Describing Work Environments as Reinforcer Systems: Reinforcement Schedules versus Reinforcer Classes

Abstract

Ten judges (representing two levels of expertise) rated 183 occupational titles (representing every major DOT category) on three rating dimensions: predictable versus nonpredictable (to infer the variable vs fixed reinforcement schedule), self versus nonself (to infer the ratio vs interval reinforcement schedule), and social versus nonsocial (to partition the nonself dimension further). These ratings were compared with scores on the same three dimensions based on Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) ratings of interest and temperament requirements for the 183 occupations. Finally, groupings of occupations based on inferred reinforcement schedule were compared with occupational groupings based on independently obtained ratings of reinforcer classes (Occupational Reinforcer Patterns). Results showed that occupations can be characterized reliably in terms of ratings on the three rating dimensions. Such inferred reinforcement schedule ratings are consistent with inferred reinforcement schedules estimated from DOT ratings of interest and temperament requirements. Reinforcement schedule inferred from these ratings is related to, but different from, reinforcer class, as represented by Occupational Reinforcer Patterns.