Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

[MarioNintendo]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

^ Vote for Pedro

[kommisar]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Rebirth knows files, plopadop knows files, spitfire knows files


qualified judges damn what a concept



k i'll stop now :3

[psychoangel691]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

I have recommended rebirth coming back several times, if you look around in the judges forum you'd see it. People were against it.

[megamon88]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

It's basic psychology and it's not that payment makes judges punctual per se, but it's boosts motivation. It's not just human nature, but nature of every living creature. It doesn't even have to be payment in the form of money.
Reward for a job well done = motivation boosts
No reward for a job well done = motivation diminishes

A reward can be compensation, recognition or meaning, but all three are connected. If you get payment but no recognition or meaning, you'll want to quit very soon cause it's a dead end. If you get recognition but no payment or meaning, same as before and it's a financial waste of time as well. If you get meaning and no payment or recognition, your motivation will drain with every job done because you don't get recognized for what you're doing + financial waste of time.

Actually, I learned the opposite of this in psych class (I just had a test yesterday, go figure).

It turns out that when people do a task expecting a reward, their intrinsic motivation for that task decreases as opposed to if they had been rewarded after the task without being notified of the reward prior to finishing it, or if they had not been rewarded at all.

Here's an article explaining the study that the effect originated from: http://explorable.com/overjustification-effect.html

Basically, the researchers went to a nursery school and observed the children’s intrinsic interest in various school activities. The 3- to 5-year old children were made to play and draw using felt-tipped pens and were at the same time, put into one of three different conditions for the experiment:

- First Condition: The Expected Award Condition
In this condition, the children were promised to receive a “Good Player” ribbon for participating in the activity where they will be drawing with the use of felt-tipped pens. Take note that the kids have already been doing this activity ever since, and with pure intrinsic interest.

- Second Condition: Unexpected Award Condition
In this condition, the children were not told about the reward they would be getting until they actually finished the activity.

- Third Condition: No-Reward Condition
Lastly, in this third condition, the children were not told or given any kind of reward. This group of kids served as the control group, since extrinsic rewards were not involved either before or after the said activity.


Later on, the children were again observed in a free-play setting to find out whether there is a significant difference in the number of children participating in the same activity, this time, without any promise of a reward. Here's a graph of what happened when they let the kids play:



As you can see, the kids who were originally given an incentive to drawing spent considerably less time doing it by themselves without reward, thus illustrating the decline of instrinsic motivation with the presence of rewards.

It's a really interesting effect, and if you want to do more reading into I suggest you do - psychology in general is really interesting.

[Rebirth0]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

I remember bmah specifically asking me if I wanted to judge when the next batch is ready (which would have been the last one). I said yes but nothing happened beyond that

[Nullifidian]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Actually, I learned the opposite of this in psych class (I just had a test yesterday, go figure).

It turns out that when people do a task expecting a reward, their intrinsic motivation for that task decreases as opposed to if they had been rewarded after the task without being notified of the reward prior to finishing it, or if they had not been rewarded at all.

Here's an article explaining the study that the effect originated from: http://explorable.com/overjustification-effect.html

Basically, the researchers went to a nursery school and observed the children’s intrinsic interest in various school activities. The 3- to 5-year old children were made to play and draw using felt-tipped pens and were at the same time, put into one of three different conditions for the experiment:

- First Condition: The Expected Award Condition
In this condition, the children were promised to receive a “Good Player” ribbon for participating in the activity where they will be drawing with the use of felt-tipped pens. Take note that the kids have already been doing this activity ever since, and with pure intrinsic interest.

- Second Condition: Unexpected Award Condition
In this condition, the children were not told about the reward they would be getting until they actually finished the activity.

- Third Condition: No-Reward Condition
Lastly, in this third condition, the children were not told or given any kind of reward. This group of kids served as the control group, since extrinsic rewards were not involved either before or after the said activity.


Later on, the children were again observed in a free-play setting to find out whether there is a significant difference in the number of children participating in the same activity, this time, without any promise of a reward. Here's a graph of what happened when they let the kids play:



As you can see, the kids who were originally given an incentive to drawing spent considerably less time doing it by themselves without reward, thus illustrating the decline of instrinsic motivation with the presence of rewards.

It's a really interesting effect, and if you want to do more reading into I suggest you do - psychology in general is really interesting.

I'm not denying the results of that study, but is this also applicable to building a career?
I would think a lot of factors have a result on this (like wether you want to grow in that particular activity you're doing), and children have a different mindset than adults about this.
I also mean reward as in achieving a personal goal and congratulating yourself for it, or simply getting a "great job".

[megamon88]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

I'm not denying the results of that study, but is this also applicable to building a career?
I would think a lot of factors have a result on this, and children have a different mindset than adults about this.
I also mean reward as in achieving a personal goal and congratulating yourself for it, or simply getting a "great job".

It really depends, but on an overall basis research shows that the presence of a reward decreases motivation by a significant amount. There were many other studies done after the original one. From Psychwiki:

"Meta-analyses and the Conclusion to the Controversies
With so many studies into the overjustification effect, meta-analyses of these studies were eventually done. In one significant meta-analysis in 1995, psychologists Tang and Hall sufficiently concluded that physical rewards which were made contingent upon completing an activity, did in fact undermine intrinsic interest in the activity.
Twenty-five years after Calder and Staw (1974) published their firsts doubts, another meta-analysis was performed in 1999 that confirmed that extrinsic motivation has a negative impact on intrinsic motivation. This meta-analysis is the work of Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (1999). It examined 128 carefully conducted experiments and found that tangible rewards do, indeed, greatly weaken intrinsic motivation.

Relevance for Everyday Life
The overjustification effect, as stated in Deci, Koestner, and Ryan’s meta-analysis, has significant consequences for many people. When control is placed on individuals by offering them incentives, the long term effect will be a loss in intrinsic motivation, accompanied by negative performance. This applies to classrooms, sports teams, as well as other environments. Should a reward be present, there is a risk of losing the enjoyment of the activity for itself."

I know it's not necessarily an "academic" source, but they do cite a lot of works on the page.

EDIT: I think personal goals and rewards would count as intrinsic motivation, but once outside motivation comes in (even things like receiving praise for your work), then that's when motivation starts to decrease.

[Nullifidian]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

It really depends, but on an overall basis research shows that the presence of a reward decreases motivation by a significant amount. There were many other studies done after the original one. From Psychwiki:

"Meta-analyses and the Conclusion to the Controversies
With so many studies into the overjustification effect, meta-analyses of these studies were eventually done. In one significant meta-analysis in 1995, psychologists Tang and Hall sufficiently concluded that physical rewards which were made contingent upon completing an activity, did in fact undermine intrinsic interest in the activity.
Twenty-five years after Calder and Staw (1974) published their firsts doubts, another meta-analysis was performed in 1999 that confirmed that extrinsic motivation has a negative impact on intrinsic motivation. This meta-analysis is the work of Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (1999). It examined 128 carefully conducted experiments and found that tangible rewards do, indeed, greatly weaken intrinsic motivation.

Relevance for Everyday Life
The overjustification effect, as stated in Deci, Koestner, and Ryan’s meta-analysis, has significant consequences for many people. When control is placed on individuals by offering them incentives, the long term effect will be a loss in intrinsic motivation, accompanied by negative performance. This applies to classrooms, sports teams, as well as other environments. Should a reward be present, there is a risk of losing the enjoyment of the activity for itself."

I know it's not necessarily an "academic" source, but they do cite a lot of works on the page.

Ah yeah, it talks about extrinsic rewards that are a "given" just for completing a task (pay every month etc I would think). I can see why that diminishes intrinsic motivation because why motivate yourself when you're getting it anyway? I would think that that's a signal that that particular activity isn't giving you meaning because for me, money is an extra (and a means to pay the rent, buy food etc.), but the joy I get from recognition and meaning I find in what I'm doing for career is what makes me keep on doing it.

[megamon88]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Ah yeah, it talks about extrinsic rewards that are a "given" just for completing a task (pay every month etc I would think). I can see why that diminishes intrinsic motivation because why motivate yourself when you're getting it anyway? I would think that that's a signal that that particular activity isn't giving you meaning because for me, money is an extra (and a means to pay the rent, buy food etc.), but the joy I get from recognition and meaning I find in what I'm doing for career is what makes me keep on doing it.

Yeah, it's not really set in stone that you'll hate something if you get paid - if you really enjoy doing it, then you're right, your motivation wouldn't be affected too much. However, I've noticed this effect too; I find myself slowly losing motivation for producing music, and this effect could be the partial reason for it. For me, I think my reward for music is gaining fans, because who doesn't like it when people like stuff that you make? The more I get though, the less motivation I have to produce music - I know it sounds weird, but it's happening. I might just be in a slump though, so we'll see how I feel in a month or so. It might just be confirmation bias after learning about this in psych class. :P

Speaking of which, I have a psych paper due tomorrow that I haven't started. This got me warmed up though, so hopefully I can finish it somewhat fast.

[NeoMasterPie]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

whats a simfile

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

I was about to lock this thread because it was going all haywire, but the end result doesn't seem entirely poisonous now.

I'll catch up to all of this later tonight. What you can expect in the near future though are applications for more judging positions. Will also get into that later.

[yo man im awesome]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

I was about to lock this thread because it was going all haywire, but the end result doesn't seem entirely poisonous now.

I'll catch up to all of this later tonight. What you can expect in the near future though are applications for more judging positions. Will also get into that later.

just give us time, fiffer can always sort things out!!

[SKG_Scintill]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Scin 4 judge

[Hateandhatred]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

I saw Arch0wl was back a while ago













Arch4judge

[Razor]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

notes where?