The behavioral economics of production.

The team tested if rat licking follows a factory rule. They raised the number of tongue lifts needed for water. They also added more rats or more water spouts.

The setup copied an old economics idea: more workers plus more machines should raise total output, but only up to a point.

Harder work rules pushed the rats to lick more, not less. Extra rats or extra spouts also lifted total licks. The curve matched a Cobb-Douglas production function.

Output still grew, yet each new worker or station gave smaller and smaller gains.

Delmendo et al. (2009) extends the same price idea to kids. They showed that when each M&M costs more button presses, children buy fewer M&Ms. Both studies say the same thing: higher unit price cuts consumption.

Killeen (1978) came earlier and asked what happens when daily food is capped. Rats still worked hard but shifted choice toward the cheaper reinforcer. Szempruch et al. (1993) flips the question: instead of limiting income, they boost labor and capital and watch total output rise.

McGonigle et al. (1982) used one rat on two levers and found that pressing more on the rich lever can suppress output on the lean lever. The 1993 paper shows the opposite side: adding extra rats or stations can raise the grand total without hurting anyone’s rate.

Your client’s “response factory” behaves like the rat data. If you raise the task demand, you may get more total work, but only while the cost feels worth it. Adding helpers or materials can also lift output, yet each new helper gives smaller gains. Use this when you set high-response programs or add staff: watch for the sweet spot where extra effort or extra hands still pays off.