When living at home, I used to drop off my little brother at school before heading to my own classes. This was generally fine, but there was no task I hated more than waking up at 5:30 to shovel and defrost my car in the freezing cold per my parents' worries about safety. When I returned home from my first semester of college after being spoiled with mild Virginia winters, I refused to partake in this miserable chore. So, on the first morning upon my return, my teenage brother woke up before dawn and shoveled out the car for me. My parents were stunned. Jason, an autonomous agent, doing a favor for his sister out of the kindness of his own heart? Of course not! I had obviously set up an incentive structure.
On our daily route, we passed a Dunkin' Donuts maybe a half a mile from the school. I promised Jason that if he cleaned and defrosted my car, I would stop and buy him a donut. Not only did he get a ride and a donut, but he got the added benefit of looking like an angel to our oblivious parents. This is an example of observational equivalence, because they could not tell just through observation what was driving Jason's behavior. They wrongly attributed it to his kindness, when really he was reaping rewards. Of course, I was sure to include a sanction as well (because I wanted an effective incentive structure and definitely not because cold mornings make me grouchy). Jason decided to sleep in one especially cold morning, so when I stopped by Dunkin' and got myself a nice hot coffee, I opened the car door and told him to get out. This seemed to be an effective punishment (albeit a little cruel), because he started my car every morning for the remainder of break. One might say siblings should not have such a transactional relationship, but it has worked for the past two winters and neither of us has shown any intent to change it.
No comments:
Post a Comment