Metacontingencies, Experimentation and Nonhumans: Searching for Conceptual and Methodological Advances

Metacontingency has been described as the functional relation between interlocking behavioral contingencies, plus their direct and immediate effect, called aggregated product, and a selecting event dependent of such effect, called cultural consequence. The metacontingencies analysis enables the discussion of human behavior complexity in social systems. In the present study, we aimed to review and discuss: (a) the importance of basic behavioral processes analysis for the comprehension of social human phenomena; (b) the necessity of constructing and improving metacontingencies experimental models; (c) the current state of metacontingencies experimental investigations in humans; (d) the use of animal models as a way to control the effects of verbal behavior, among other variables, over cultural selection; (e) a concrete and illustrative proposal of an animal model of metacontingencies.

Effects of consequenses on patterns of interlocked contingencies; A replication of a metacontingency experiment

The concept of metacontingency was taught to undergraduate students of Psychology by using a "game" simulation proposed originally by Vichi, Andery and Glenn (2009). Twenty-five students, distributed into three groups were exposed to six experimental sessions in which they had to make bets and divide the amounts gained. The three groups competed against each other for photocopies quotas. Two contingencies shifted over the sessions. Under Contingency B, the group would win points only if in the previous round each member had received the same amount of points and under Contingency A, winning was contingent on an unequal distribution of the points. We observed that proportional divisions predominated independent of the contingency in course. The manipulation of cultural consequences (winning or losing points) produced consistent modifications in two response categories: 1) choices of the value bet in each round, and 2) divisions of the points among group members. Controlling relations between cultural consequences and the behavior of dividing were statistically significant in one of the groups, whereas in the other two groups controlling relations were observed only in Contingency B. A review of the reinforcement criteria used in the original experiment is suggested.