In the Theatre, the People Eat Sweets When the Actors are Poor’: Crowding-Out, Overjustification, Pleasure and the Anti-Delian Reading of the Nicomachean Ethics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the following paper, I examine a psychological phenomenon called the crowding-out effect. Crowding-out sometimes occurs when a subject receives external rewards for performing an activity once executed for its intrinsic pleasure. The external rewards “crowd out” or undermine the innate pleasure the subject once experienced in engaging in the activity. The dominant explanation to account for this paradoxical and obviously deleterious psychological feeling is the overjustification thesis. In the following paper, I demonstrate there are two problems with this explanation and offer an ancient alternative. With the help of Joachim Aufderheide’s Anti-Delian reading of the Nicomachean Ethics, I disclose that Aristotle was not only well aware of this phenomenon but that his model of human flourishing predicated on practical wisdom presents us with a way to prevent subjects from experiencing the crowding-out effect. In short, my operationalization of Aufderheide’s reading of the Nicomachean Ethics provides researchers in psychology, education, and industrial management with new pathways and tools to understand and combat motivational diminishment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".