pmc logo image
Logo of jeabehavJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Web SiteSubscriber LoginJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis Web SiteSubscription InformationInformation for AuthorsJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Web Site

Formats:

J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 May; 47(3): 261–271.
PMCID: PMC1348309
Superstitious behavior in humans
Koichi Ono
Abstract
Twenty undergraduate students were exposed to single response-independent schedules of reinforcer presentation, fixed-time or variable-time, each with values of 30 and 60 s. The reinforcer was a point on a counter accompanied by a red lamp and a brief buzzer. Three color signals were presented, without consistent relation to reinforcer or to the subjects' behavior. Three large levers were available, but the subjects were not asked to perform any particular behavior. Three of the 20 subjects developed persistent superstitious behavior. One engaged in a pattern of lever-pulling responses that consisted of long pulls after a few short pulls; the second touched many things in the experimental booth; the third showed biased responding called sensory superstition. However, most subjects did not show consistent superstitious behavior. Reinforcers can operate effectively on human behavior even in the absence of a response-reinforcer contingency and can, in some cases, shape stable superstitious patterns. However, superstitious behavior is not a consistent outcome of exposure of human subjects to response-independent reinforcer deliveries.
Full text
Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.6M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • APPEL JB, HISS RH. The discrimination of contingent from noncontingent reinforcement. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1962 Feb;55:37–39. [PubMed]
  • Blue S, Sherman JG, Pierrel R. Differential responding as a function of auditory stimulus intensity without differential reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 May;15(3):371–377. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Brown PL, Jenkins HM. Auto-shaping of the pigeon's key-peck. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jan;11(1):1–8. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • BRUNER A, REVUSKY SH. Collateral behavior in humans. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Oct;4:349–350. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • CATANIA AC, CUTTS D. Experimental control of superstitious responding inhumans. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6:203–208. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Falk JL. Conditions producing psychogenic polydipsia in animals. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1969 May 15;157(2):569–593. [PubMed]
  • Falk JL. The nature and determinants of adjunctive behavior. Physiol Behav. 1971 May;6(5):577–588. [PubMed]
  • Kello JE, Innis NK, Staddon JE. Eccentric stimuli on multiple fixed-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Mar;23(2):233–240. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • KIEFFER JD. DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE RATES CORRELATED WITH THE PRESENCE OF "NEUTRAL" STIMULI. J Exp Anal Behav. 1965 Jul;8:227–229. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Killeen PR. Superstition: a matter of bias, not detectability. Science. 1978 Jan 6;199(4324):88–90. [PubMed]
  • Lachter GD. Some temporal parameters of non-contingent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Sep;16(2):207–217. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lachter GD, Cole BK, Schoenfeld WN. Response rate under varying frequency of non-contingent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Mar;15(2):233–236. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lander DG. Stimulus bias in the absence of food reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Nov;11(6):711–714. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lattal KA. Reponse-reinforcer independence and conventional extinction after fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Jul;18(1):133–140. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lattal KA. Response-reinforcer dependence and independence in multiple and mixed schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Sep;20(2):265–271. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lattal KA. Combinations of response-reinforcer dependence and independence. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):357–362. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • MORSE WH, SKINNER BF. A second type of superstition in the pigeon. Am J Psychol. 1957 Jun;70(2):308–311. [PubMed]
  • Neuringer AJ. Superstitious key pecking after three peck-produced reinforcements. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):127–134. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Sizemore OJ, Lattal KA. Unsignalled delay of reinforcement in variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Sep;30(2):169–175. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Starr BC, Staddon JE. Sensory superstition on multiple interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Mar;37(2):267–280. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Timberlake W, Lucas GA. The basis of superstitious behavior: chance contingency, stimulus substitution, or appetitive behavior? J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Nov;44(3):279–299. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Wasserman EA, Neunaber DJ. College students' responding to and rating of contingency relations: The role of temporal contiguity. J Exp Anal Behav. 1986 Jul;46(1):15–35. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Zeiler MD. Fixed and variable schedules of response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jul;11(4):405–414. [PMC free article] [PubMed]