Interação entre instruções e o desempenho não verbal em situações de alterações ambientais independentes do responder

• Ano de defesa: 2016
• Autor(a) principal: Monteiro, Letícia Tiemi
• Orientador(a): Micheletto, Nilza
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Psicologia Experimental: Análise do Comportamento
• Departamento: Faculdade de Ciências Médicas e da Saúde
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Instruções; Alterações ambientais independentes do responder; Reforçamento não contingente
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Instructions; Environmental changes independent on respond; Non contingent reinforcement
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA EXPERIMENTAL
• Link de acesso: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/19475

The present research aimed to investigate if different kinds of instructions in a task in which the interruption of aversive stimuli did not depend on the response occurrence interferes with the non-verbal performance. Furthermore, it was investigated whether such exposure interferes on the acquisition of motor responses in a subsequent phase, in which it presented a problem-solving task. College students (80) were equally distributed in four conditions (n=20), named instruction that describes a relationship of dependency (RD), instruction that does not describe a relationship of dependency (NRD), minimal instruction (MIN) and control (C). On phase 1, with the exception of the participants in control condition, the other ones were exposed to aversive stimuli (sound) that lasted no more than 10 seconds, which were interrupted regardless of their responses and received instruction that described a relationship of dependency between the response and the environmental change; the instruction that did not describe a relationship of dependency between the response and the environmental change; requiring that the participant assessed if it was possible to solve the task; and the minimal instruction did not give information about the relationship response /environmental change. On phase 2, all of them, including Control group, did the maze-solving task. On phase 1, the participants that received the NRD instruction were the ones who received a bigger number of responses followed by the ones who received RD instruction. The major part of participants that received the MIN instruction emitted few responses. 38 of 60 participants presented responses pattern classified as superstitious. The 22 participants that did not present the superstitious pattern received, in its major part, MIN instruction. On phase 2, the control participants spent, in general, less time to go through the first maze followed by the participants that received the MIN and NRD instruction. The participants that received the RD instruction were the ones who spent more time to go through the first maze. Those participants who spent less time to go through the maze, most of them showed, on the first phase, low response rate compared to the other participants. The results suggest, on the first phase, a relationship between high/low frequency of responses and the kind of instruction received, and it seems that this frequency can influence on the following phase, because the participants that showed, emitted a smaller number of answers spent less time to go through the first maze