SUPERSTITIOUS BEHAVIOR IN HUMANS

TLDR

The experiment exposed 20 undergraduates to fixed‑time and variable‑time response‑independent reinforcer schedules (30–60 s) with a point counter, red lamp, and buzzer, while presenting unrelated color signals and offering levers that were not required to be used. Although three of the 20 participants exhibited persistent superstitious behaviors—ranging from patterned lever‑pulling to sensory superstition—most did not, indicating that response‑independent reinforcers can shape such patterns but do not reliably produce superstition.

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.