The Timing and Magnitude of Monetary Reward: Testing Hypotheses from Expectancy vs. Reciprocity Theory
| dc.contributor.author | Lehman, Philip Kent | en |
| dc.contributor.committeechair | Geller, E. Scott | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Winett, Richard A. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Axsom, Danny K. | en |
| dc.contributor.department | Psychology | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2011-08-06T15:58:26Z | en |
| dc.date.adate | 2003-11-18 | en |
| dc.date.available | 2011-08-06T15:58:26Z | en |
| dc.date.issued | 2003-09-26 | en |
| dc.date.rdate | 2004-11-18 | en |
| dc.date.sdate | 2003-11-13 | en |
| dc.description.abstract | Social psychologists have noted that compliance strategies based on the social norm of reciprocity can be an effective tool for changing behavior (e.g., Cialdini, 2001). In contrast to expectancy-based behavior-change strategies, which offer a reward after a behavior is completed (post-behavior reward); reciprocity-based strategies present the reward first in the form of a gift (pre-behavior reward). Although there are no explicit contingencies attached to the gift, a sense of obligation to reciprocate may be a powerful motivator to comply with the request. It was hypothesized that pre-behavior rewards would be more effective than post-behavior rewards at low magnitudes of reward, and that both strategies would be effective at higher levels. This study examined effects of the timing and magnitude ($1 vs. $10) of a cash reward on compliance with a request to use a specially designed thank-you card recognizing prosocial and proenvironmental behavior. The hypotheses were not supported. The highest rate of compliance occurred in the post-behavior $10 condition, where 35.5% of participants complied, followed by post-behavior $1 (18.8%), pre-behavior $1 (12.9%) and pre-behavior $10 (8.8%). Pairwise comparisons revealed compliance in the $10 post-behavior condition was significantly higher than the rate of compliance in the $1 and $10 pre-behavior conditions, Chi-Square (1, n = 62) = 4.31, p < .05 and Chi-Square (1, n = 65) = 6.82, p < .01 respectively. The lack of evidence for the effectiveness of pre-behavior reward strategy is discussed and contrasted with previous findings. | en |
| dc.description.degree | Master of Science | en |
| dc.format.medium | ETD | en |
| dc.identifier.other | etd-11132003-193736 | en |
| dc.identifier.sourceurl | http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-11132003-193736 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10919/9846 | en |
| dc.publisher | Virginia Tech | en |
| dc.relation.haspart | lehmanthesis.pdf | en |
| dc.rights | In Copyright | en |
| dc.rights.uri | http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ | en |
| dc.subject | Expectancy | en |
| dc.subject | Reward | en |
| dc.subject | Reciprocity | en |
| dc.subject | Reward Timing | en |
| dc.title | The Timing and Magnitude of Monetary Reward: Testing Hypotheses from Expectancy vs. Reciprocity Theory | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | en |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Psychology | en |
| thesis.degree.grantor | Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | en |
| thesis.degree.level | masters | en |
| thesis.degree.name | Master of Science | en |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1