Overjustification Research Articles

How sales promotion influences consumers’ physical exercise and purchase behaviors: evidence from mobile exercise app data

Purpose Firms can benefit from designing sales promotion based on the analysis of consumers' physical exercise and purchase data. This study aims to study mobile exercise app data to explore how purchasing a promoted or nonpromoted product affects exercisers’ subsequent exercise and purchase behaviors.Design/methodology/approach Drawing from the theoretical framework of overjustification effect, this study empirically examines the effects of the purchase of promoted – monetary and nonmonetary – or nonpromoted products on relationships (1) between past and subsequent exercise behaviors and (2) between past exercise and subsequent purchase behaviors. Novel data of one million exercise activities and purchase transactions created by 7,517 mobile exercise app users were collected.Findings The results reveal that monetary and nonmonetary promotions have a negative effect on overall consumers’ amount of physical exercise but increase heavy exercisers’ exercise amount. In addition, nonmonetary (monetary) promotion has a positive (negative) effect on consumers’ purchase expenditure but has no moderating effect on the exercise–expenditure relationship.Originality/value This study provides a theoretical framework explaining how to mitigate the dark side of sales promotions while targeting right exercise consumer segments with the right promotion campaigns.

Points and the Delivery of Gameful Experiences in a Gamified Environment: Framework Development and Case Analysis.

BackgroundPoints represent one of the most widely used game mechanics in gamification. They have been used as a means to provide feedback to users. They visually show user performance and are used along with other game mechanics to produce synergy effects. However, using points without analyzing the application environment and targets adversely affects users.ObjectiveThis study aims to identify the problems that users encounter when points are applied improperly, to solve problems based on an analysis of previous studies and actual point use cases, and to develop a point design framework to deliver gameful experiences.MethodsThree problems were identified by analyzing previous studies. The first problem is points that only accumulate. The second is points that emphasize a user’s difference from other people. The third pertains to the reward distribution problem that occurs when points are used as rewards.ResultsWe developed a framework by deriving 3 criteria for applying points. The first criterion is based on the passive acquisition approach and the active use approach. The second criterion is used to classify points as “high/low” and “many/few” types. The third criterion is the classification of personal reward points and group reward points based on segmentation of the reward criteria. We developed 8 types of points based on the derived point design framework.ConclusionsWe expect that some of the problems that users experience when using points can be solved. Furthermore, we expect that some of the problems that arise when points are used as rewards, such as pointsification and the overjustification effect, can be solved. By solving such problems, we suggest a direction that enables a gameful experience for point users and improves the core value delivery through gameful experiences. We also suggest a gameful experience delivery method in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

For the love of it: The overjustification effect and motivation crowding theory as the missing pieces in discussions of basic income’s (a)motivating potential

For the love of it: The overjustification effect and motivation crowding theory as the missing pieces in discussions of basic income’s (a)motivating potential

Hedonic or utilitarian

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how the product type (hedonic product and utilitarian product) and reward type (hedonic gift and utilitarian gift) influence customer referral likelihood in referral reward program. Design/methodology/approach The authors test the effect of the product type and reward type on referral likelihood through two studies. Study 1 produces a 2 (product type: hedonic product and utilitarian product) × 2 (reward type: hedonic gift and utilitarian gift) factorial design to test H1, H2 and H3, that is, the effect of the product type and reward type on referral likelihood and their interaction effect. On the basis of study 1, study 2 will select different subjects, different products and different incentive allocation schemes to test H1, H2 and H3 again. Findings The results are as follow: first, the product type has significant influences on referral likelihood. Compared with a utilitarian product, customers are more likely to make referrals when consuming a hedonic product. Second, the product type and reward type have significant interactions to referral likelihood. When rewarded a hedonic gift, customers who consumed the hedonic product have great willing to make referrals; however, when rewarded the utilitarian gift, customer who consumed the utilitarian product have great willing to make referrals. Originality/value The authors’ findings contribute to the literature of consumers’ recommendation in the following aspects. First, from the perspective of enterprises which launch referral reward program, the present research demonstrates the product type (hedonic product and utilitarian product) and reward type (hedonic gift and utilitarian gift) influence customer referral likelihood. Previous studies discuss attributes of product that influence consumers’ referral likelihood, such as product sensitivity (Kornish and Li, 2010), product involvement (Zhu et al., 2011), brand strength (Ryu and Feick, 2007) and price (Xiao et al., 2011). However, few studies focus on the hedonic and utilitarian attributes of products and explore their impact on the willingness to recommend. This paper makes a useful supplement to the research gap. Most previous studies simply divide the type of reward into tangible and intangible (Shi and Wojnicki, 2007), cash and coupon (Wang, 2010) or cash and gift (Huang et al., 2013). This paper enriches the research on reward types and refines the types of gifts in a referral reward program. The present research divides the type of reward into hedonic gifts and utilitarian gifts, and applies benefit congruency frameworks (Chandon et al., 2000), attitude theory (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993) and over-justification effect (Deci and Ryan, 1985).

Gamification in Action: Theoretical and Practical Considerations for Medical Educators.

Gamification involves the application of game design elements to traditionally nongame contexts. It is increasingly being used as an adjunct to traditional teaching strategies in medical education to engage the millennial learner and enhance adult learning. The extant literature has focused on determining whether the implementation of gamification results in better learning outcomes, leading to a dearth of research examining its theoretical underpinnings within the medical education context. The authors define gamification, explore how gamification works within the medical education context using self-determination theory as an explanatory mechanism for enhanced engagement and motivation, and discuss common roadblocks and challenges to implementing gamification.Although previous gamification research has largely focused on determining whether implementation of gamification in medical education leads to better learning outcomes, the authors recommend that future research should explore how and under what conditions gamification is likely to be effective. Selective, purposeful gamification that aligns with learning goals has the potential to increase learner motivation and engagement and, ultimately, learning. In line with self-determination theory, game design elements can be used to enhance learners' feelings of relatedness, autonomy, and competence to foster learners' intrinsic motivation. Poorly applied game design elements, however, may undermine these basic psychological needs by the overjustification effect or through negative effects of competition. Educators must, therefore, clearly understand the benefits and pitfalls of gamification in curricular design, take a thoughtful approach when integrating game design elements, and consider the types of learners and overarching learning objectives.

A quantitative review of overjustification effects in persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

The overjustification hypothesis suggests that extrinsic rewards undermine intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic rewards are common in strengthening behavior in persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities; we examined overjustification effects in this context. A literature search yielded 65 data sets permitting comparison of responding during an initial no-reinforcement phase to a subsequent no-reinforcement phase, separated by a reinforcement phase. We used effect sizes to compare response levels in these two no-reinforcement phases. Overall, the mean effect size did not differ from zero; levels in the second no-reinforcement phase were equally likely to be higher or lower than in the first. However, in contrast to the overjustification hypothesis, levels were higher in the second no-reinforcement phase when comparing the single no-reinforcement sessions immediately before and after reinforcement. Outcomes consistent with the overjustification hypothesis were somewhat more likely when the target behavior occurred at relatively higher levels prior to reinforcement.

Extrinsic rewards undermine altruistic tendencies in 20-month-olds.

The current study investigated the influence of rewards on very young children's helping behavior. After 20-month-old infants received a material reward during a treatment phase, they subsequently were less likely to engage in further helping during a test phase as compared with infants who had previously received social praise or no reward at all. This so-called overjustification effect suggests that even the earliest helping behaviors of young children are intrinsically motivated and that socialization practices involving extrinsic rewards can undermine this tendency.

Evaluations of the Overjustification Effect

The utility of reinforcement-based procedures has been well established in the behavior analysis literature and is commonly used in educational settings. However, the overjustification effect is one commonly cited criticism of programs that use tangible items as reinforcers. In the current studies, we evaluated the effects of tangible rewards contingent on engagement with leisure activities. We further evaluated the amount of engagement after the reward condition was discontinued. In Studies 1 and 2, tangible rewards were delivered for engaging with a preferred activity when only one leisure activity or several activities were available, respectively. Study 1 results did not support the overjustification hypothesis. Study 2 participants showed a decrease in activity engagement following the reward condition. It was not clear whether this was a result of extended exposure or overjustification. Thus, in Study 3, we extended exposure to preferred activities in one context without rewards. Study 3 results suggested that extended exposure to a preferred activity had effects that look similar to the overjustification effect but are probably best described as satiation.

Motivation: Origins of the Extrinsic/Intrinsic Debate

For over three decades cognitive researchers have studied the overjustification effect, indicating that positively reinforcing behaviors that are intrinsically motivated decreases such behaviors. As a result, some in education advocate that positive reinforcement be limited in educational settings. These studies are reviewed as well as several single-subject studies on the effects of extrinsically reinforcing intrinsically motivated behaviors. While group studies often detect an overjustification effect, it is short-lived and does not occur when positive reinforcement is implemented correctly. Positive reinforcement is a necessary component during the acquisition and maintenance phases of learning.

An evaluation of the overjustification effect across multiple contingency arrangements

AbstractThe overjustification effect suggests that external rewards may decrease intrinsically reinforced behaviors; however, this conclusion is often drawn from pre‐ and post‐assessment data. The majority of studies published in this area do not take repeated measures of behavior. In addition, previous research has not distinguished between the use of rewards and reinforcers by demonstrating a reinforcement effect; hence, it is possible that the occurrence of the overjustification effect varies depending on the nature of the stimuli that are used. This study extended previous research by evaluating whether the overjustification effect was relevant to the use of non‐reinforcing stimuli, reinforcers, or both. The effects of verbal praise were also evaluated in relation to the overjustification effect. Results indicated that behavior did not decrease below baseline levels following the contingent delivery of non‐reinforcing stimuli, reinforcers, or verbal praise. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Dynamics of Contracts and Generalized Trustworthiness

Generalized trust, or trust in strangers, has been traced to a wide range of societal benefits. But generalized trust is not sustainable in the absence of widespread generalized trustworthiness, that is, the tendency for strangers to honor trust extended to them. While there has been much work on the origins and consequences of generalized trust, surprisingly little research has addressed the antecedents of generalized trustworthiness. We argue that generalized trustworthiness is negatively affected by prior exposure to a ubiquitous extrinsic motivator of trustworthy behavior, contracts. Specifically, drawing on classic social psychological research on the overjustification effect, we argue that actors previously constrained by contracts will attribute their own `trustworthy' behavior in those interactions to the contract itself. According to overjustification arguments, this misattribution should lead to a decrease in intrinsic motivations to act trust-worthily in interactions where the actor is not constrained by the contract. Results of a new experiment support this argument.

Paradox, reprimand and extinction in adults with mental handicap

To assess the efficacy of paradoxical directives, levels of challenging behaviour during 2 weeks of paradox, reprimand and extinction were compared with baseline levels in four adults with mental handicaps attending a day centre. Paradox was the most effective procedure for reducing the frequency and severity of challenging behaviour by an average of over 70% by the end of 2 weeks and up to 90% in certain subjects; extinction was least effective. Paradox was most effective with more defiant subjects, when staff rated treatment success as low, when improvement using extinction and reprimand was poorest, and in reducing aggressive behaviour. The present authors suggest the overjustification effect offers an explanation for the effects of paradox.

Extrinsic rewards undermine altruistic tendencies in 20-month-olds.

The current study investigated the influence of rewards on very young children's helping behavior. After 20-month-old infants received a material reward during a treatment phase, they subsequently were less likely to engage in further helping during a test phase as compared with infants who had previously received social praise or no reward at all. This so-called overjustification effect suggests that even the earliest helping behaviors of young children are intrinsically motivated and that socialization practices involving extrinsic rewards can undermine this tendency.

“Kids Choice” School lunch program increases children's fruit and vegetable acceptance

The “Kids Choice” school lunch program used token reinforcement, food choice, and peer participation to increase children's fruit and vegetable consumption without later drops in food preference sometimes found in past research and often called ‘overjustification effects.’ Participants included 188 school children (92 boys, 96 girls; mean age =8.0; 95% Caucasian). After four baseline meals, children were randomly assigned for 12 meals to receive token reinforcement for eating either fruits or vegetables. Observers recorded fruit and vegetable consumption and provided token reinforcement by punching holes into nametags each day children ate their assigned foods, then once a week children could trade these tokens for small prizes. Fruit and vegetable preference ratings were gathered with child interviews during baseline, and during follow-up conditions two weeks and seven months after the token reinforcement program. Consumption increased for fruit and for vegetables and the increases lasted throughout reinforcement conditions. Two weeks after the program, preference ratings showed increases for fruit and for vegetables. Seven months later, fruit and vegetable preferences had returned to baseline levels, suggesting the need for an ongoing school lunch program to keep preferences high, but also showing no signs of “overjustification effects” from the token reinforcement used in the “Kids Choice” school lunch program.

The Classroom as a Social Psychology Laboratory

Abstract The typical classroom illustrates many common social psychology concepts and phenomena, although often with less–than–desirable results. I give examples of self–handicapping, self–serving bias, belief perseverance, the fundamental attribution error, social categorization, and the overjustification effect as they occur in the classroom. It is possible that alerting instructors and students to these principles may lessen their occurrence.

Incentives and Prosocial Behavior

We develop a theory of prosocial behavior that combines heterogeneity in individual altruism and greed with concerns for social reputation or self-respect. Rewards or punishments (whether material or image-related) create doubt about the true motive for which good deeds are performed, and this “overjustification effect” can induce a partial or even net crowding out of prosocial behavior by extrinsic incentives. We also identify the settings that are conducive to multiple social norms and, more generally, those that make individual actions complements or substitutes, which we show depends on whether stigma or honor is (endogenously) the dominant reputational concern. Finally, we analyze the socially optimal level of incentives and how monopolistic or competitive sponsors depart from it. Sponsor competition is shown to potentially reduce social welfare.

Re-Examining the Overjustification Effect

The purpose of the present investigation was to extend the research related to the possible negative side effects of extrinsic reinforcement on children's compliant behavior, particularly the overjustification effect. Specifically, this study examined the effects of a token reinforcement procedure in a naturalistic environment (third grade classroom) on children's compliance with classroom rules. Three students exhibiting high compliance with classroom rules were selected. Results indicated that the introduction of a token reinforcement program contingent on the occurrence of rule compliance had no detrimental effect on their rule compliant behavior following the withdrawal of the token procedure (i.e., comparison of Baseline I and Baseline II). Thus, the overjustification effect was not supported.

Incentives and Prosocial Behavior

We build a theory of prosocial behavior that combines heterogeneity in individual altruism and greed with concerns for social reputation or self-respect. The presence of rewards or punishments creates doubt as to the true motive for which good deeds are performed, and this overjustification effect can result in a net crowding out of prosocial behavior by extrinsic incentives. The model also allows us to identify settings that are conducive to multiple social norms of behavior, and those where disclosing one's generosity may backfire. Finally, we analyze the equilibrium contracts offered by sponsors, including the level and confidentiality or publicity of incentives. Sponsor competition may cause rewards to bid down rather than up, and can even reduce social welfare by requiring agents to engage in inefficient sacrifices.

An idiographic investigation of the effects of ability- and effort-based praise on math performance and persistence.

A growing debate exists over the possibility that various types of external rewards may have negative effects on intrinsic motivation. Past research has produced conflicting results. The present study examines past research in light of behavioral principles and utilizes single-subject research methods to examine the potential effects of ability- and effort-based verbal praise statements on mathematics task performance and task persistence. Results of this study do not support the criticism uniformly leveled against external rewards generally or ability-based praise specifically. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed. Keywords: verbal praise; effect; external rewards; intrinsic motivation; math performance. ********** The effects of rewards on task performance, task behavior, and intrinsic motivation have been debated over the past 30 years. As early as 1960, educational theorists warned that using rewards as incentives to promote learning might decrease children's natural curiosity and devalue learning activities and opportunities in children's eyes (Neil, 1960). These warnings appeared to be validated by some experimental work produced in the early 1970's. Deci (1971, 1972) and Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett (1973), for example, demonstrated that rewards could have a decremental on the performance of previously highly-preferred tasks. In these and dozens of similar studies that followed, an experimental group was given a reward for the performance of some interesting task while a control group performed the task without reward. Next, intrinsic motivation to perform the task was assessed in a session where no rewards were available and subjects could choose from among several tasks, with one being the target activity. If, during the free-play session, the rewarded group spent less time on the target activity than the control group, it was assumed that the extrinsic rewards had undermined intrinsic motivation, a phenomenon labeled as the overjustification effect (Lepper et al., 1973). Although evidence for the hypothesis has been replicated a number of times, an approximately equal number of studies have failed to replicate it. Thus, there has been considerable debate over the last several decades regarding the accuracy, relevance, limitations, and implications of the over justification hypothesis in both experimental and applied settings. The rigor of the debate as well as the abundance of research on the subject may most easily be seen in the number of meta-analyses examining the effect. Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (1999) analyzed 128 studies and concluded that rewards significantly undermined both free choice intrinsic motivation and self-reported interest. Other meta-analyses conducted by Cameron and colleagues (Cameron & Pierce, 1994; Cameron, Banko, & Pierce, 2001) produced findings contrary to Deci et al.'s and went further by pointing out rather significant methodological shortcomings in the often-cited studies which have demonstrated the effect. For example, use of the term reward in place of reinforcer in much of the literature may be significant in that rewards are seldom, if ever, empirically identified as reinforcers for the target activity (Cameron & Pierce, 1994). In another meta-analysis, Wiersma (1992) also found the effects of rewards on intrinsic motivation to be inconsistent and asserted that one reason may be methodological differences in the dependent variable of past studies. For instance, when the dependent variable is behavior during a free-time session, the has been demonstrated; however, when the dependent variable is measured as task performance, rewards often served to increase performance. This is an important distinction. From a theoretical standpoint, what cognitive theorists are referring to when they speak of intrinsic motivation may from a behavioral perspective simply be seen as task performance and task persistence. …

Effectiveness of trained peer models to encourage food acceptance in preschool children

The present study examined the effectiveness of trained peer models to encourage food acceptance in children during preschool meals, and one month later. It also considered whether trained peer models risk the over-justification effects proposed to reduce later food acceptance after reinforcement has been offered for eating a specific food. Three novel foods were presented to eight tables of 38 children during five preschool meals. After three baseline meals, 16 children were trained to serve as peer models of food acceptance for one of the foods in exchange for small toy reinforcements, with each food assigned to either no model, girl model, or boy model conditions during the next two meals. The remaining 22 children served as observers whose food bites were recorded during baseline and modeled meals. Girl models were more effective than boy models to increase food acceptance from baseline to modeled meals for children of either gender. One month later, child interviews measured delayed food acceptance using food preference ratings and number of bites consumed. For observers, delayed food acceptance did not differ according to the food's previous modeling condition, suggesting that effectiveness of trained peer models does not last beyond the modeled meals. Trained peer models gave the highest preference ratings to the specific food they had eaten in exchange for toy reinforcements one month before, and they ate as much of this food as other foods, offering no evidence for detrimental over-justification effects on food acceptance as a result of serving as peer models.