Abstract
JEFFREY, D. BALFOUR; HARTMANN, DONALD P.; and GELFAND, DONNA M. A Comparison of the Effects of Contingent Reinforcement, Nurturance, and Nonreinforcement on Imitative Learning. CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1972, 43, 1053-1059. 45 secondand third-grade Ss made choices on a preference task immediately after observing the model's (M) choices. In Phase I of the task M was present, while in Phase II M was absent. One-third of the Ss received contingent reinforcement for matching M's responses in Phase I, one-third experienced a prematching nurturant interaction with M, and the remaining Ss received neither. The results indicated (a) that in both phases imitation was strongest for contingently reinforced Ss; (b) that in Phase I, Ss exposed to the unresponsive model significantly mismatched (negative set) while Ss treated nurturantly matched at chance levels; and (c) that in Phase II the latter 2 groups matched at chance levels and did not differ from one another.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
