Social_Behavior.ppt 63KB Jun 23 2011 12:06:42 PM

A COMPUTER MODEL OF
ELEMENTARY SOCIAL
BEHAVIOR

By John t. Gullahorn & Jeanne E. Gullahorn
인인인인 인인인인
98132-506 인인인

Contents
 Introduction
 The

program
 Proposition 1: Stimulus and Response
 Proposition 2: Frequency and Recency or reward
 Proposition 3: Assessing the reward
 Proposition 4: Derivation-Satiation aspect
 Proposition 5: Distributive justice
 Conclusion

Introduction

 Solomon Asch(1952)

 “To act in the social field requires a knowledge of social
facts-of persons and groups.”
 George

Homans’ Social Behavior

 one of most provocative explanations of human response in
interpersonal situations
 Model human behavior as a function of its payoff: an
individual’s responses depends on the amount and quality
of reward and punishment his actions elicit
 Use Blau’s description of interpersonal behavior in a
bureaucracy(Blau, 1955)

Introduction
 Blau’s

description of interpersonal behavior

 16 agents holding the same title
 Interaction as an exchange of values





Requesting help
Being abled to do a better job implicitly admitting his
inferiority to a colleague
Gain prestige time taken from his own work

The program
 HOMUNCULUS
 Model

elementary social behavior in the form of a
computer program written in Information
Processing Language(Newell, 1961e)

 hypothetical agents, Ted and George
 person as information processing organism

The program(2)
 IPL-V,

list processing language
 person is represented as a list structure containing
a large number of description lists.

Flow chart
 figure

1 ~ figure 3

Propostion 1
 Stimulus

and response generalization

 “If in the recent past the occurrence of a particular
stimulus-situation has been the occasion on which a
man’s activity has been rewarded, then the more similar
the present stimulus-situation is to the past one, the
more likely he is to emit the activity, or some similar
activity, now”

Proposition 1
 George

considers whether AR is a general
sitmulus situation in which his responses have
been rewarded (P1, box IV)
 George searches a memory list of reinforced stimulus
situations to determine whether the present input is
among them.

 Determine

if his responses have been rewarded by

(Ted) -> deeper search
 Consider response alternatives

Proposition 2
 Frequency

and recency of reinforcement(P2, box

XXIII)
 “The more often within a given period of time a man’s
activity rewards the activity of another, the more often
the other will emit the activity”
 Rough

estimate of the frequency with which Ted
has rewarded each of the activities he is
considering in response to Ted’s current request
for help

Proposition 2

 Frequency

- set a counter?

 But people seem to use a less refined means of
measurements -> crude five-point ordinal scale for
reward frequency
 Emotional salience -> determine thru trials in
controlled conditions

Proposition 3
 Assessing

the value of the anticipated rewards(P3,
Box XXIV)
 “The more valuable to a man a unit of the activity
another gives him, the more often he will emit activity
rewarded by the activity of the other”
 ex) Complimenting in front of colleagues > “Hmm,
thanks” > “Well, sorry I bothered you”

Proposition 4
 The

deprivation-satiation aspect(P4, Box XXV)

 “The more often a man has in the recent past received a
rewarding activity from another, the less valuable any
further unit of that activity becomes to him”

Proposition 4
 George

evaluate his relative deprivation with
reference to the rewards he anticipates from Ted
 Search the description lists of each of the anticipated
rewards to determine the degree of George’s current
deprivation or satiation
 A deprivation-satiation score is stored as the value of a
special attribute on the description list of each activity.

Proposition 4
 Cost

of the proposed response(Box XXVII)

 Homans: the cost of an activity is the value of the
reward obtainable through an alternative activity.
 Compare the over-all expected reward from Ted with
the anticipated reward from continuing with his own
work

Proposition 5
 Distributive

justice

 “The more to a man’s disadvantage the rule of
distributive justice fails of realization, the more likely
he is to display the emotional behavior we call anger”

 Social

norm or accepted expectations for behavior
within a group

Proposition 5
 Programmed

Interpretation

 Whether a stimulus is appropriate in the given
circumstances(P5, Box I)
 Time spent solving problem as being help: if no reward
-> Change its own image list of Tom and expect greater
thanks next time-> if No reward again, Warning signal
set -> Next, response anger or storing aggression. (but
before, George assess the consequences of such
behavior)

Conclusion

 We

are reducing complex social behavior to
symbol manipulating processes
 Deterministic rather than probabilistic
 Decision making processing is assumed to be
serial
 Person as an hypothesis testing, information
processing organism

Conclusion


HOMUNCULUS is an attempt to explicate the ability of a
person engaged in normal social interaction to evaluate the
context of behavior, retrieve information necessary to
project alternative plans of action, and before actually
committing himself overtly - to select the conditions under
which he will emit one activity rather than another.