Caravaggio - The Cardsharps |
One of the most interesting discoveries made by B F Skinner and other behaviourists was the powerfully, addictive effect of irregularly received rewards.
If a pigeon is conditioned to peck a switch in order to get some food, it will keep pecking the switch even if food is
only given at infrequent, random intervals. Not only that, but the randomness itself seems to
exert a powerful conditioning influence. Even if the reward is removed
altogether, it can be a long time before the pigeon gives up on the
switch.
It works on humans too and is the basis of gambling
addiction. A few wins and some people become addicted even if wins remain rare and paltry - that's enough to maintain the addiction. Even the wins of other people may act as a rewarding stimulus. Lotteries are a good example, as is stock-market investing and hunting for antiques.
But it isn't just gambling. Many other human activities are similar to gambling in that they are significantly addictive and the addiction is maintained by irregular rewards.
Compulsive TV viewing is just one example where a few random scraps of worthwhile quality are sufficient to keep people switching on for their entire lives, even though there is no prospect of the time invested ever being repaid.
A third-rate golfer may be so stimulated by the occasional good round or even the rare sweetly-hit stroke that they play the game all their lives, come rain or shine. They don’t need the stimulus of winning because those rare successes keep them hooked on the illusion that they love the game for its own sake. There may be other factors of course, but the irregular reward is vital to maintain the addiction.
But it isn't just gambling. Many other human activities are similar to gambling in that they are significantly addictive and the addiction is maintained by irregular rewards.
Compulsive TV viewing is just one example where a few random scraps of worthwhile quality are sufficient to keep people switching on for their entire lives, even though there is no prospect of the time invested ever being repaid.
A third-rate golfer may be so stimulated by the occasional good round or even the rare sweetly-hit stroke that they play the game all their lives, come rain or shine. They don’t need the stimulus of winning because those rare successes keep them hooked on the illusion that they love the game for its own sake. There may be other factors of course, but the irregular reward is vital to maintain the addiction.
Supporters of dull football clubs may endure a lifetime of frustration for the sake of a few good matches, rare but spectacular goals and a smattering of unexpected wins. It feels like loyalty of course, which it is, but it is also the powerful effect of a random reward and is much the same as gambling. In both cases, the punter is happy to spend time and money on a few unpredictable, paltry rewards.
As for loyalty, that too can be induced and maintained by a random pat on the back. Again there may be other factors at work, but the effect of an occasional word of encouragement is much the same as the gambler's occasional win.
We see it in superstition where a few random events may strongly reinforce superstitious beliefs.
And speaking of superstition, we see it in scientists who rewarded by one or two temporary or irrelevant correlations spend the remainder of their careers pursuing illusions. A few high-profile successes, whether real or imaginary and the addiction kicks in. It seems to be particularly important in climate science so we can be quite sure that even one mild winter will set the ball rolling again.
6 comments:
Supporters of dull football clubs may endure a lifetime of frustration for the sake of a few good matches, rare but spectacular goals and a smattering of unexpected wins. It feels like loyalty of course, which it is, but it is also the powerful effect of a random reward and is much the same as gambling. In both cases, the punter is happy to spend time and money on a few unpredictable, paltry rewards.
When viewed in that way, it all seems so pointless, doesn't it?
Not so sure the pigeon is so daft. For no discernable reason a peck on a newly arrived random object - a switch - suddenly gives food albeit at unpredictable times. So in the absence of a better theory or the arrival of the pigeon's journal Nature (by pigeon post) pecking away is as good as any other activity - especially when one's life does not depend on it and one is caged up.
The human's journal Nature tells its readers which new switches to peck and which switches are deemed no longer productive. Among us proles advertisers and their close relatives the propaganda merchants rely on attacting us to the switches, a Pox on all of them - and the behaviourists too. By the way, Laurie Taylor had some kind words about behaviourists recently.
JH - I suppose it's only pointless if you analyse it, which maybe isn't necessarily a good idea.
rogerh - yes, I suspect it's a tribal survival skill we sometimes call loyalty or persistence. Persistence works too - look at high-flyers. Thanks for the pointer to Laurie Taylor, I'll look it up.
Errr..., reading blogs?
Interesting stuff. I am struck by the fact that the more general you make it (i.e. existence itself) the more it looks like Buddhism.
D - yes, and writing them.
SV - it does. I think it's the need to step back and view things from further out.
Post a Comment