Punished by Rewards

Kohn, A. 1993. Punished by Rewards. Boston Houghton Mifflin Company. Krause, T. R. 1995, February. Driving continuous improvement in safety. Occupational Hazards, 37, 47-49. 

This rmfounded statement is related to the previous pop psychology myth, and is frequently used by safety professionals to criticize all applications of incentives to improve safety performance ( ause, 2000). A popular book entitled Punished by Rewards (Kohn, 1993) has been read by too many safety professionals. Now, this myth is getting dispersed at safety conferences and in safety magazines. 

Kohn, A., Punished by Rewards The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A s, Praise, and Other Bribes, Houghton Mifflin, New York, 1993. 

Perform periodic unannounced audits of operator performance by submitting blind samples of known composition. Comparison of observed vs. expected results may reveal bias due to differences in methodology or flaws in technique. The results of the tests should not be made the basis of punishment or reward. 

More rarely, navigation of a T-maze has been used for drug discrimination studies. Early studies used a T-maze procedure where rats were trained to select one of the two arms when nicotine was administered, whereas entries into the opposite arm were punished by foot-shock (Romano et al. 1981 Schechter and Rosecrans 1971a, b Overton 1982). Nicotine proved to have moderate relative discriminability, as measured by the sessions to criterion performance (20 sessions at 0.55 mg kg Overton 1982). More recently, a food-rewarded discrimination procedure using a T-maze has been described, but no studies involving nicotine have been identified (Colombo et al. 1996). 

Choice-oriented behavior is not the same as rational behavior. By the former, I simply mean behavior that is sensitive to rewards and punishments. By the latter, I mean behavior that fits into a complex pattern of optimization The behavior must be optimal, given the desires and... 

Human beings are motivated by positive and negative forces by rewards and punishments. When it comes to safety there is no compromise. Although employees still need to be motivated, the motivation for safe behavior ultimately needs to be self-generated, arising from the commitment of each employee to remain safe. This commitment extends to co-workers, families, and the community [3]. 

Not all people are equally sensitive and responsive to enforcement. Some people are more sensitive to rewards and less sensitive to punishments, and such people are more likely to violate the law (for example because speeding is rewarding). Others are more sensitive to punishment than rewards and these people are more affected by enforcement (Castella and Perez, 2004). 

Let us talk a little more about consequences. The strongest consequences are soon, sizable, and certain. In other words, we work diligently for immediate, probable, and large positive reinforcers or rewards, and we work frantically to escape or avoid soon, certain, and sizable negative reinforcers or punishers. This helps explain why safety is a struggle in many workplaces. You see, safe behaviors are usually not reinforced by soon, sizable, and certain consequences. In fact, safe behaviors are often punished by soon and certain... 

Traditional Safety Engineering approach (control of error by motivational, behavioral, and attitude change) Occupational safety Manual operations Selection Behavior change via motivational campaigns Rewards/punishment Very common... 

The tests generally involve some form of maze but the simplest is the passive avoidance test. In this the animal learns that in a certain environment it will be punished with an electric shock for some particular action, like stepping onto a special part of the floor of the test chamber. The test of memory is how long the rat avoids (remains passive to) making the movement that will initiate the shock. Of course, drugs that reduce the animal s anxiety also modify the response. Using a maze in its simplest T shape, the animal is placed at the base of the vertical arm and a food reward at the end of one of the horizontal arms. Clearly the animal has to learn which arm contains the reward. Memory is assessed by the time taken for a food-deprived animal to reach the reward and the number of false arm entries. This simple system can be made more complex by introducing many more arms and branches but the principle is the same. 

It should be observed, that the singular termination of the life of Josiah, of whom we have seen it had been foretold in prophecy, that he should do great acts in the suppression of idolatry, serves to show how exactly the Almighty verified his promises to his selected people, that they should be rewarded or punished, as predicted by Moses. 

Organization—Shift size and training decisions affect workload and a person s ability to perform work safely and efficiently. Reward and punishments used by the organization influence what individuals do. 

---