind it all thediscoveries of behavioral
science, psychology, businessand economics that will open our
eyes to what's happening behindthe scenes.
In episodes 11 through 14,we've been learning about
operant conditioning, which isone of the ways people learn or
have their behavior shaped.
One of the reasons we've beenstudying this is because the
(01:22):
ability to learn is vital toorganizational survival and
maintaining competitiveadvantage in an ever-evolving
business landscape.
Today, we're going to wrap upour study of operant
conditioning by talking aboutschedules of reinforcement.
To help understand this topic,let's listen to Dwight Schrute's
scheme of positivereinforcement from the Office.
(01:45):
Listen up, come to the centerof the room please.
This is a Schrute buck.
When you have done somethinggood, you will receive one
Schrute buck.
Hank Schlinger (01:56):
1,000 Schrute bucks equals an extra five
minutes for lunch.
Travis Mallett (02:00):
What is the cash value of a Schrute buck?
Excellent question, pam.
Hank Schlinger (02:03):
One one-hundredth of a cent, so
10,000 of your dollars is worthone real dollar.
Travis Mallett (02:09):
Just zip your lid.
Now let us discussprecipitation, Stanley.
When rainfall occurs, does itusually fall in a liquid, solid
or gaseous state?
Liquid, Very good, you haveearned one shroot buck.
I don't want it.
Then you have been have earnedone shroot buck.
I don't want it.
Then you have been deducted 50shroot bucks.
(02:29):
Make it 100.
Hank Schlinger (02:31):
Don't you want to earn shroot bucks?
No, in fact, I'll give you abillion Stanley Nichols if you
never talk to me again.
What's the ratio of StanleyNichols to shroot bucks?
The same as the ratio ofunicorns to leprechauns.
Okay, that's it.
Blast, cancel.
Everybody out.
No wait, what are you doing?
Travis Mallett (02:47):
I'm punishing them.
Aside from the fact thatDwight's Shroop Bucks hold
essentially no real value, anddoesn't take into account
whether the Shroop Buck isreally a positive reinforcer for
everyone.
This scheme is interestingbecause there's no indication of
how many good behaviors ittakes to get rewarded with a
shroop buck.
Maybe Dwight intends to rewardevery single instance of good
(03:10):
behavior with a shroop buck,which would be called a
continuous schedule ofreinforcement.
Or, more likely, it's up to thewhims of Dwight and the shroop
bucks will be handed out in anunpredictable and random fashion
.
If we think about it, there'sall sorts of ways we could
design how often we give peoplereinforcements to encourage or
shape their behavior.
What if we provided thereinforcement every three times
(03:33):
they do a desired behavior?
Or what if the reinforcement isprovided randomly but happens
on average every three times?
Each of these would be adifferent schedule of
reinforcement and could elicit adifferent response from the
receiving person, and this makesme wonder if there's a best
schedule of reinforcement, onewhich gives us the highest
probability of desired behavior.
(03:55):
I actually stumbled across someof these differences while
playing with my four-year-oldson.
See, he loves giving high fivesover and over, but he
especially loves it if he givesa big high five and gets some
dramatic response you got me,you got me, okay.
(04:15):
I've noticed that if I give himthat crazy overreacting
response every single time, hegives me a solid high five.
That's only rewarding thosehigh fives which are good, solid
ones.
He has a particular pattern ofresponse.
This is called a continuousreinforcement schedule.
Every successful attempt isrewarded.
As you might expect from thetenets of operant conditioning,
(04:38):
his response is indeed to focushis attempts on giving good,
solid high fives rather thanweak side swipes, since it's the
solid ones which earn him areaction that he finds hilarious
.
Interestingly, he does thiswith a very specific pattern of
response in terms of frequencyand intensity of the attempts.
But I've also tried using avariable schedule of
(05:00):
reinforcement.
Even if he gives a good, solidhigh five, I don't always react,
only reacting maybe every thirdtime on average, sometimes
waiting until after five solidhigh fives, other times giving
him the response after only two.
Sure enough, this also resultedin him focusing his high fives
on trying to achieve good, solidones, since those are the ones
(05:22):
that yield a funny reaction.
But the pattern of his attemptsin terms of frequency and
intensity is vastly differentfrom the continuous schedule of
reinforcement.
You'll find out what thedifference in his response is
after our guest interview.
Speaking of which, there are alot of different schedules of
reinforcement and they allelicit various patterns of
(05:43):
responding.
So we're going to need somehelp sorting through all this,
and we're fortunate enough tohave with us an expert on this
topic, dr Hank Schlinger.
Hi, hank, and welcome to theshow.
Hank Schlinger (05:54):
Thank you for having me on, I appreciate it.
Travis Mallett (05:56):
Great, I'm really excited to talk to you
today.
There are lots of differenttypes of schedules of
reinforcement and, honestly,it's a bit difficult to keep
track of them all, so I'm reallylooking forward to your help in
sorting through it.
But before we get started, goahead and introduce yourself and
tell us a bit about yourbackground and work.
Hank Schlinger (06:13):
My name is Hank Schlinger.
I'm a professor of psychologyat California State University.
I previously directed themaster's program in applied
behavior analysis.
Currently I'm director andcoordinator of the undergraduate
BCABA program, so it's acertificate program for
undergraduates in behavioranalysis.
Historically I have conductedresearch in basic learning
(06:35):
processes, including schedulesof reinforcement, and a lot of
theoretical work in variousaspects of psychology, including
intelligence, consciousness etc.
All from a behavior analytic orscientific perspective, and
I've published four books.
Two are introductory psychbooks, one is a book on child
development from a behavioralperspective and my most recent
(06:56):
book is a parenting book titledhow to Build Good Behavior and
Self-Esteem in Children.
Travis Mallett (07:01):
Excellent, and thanks again for joining us.
As I mentioned, we're talkingabout schedules of reinforcement
For our listeners who might benew to the topic children.
Excellent, and thanks again forjoining us.
As I mentioned, we're talkingabout schedules of reinforcement
For our listeners who might benew to the topic.
Could you provide a briefoverview of what schedules of
reinforcement are?
Hank Schlinger (07:13):
Sure, I think to begin with it's probably
important to talk about whatreinforcement is, because it's
misunderstood, which may be thefault of people like myself in
terms of disseminating it.
But reinforcement is a basiclaw of behavior and what
reinforcement states is thatconsequences of behavior.
And by consequences I don'tmean bad things, because when I
(07:33):
was growing up my parents wouldsay you misbehavebehavior going
to get the consequences.
I just mean any result ofbehavior determines the future
probability of that behavior,and the probabilities can either
remain the same or they canincrease or decrease depending
upon the consequences.
So, in general, a reinforcer isa consequence or a stimulus
that follows a response andincreases the probability of
(07:57):
similar responses, responsesthat are similar to that
response under similarcircumstances.
On the one hand, it's verysimple and self-evident.
On the other hand, a thoroughunderstanding is not that simple
.
Schedules of reinforcement aresimply rules by which
reinforcers are delivered, sothat's maybe a little simpler.
The idea came, like all greatscientific discoveries, by
accident.
(08:18):
I think the story goes likethis BF Skinner, who was really
the father of behavior analysis,who originally discovered the
basic principles that otherpeople built upon.
I think the story goes that hewas working in the lab with rats
, and the weekend came and herealized that he didn't have
enough food pellets for the rats, and so the stores were closed
(08:39):
and he couldn't buy any more.
So he had to make do with thepellets that he had, and so he
had to stretch them out, and bydoing so he discovered that when
he gave food pellets, insteadof for every single response,
which we call a continuousreinforcement schedule, he had
to give them for every certainnumber of responses, which I'll
talk about as a fixed ratioschedule.
He did that initially just tosave pellets, so that he didn't
(09:02):
run out over the weekend, and bydoing so he discovered some
interesting phenomena,interesting patterns of behavior
in his rats, and, like allgreat scientists, that led him
into a different direction,which was basically
investigating schedules ofreinforcement.
Travis Mallett (09:15):
Excellent.
That's an interesting originstory for the topic, though I'm
not surprised to hear BF Skinnerbrought into this, since I
think you're now the fifth guestin a row to mention him.
But let's go through thissystematically, one at a time,
and start with fixed ratios.
What is a fixed ratio, and howdoes that differ from interval
schedules?
Hank Schlinger (09:34):
So Skinner discovered that you can deliver
a reinforcer after a certainnumber of responses and that
would be the ratio of responsesto reinforcers.
So one reinforcer to oneresponse, that would be an FR1,
fixed ratio one or continuousreinforcement.
Or you could have onereinforcer for 10 responses.
One reinforcer for every 10responses would be a fixed ratio
(09:56):
, 10.
So a fixed ratio, then, is theratio schedule in which
reinforcement occurs after a setor fixed number of responses.
So FR10, every 10th responseproduces a reinforcer.
Now all schedules ofreinforcement produce certain
patterns and rates of responding.
So the rates can vary fromfairly low to extremely high,
(10:18):
and by rate I simply mean numberof responses over time.
And the patterns are patternsthat Skinner discovered because
he used a device called acumulative recorder and
basically what it did was recordthe animal's responses
cumulatively and that enabledhim to see, moment to moment,
how reinforcement affected theanimal's behavior.
So it was really like amicroscope onto the behavior of
(10:41):
his lab animals.
So a fixed ratio scheduleproduces a very interesting
pattern of response and itproduces this in all organisms
in which it has been used, withone possible exception.
Once the animal or human startsresponding, they respond
extremely quickly.
When the reinforcer isdelivered, they pause for a
period of time.
(11:01):
The pause is called apost-reinforcement pause, and
all that means is that afterreinforcement the animal will
stop responding for a period oftime, and so that period of time
during which the animal's notresponding varies directly with
the size of the upcoming ratio.
So if it's a very short ratiothe animal has to do, then the
animal's not responding variesdirectly with the size of the
upcoming ratio.
So if it's a very short ratiothe animal has to do, then the
(11:21):
animal will only pause briefly.
If there's a lot of work, it'sa large ratio the animal has to
complete, then the animal pauseslonger.
So the pause is simply a periodof time with no responding.
Now, the length of the pause isdirectly related to the size of
the ratio, and also there areother factors involved too,
which I don't need to get into.
But, for example, it differsdepending on the species you use
(11:41):
, how food deprived the animalis, how big the reinforcer is.
There are a lot of othervariables that determine the
length of the pause, but theprimary one for our purposes
would be the size of the ratio.
For example, a very small ratiolike an FR1 or an FR5 or an
FR10, depending on the animal.
Small ratio like an FR1 or anFR5 or an FR10, depending on the
animal produces a very shortpause.
(12:02):
The pause is not related tofatigue and it's not related to
food deprivation.
It's related only to the sizeof the ratio.
So, for example, let's talkabout rats.
For a rat, an FR10 produces avery short pause.
An FR50, on the other hand,produces a much longer pause.
The way to look at it is thatit's a lot of work.
So when the rat finishes the 50responses, gets the reinforcer.
(12:22):
You could look at it this waythe rat thinks to himself or
herself what do I have to do nowto get to the next reinforcer?
Oh, I've got to do 50 responses.
I liked it much better when itwas 10 responses.
Obviously, the rat's nottalking to him or herself like
that, but that's what it lookslike.
And then they will eventuallystart responding and once they
do, they respond very quickly intheir 50 responses for the next
(12:44):
reinforcer.
And the relevance of fixed ratioschedules with the pause is
what we humans would callprocrastination.
So when we have only a littlebit of work ahead of us, we're
less likely to procrastinatewhen we have a lot of work ahead
of us.
Interestingly, we're morelikely to procrastinate.
I see this in my students.
When they only have a shortquiz to do for the next day,
(13:07):
they go home and study it prettyquickly.
When they have a big test thenext day, other things become
very reinforcing Washing thedishes, vacuuming the floor.
But once they sit down to startstudying, they study.
So vacuuming the floor.
But once they sit down to startstudying, they study.
So that's the fixed ratioschedule.
I can't think of too many realworld examples with humans where
fixed ratio schedules are used,except possibly in some
industries where a worker has tocomplete a fixed or set number
(13:30):
of things before they get a unitof pay.
So there's your fixed ratioschedule.
Travis Mallett (13:36):
Got it.
So now the contrast to a fixedratio is a variable ratio.
What is a variable ratio?
Schedule of reinforcement.
Hank Schlinger (13:45):
Okay, a variable ratio.
Again, it's the ratio ofresponses to reinforcers.
In this case, instead of theratio being fixed, the ratio is
variable.
It's based on an average numberof responses.
So, talking about fixed ratioand a fixed ratio, 10 would be
every 10th response produces areinforcer.
A variable ratio, 10 means onaverage the 10th response
(14:08):
produces a reinforcer.
So it could be one response, itcould be 20 responses, 5, 30,
and as long as when you add themall up and divide by the number
, you get 10.
The difference between thevariable and fixed ratio is
remarkable.
The variable ratio, for ourpurposes today, eliminates the
post-reinforcement pausing, andthe reason it does so is because
the reinforcer is unpredictable.
(14:29):
The animal doesn't know whenthe next reinforcer will come.
So if they complete a longratio and get a reinforcer, the
very next reinforcer could behad by just responding one time.
So the difference between avariable ratio and a fixed ratio
.
By the way, all of theseschedules are called
intermittent schedules.
One of the main differencesbetween the variable and fixed
ratio schedule is that thevariable ratio schedule produces
(14:52):
very persistent responding.
That means almost nopost-reinforcement pausing.
And we see variable ratioschedules, or something like
them, in slot machines and othertypes of gambling and iPhones
for that matter.
There's been a lot ofdiscussion lately, especially by
I forget the guy's name atGoogle who's talked about how
various apps for phones areprogrammed to keep you on the
(15:15):
phone and they're programmedaccording to something like a
variable ratio schedule becauseyou never know when the
reinforcer is going to come.
And that's the case with slotmachines.
People sitting in slot machines99% of their responses produce
nothing and yet they sit therefor hours responding and putting
money in, and that's becausetheir behavior is on something
very close to a variable ratioschedule.
(15:36):
It generates very persistentresponding.
People persevere a lot onvariable ratio schedules and
mostly that's because of theunpredictability of the
reinforcer.
There are many other examplesof variable ratio schedules in
real life.
Travis Mallett (15:50):
I'm curious if there's any sort of burnout with
that persistence over time,Like if I'm a manager and have
dialed into a highly effectivevariable ratio schedule of
reinforcement.
Is there a risk of burnout duespecifically to this schedule of
reinforcement?
I get that there might be otherfactors that influence burnout,
but I'm curious about specificto this schedule of
(16:12):
reinforcement.
Hank Schlinger (16:13):
No, there's no burnout and the evidence.
Just go to a casino and look atpeople sitting in front of slot
machines or gambling or beingon their phones for hours on end
.
There is what you could callburnout.
On a fixed ratio schedule, ifyou make the ratio high enough,
fast enough, if an animal isresponding, let's say, on a
fixed ratio of five, and youmove them to a fixed ratio of 50
(16:35):
immediately, they'll never makeit to 50, right, so we call
that extinction, so theirbehavior will stop.
But you could get them up to 50gradually if you move from 5 to
, let's say, 8 to 12, to 20 to30.
You can get them where they canrespond 50.
But if you go immediately from5 to 50, then, yes, burnout will
occur.
(16:56):
They will stop responding.
That is very unlikely to occuron variable ratio scheduling.
Travis Mallett (17:00):
Extinction for our listeners who might have
missed it is something that wededicated the entirety of
episode 14 to, with Dr MichaelDomián.
Now, next on the list is fixedinterval schedules.
What are some of thecharacteristics and effects of
fixed interval schedules?
Hank Schlinger (17:17):
So ratio schedules are defined by the
ratio of responses toreinforcers.
Interval schedules depend upontwo things.
One, an interval of time mustpass, but two, a response must
occur.
And there's a misunderstandingabout interval schedules and I
see this in my students all thetime.
They think that an intervalschedule, you just get a
(17:37):
reinforcer after a period oftime.
But that's not true.
You have to make the desiredresponse.
So in a fixed interval schedulethe reinforcer is delivered
after the first response, aftera fixed or set amount of time.
So a fixed interval one minuteschedule, for example one minute
has to pass and then a responsehas to occur.
And it doesn't matter if anyresponses occur during that
(17:59):
interval.
You only have to respond onceafter the interval.
So what I ask my students iswhat's the minimum number of
responses that must occur on afixed interval schedule?
And they usually correctly sayone.
But almost no animal ever justmakes one response.
So after animals have been on aschedule like this for a while,
there's a very consistentpattern that develops.
(18:20):
It's called a scallop, and whatthat looks like is after the
reinforcer occurs for theresponse, then there's a period
of time which looks like apost-reinforcement pause.
There's a period of time whenthe animal doesn't respond, but
then they respond slowly, andthen faster and faster, until
they're responding at abreakneck speed right before the
(18:41):
interval ends and thereinforcer is delivered.
Well, only one response isrequired for reinforcement.
So why is the animal engagingin all that other responding?
That's a phenomenon whichSkinner called superstitious
behavior, because the animal isengaging in that very high rate
of behavior right when thereinforcement is delivered.
The reinforcer is not dependenton that, but it's correlated
(19:03):
with it.
So you get this scallop pattern.
And the reason that happens isthat early on, when the animal
is responding on a fixedinterval schedule, if they
respond immediately afterreinforcement which they all do,
every animal will do that yourespond once you get food and
then you start responding, butthere's no food there because
the 60 second interval hasn'ttimed out yet.
(19:23):
Eventually, responses rightafter reinforcement stop.
That's due to a process calledextinction.
But since animals can't telltime as well as we can they
don't have little watches theydon't know when the 60 seconds
is up.
So they try Is it up yet?
No, not yet.
What about now?
Now, now, no.
And so by the time it is up,they're responding quickly Like
(19:43):
where is that reinforcer.
And then the reinforcer occursand all that responding gets
adventitiously or accidentallyreinforced.
That's why you get that kind ofpattern of responding.
Travis Mallett (19:52):
Of course, the contrast to fixed interval
schedules is variable intervalschedules.
What are variable intervalschedules?
Hank Schlinger (20:00):
So a variable interval is to a fixed.
So a variable interval is to afixed interval as a variable
ratio is to a fixed ratio.
So instead of a fixed intervalof time there's an average
interval of time, a fixedinterval.
One minute schedule means thefirst response after every
minute will be reinforced.
Under a variable intervalschedule it's the first response
after an average interval oftime and just like variable
(20:23):
ratio schedules, variableinterval schedule, it's the
first response after an averageinterval of time and just like
variable ratio schedules,variable interval schedules
generate very persistentresponding.
The difference is variableratio schedules generate fairly
high persistent responding.
Variable interval schedulesgenerate fairly low persistent
responding.
And if you think about the waythe schedules are programmed, it
makes sense Because on avariable ratio schedule and a
(20:43):
fixed ratio for that matter theanimal really controls when they
get the reinforcer.
So if you're on a fixed ratioof 10, you can respond as
quickly or as slowly as you want.
You determine when thereinforcer comes.
You have to make 10 responses.
Same is true on a variableratio schedule.
On a variable interval schedule, the animal doesn't control
that.
It depends on whether areinforcement has been set up by
(21:04):
a clock.
Here's a good example Fishing.
People go out and fish.
You don't catch fish dependingon how many times you throw your
line in the water.
That's not how it works.
It's not every 10 times I throwmy line in the water I get a
fish, or on the average of every10 times.
It depends whether there arefish there and whether there are
(21:27):
fish swimming underneath yourboat or wherever you are.
That translates into time.
If time has passed and a fishhappens to be there when you
throw your line in the water,and of course the fish is hungry
or whatever, then the fishmight bite and so it's
unpredictable.
You don't know when the fishare there, unless, of course,
you can see in the water.
But you don't know when thefish are there, so that keeps
you doing that time and timeagain.
Checking email is anotherexample.
If you don't have an emailprogram that alerts you when
(21:48):
your emails come and you checkyour email yourself, this is
what I find.
I could be working on a paperor doing something, working
creating a test or something,and every few minutes I'll go
check my email.
Very persistent.
I don't check it quickly, it'snot fast, it's very slow, very
persistent behavior, and the oddthing about that is what's the
reinforcer?
For me?
The reinforcer is I get anemail, but most of the emails I
(22:09):
get are junk.
The chances of getting a reallyvaluable email, like the one I
got from you, for example,that's a pretty low probability.
So but there I am, checkingjust like the rat pressed the
lever, checking at a very lowbut very steady and persistent
(22:32):
rate.
Travis Mallett (22:33):
So one particular situation I'm
interested in is verbalinteractions, for example, how a
manager might choose theirwords, like giving praise at
particular moments or at certaintimes, to reinforce desired
behaviors.
Are there ways to use schedulesof reinforcement to optimize
results in our verbalinteractions at work?
Hank Schlinger (22:54):
Yes, but not just verbal behaviors, other
kinds of behaviors in businessand industry.
If you understand aboutreinforcement schedules, I
assume that many managers wouldlike their employees to respond
fairly persistently when they'reworking, that is, don't take a
lot of breaks.
So if you want them to respondin a fairly consistent,
persistent kind of way, then avariable schedule is obviously
(23:16):
your choice.
The problem is translating fromthe basic animal laboratory to
a complex human setting like abusiness or an industry.
Certainly, all of our verbalbehaviors are reinforced by
listeners and they're reinforcedon some kinds of reinforcement
schedules.
It's not clear what they areall the time but for example, as
I talk to you I can see younodding.
(23:36):
Or if I didn't have videos onthen you might ask me a question
, but you don't do that forevery word.
I say right, and sometimes if Istarted talking about things
that were unpleasant oruncomfortable for you, you might
stop nodding or looking at meor responding.
So all of our verbalinteractions are reinforced by
the people that listen to us andgenerally they're not
(23:57):
reinforced on continuousreinforcement schedules.
They're probably reinforced onvariable reinforcement schedules
.
So're probably reinforced onvariable reinforcement schedules
.
So I think it's not just verbalbehaviors in the workforce, but
it's also, whatever thebehaviors are that are required
for that particular setting,that the employers want the
employees to carry out.
Travis Mallett (24:14):
Now, across these schedules of reinforcement
, I get the sense that variableratios seem to produce the best
performance, and actually thereare people in the field who
argue that certain schedules ofreinforcement yield higher or
lower probabilities ofreinforced behavior, which might
be interpreted as showing thatone is better than the others.
Do you believe that that's aconstructive way to rank the
(24:36):
overall effectiveness ofdifferent schedules of
reinforcement?
Hank Schlinger (24:40):
Not really.
I think if you understand therates and patterns that each
schedule generates, then youcould decide If you, for example
, you wanted some individual torespond really quickly in a
short burst and you didn't mindif they took a pause afterwards.
The variable ratio is easier toprogram because the variable
(25:06):
interval schedule you have toprogram a reinforcer after an
average amount of time.
If you're explicitlyprogramming schedules of
reinforcement it's easier toprogram a VR schedule than a VI
schedule.
But I suppose that in normaleveryday interactions either of
those schedules probably are atplay in human interactions.
Travis Mallett (25:26):
I feel like we have a small philosophical
tangent brewing underneath thisconversation, more of a moral or
ethical concern that mightunderline all of our studies of
organizational behavior andpsychology in general,
especially when we start to getvery quantitative about this
controlling the schedule ofreinforcement to elicit a
particular response, drawingdiagrams, figuring out okay,
(25:49):
here's the optimal schedule ofreinforcement to get the pattern
of behavior I want.
Are we in danger of justtreating people as machines to
be programmed?
Just figure out the optimalinputs to get the outputs we
want?
And if so, could that backfirein other ways?
For example, I don't reallylike the thought of being
treated as a machine thatsomeone else can program to get
(26:10):
what they want.
So I wonder if this aspect ofmanagement could backfire
somehow.
Hank Schlinger (26:16):
I think the way to think about reinforcement is
this.
It's like the way that we wouldthink about other laws of
science.
They're at play whether we wantthem to be or believe them to
be or know them to be or not.
Reinforcement is at play in allhuman interactions.
You're reinforcing my behavior,I'm reinforcing your behavior
to the extent that we continueto converse with each other.
(26:38):
Now, I'm not explicitly orconsciously trying to reinforce
your behavior, and I don't thinkyou are trying to do mine that
way either.
And those are happening also inthe workplace too, between
supervisors and employees ormanagers and employees, whether
we know it or not, or whether welike it or not.
The question is this in aworkplace, do employers or
(26:58):
managers want to maximize theproductivity of their employees?
And I think the answer isalmost generally yes, because
that maximizes profits, etcetera.
So what's the way to do that?
The way to do that is to makesure that the behaviors that you
want in your employees makesure that you acknowledge those
behaviors, like I do with my son.
So when my son does somethingthat I want him to do, I'll
(27:21):
praise him or I'll allow himaccess to his iPad or to a TV
show, and I think the differenceis maybe the difference between
what we call positive versusnegative reinforcement.
Positive reinforcement generallymeans that you get something
for doing something In theworkplace.
What do you get?
You typically get money rightbecause you're paid for what you
(27:44):
do.
But if you talk to a lot ofpeople, I think what do you get?
You typically get money rightBecause you're paid for what you
do, but if you talk to a lot ofpeople, I think what people
really like and what they'llwork for is just being
acknowledged by their manager.
Hey man, I noticed that you didthis.
What a great job you did.
That's just terrific.
That's just great that you didthat.
That's free, and it's amazinghow few managers and supervisors
actually acknowledge what theiremployees do, what they're
(28:08):
doing, what they want them to do, and so I don't know that that
has to be programmed accordingto a certain schedule of
reinforcement.
Obviously, if you do it everysingle time, then it might be
less effective, because then ifyou don't do it, then there's
like well, where is it?
So that is generally probablybetter programmed out of the ER
schedule.
You don't want to tell themevery time, every few times,
(28:29):
every 10, 15 times On average.
The reinforcers don't have tobe tangible, they don't have to
be monetary, they can just beacknowledgement.
And I think that a lot ofemployees will complain that
when they do their job the bestthat they can, no one ever
notices, no one ever points itout, no one acknowledges it.
And that's free, it doesn'tcost the manager anything.
In that sense, you'reconsciously and intentionally
(28:52):
using reinforcement, but I don'tthink it reduces your employee
to anything.
I think it makes them feel morevalued and more worthy, et
cetera.
Travis Mallett (29:03):
That makes me think of a manager I knew, and
this was more of a reminder forhim to give positive feedback,
since I think it's, as you said,really easy for managers to
just focus on the problems thatneed to be fixed and not give
the praise when it's due.
But it seems related to theschedules of reinforcement.
So he would put five pennies inhis right pocket and then,
throughout the day, whenever hewould acknowledge a positive
(29:25):
thing an employee had done, hewould keep track by moving a
penny from his right pocket tohis left one, aiming to have
given his five compliments orpraises by the end of the day.
And when I first heard aboutthat I thought this sounds
really useful and veryintentional, but it doesn't
really track any specificschedule of reinforcement.
It might be a good way toengage in some positive
(29:48):
psychology, but I'm wondering ifit lacks some of the
effectiveness because it isn'ttargeting specific behaviors at
specific times to intentionallyelicit a specific pattern of
response.
It's a bit more haphazard,curious.
What your thoughts are on this?
Hank Schlinger (30:03):
I think that, based on the definition of
reinforcement that I gave at thebeginning, you have to look to
see whether it actuallyincreases the productivity of
your employees.
Just doing something like thatmay seem like it's a good idea,
but if it doesn't increase theproductivity, if you don't see a
change in their behaviors, thenit's not a reinforcer, then
you're not doing reinforcement,and that's an important feature
about reinforcement.
(30:23):
What some people think might bea reinforcer may not be one.
Maybe one employee doesn'treally care if you praise them
and acknowledge them, maybethere's something else you could
do.
And so I think there's anintentionality and as a parent,
you want to intentionally makesure you acknowledge and
reinforce behavior of your kidsthat you like and don't do it
when they are engaging inbehavior you don't like.
(30:45):
And the same thing is true inthe workplace.
But you have to know that whatyou think is a reinforcer
actually is increasing thebehavior that you want to see,
and that's when the quantitativepart helps.
You take data.
Here's the productivity of ouremployees.
It's pretty low, or oneemployee or whatever.
Now we're going to institutethis procedure where we're going
(31:05):
to provide praise or some kindof acknowledgement and you
continue taking data and arethese behaviors increasing or
are they not?
And if they're not, stop doingit and do something else and
then keep taking data so thatwhat works and what doesn't.
And there are a number ofpeople in my field who do
organizational behaviormanagement, who do this kind of
thing and have done it fordecades in various business and
(31:26):
industries, and it's extremelyeffective.
Travis Mallett (31:29):
Excellent, thank you.
We're about out of time, so Ijust want to say thank you for
joining us and teaching us aboutschedules of reinforcement.
Before we sign off, can youtell our listeners how they can
find you and your work?
Hank Schlinger (31:41):
I'm all over the internet mostly, I think in
good, positive ways.
They can check me out on GoogleScholar at California State
University, los Angeles.
All my books are on Amazon.
My most recent book has awebsite, wwwbuildgoodbehaviorcom
, so if anybody wants to emailme, they can find my email
address through Cal State LA,and I'm happy to hear from
(32:01):
people.
Travis Mallett (32:02):
Perfect and thank you very much.
Hank Schlinger (32:04):
Thank you, travis, I appreciate being on.
Travis Mallett (32:26):
Wow, that was a lot of information.
So many different ways to givereinforcements and get different
responses.
So did we get an answer to ourquestion is there a best
schedule of reinforcement?
Actually, when I was writingthis episode and preparing for
it, I found contradictoryanswers.
Some organizational behaviortextbooks, along with other
(32:47):
online resources, claim thatvariable ratio schedules are the
best or the most effective, andI wrote my interview questions
with this assumption in mind.
Dr Schlinger challenged thatassumption and pointed out that
it's more complicated than that,as we've come to expect from
our journey on this show.
Whether one schedule ofreinforcement is better or worse
depends on the situation andthe pattern of responding you're
(33:09):
hoping to achieve.
But you may still be wonderingabout how my son responds to the
different schedules ofreinforcement.
When we're playing, when I usecontinuous reinforcement, giving
a big, dramatic reaction forevery big high five, he responds
by giving high fives in analmost consistent rhythm.
They're solid high fives, butnothing too dramatic.
(33:30):
But when I use a variable ratioreinforcement schedule, giving
him that funny reaction everythree times on average, he
furiously speeds up giving solidhigh fives as fast as he
possibly can, and he laughs farmore hysterically when he gets
the anticipated response thanwhen he gets it consistently
every time.
It's quite a dramaticdifference in his reaction
(33:51):
between the two schedules ofreinforcement and I can
confidently say, based on thisvery unscientific experiment,
that perhaps if we'reintentional with how we dole out
rewards or other reinforcers,we might find ourselves getting
closer to what we're looking forand we might just find
ourselves with more enthusiasticand happy employees as a result
.
(34:11):
This week, think about some ofthe rewards or reinforcers you
offer in your workplace.
This could include praise,bonuses, time off, public
recognition or other incentives.
What kind of schedule andreinforcement is currently in
place, if any?
Are we just like Dwight, givingout random rewards haphazardly?
(34:32):
Could we experiment with adifferent schedule of
reinforcement to try to getbetter results?
As usual, these managementtheories are intended to give
you tools to adapt and mold toyour specific circumstances.
So with that, thank you forjoining us on another episode of
the Management Theory Toolbox.
Stay tuned for our next episode, where we broaden our horizon
from operant conditioning andtalk about how social
(34:54):
interactions impact employeelearning.
Until then, keep learning, keepgrowing and keep adding to your
management theory toolbox,thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com