James L. Squires

Doctoral Dissertation Announcement

---

Candidate: James L. Squires

Degree of: Doctor of Philosophy

Department: Psychology

Title: The Effects of Rule Specificity and Contingency Delivery Follow-Through on Performance of an Analog Office Task

Committee:
Dr. Alyce Dickinson, Chair
Dr. John Austin
Dr. Bradley Huitema
Dr. Heather McGee
Dr. Kevin Munson

Date: Friday, October 19, 2012 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
1509 Wood Hall

Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether the specificity of rule statements and contingency delivery (i.e., follow-through or lack thereof) as described in the rule will impact participant task performance.  Participants include 37 undergraduate students at a Midwestern University. The dependent variable is the number of correctly completed checks processed in a simulated check entry program. The independent variables are specificity of rule statements and contingency delivery. A 2x2 factor design is used. Participants are randomly assigned to one of four groups: Group One receives rule statements that specify the exact number of checks to be processed during a given session and the contingency is delivered as stated in the rule statement, contingent on performance; Group Two receives rule statements that specify the exact number of checks to be processed during a given session and the contingency is delivered inconsistently on a variable ratio three (VR-3) schedule; Group Three receives rule statements that specify the requirement for the participant to perform at an ambiguous performance criterion during the session and the contingency is delivered as stated in the rule statement, contingent on performance; Group Four receives rule statements that specify the requirement for the participant to perform at an ambiguous performance criterion during the session and the contingency is delivered inconsistently on a variable ratio three (VR-3) schedule.  Results show there is a significant effect in performance related to the specificity of the rule statement. Participants who receive rule statements that contain the specified rule condition enter significantly more checks correctly than do participants who receive vague rules. There is no statically significant difference in checks entered correctly from participants who receive the consistent delivery condition versus participants who receive the inconsistent delivery condition.