Transcript A COMPUTER MODEL OF ELEMENTARY SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

A COMPUTER MODEL OF
ELEMENTARY SOCIAL
BEHAVIOR
By John t. Gullahorn & Jeanne E. Gullahorn
인지과학 협동과정
98132-506 이광주
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.