Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contingency and choice: The implications of matching theory for classroom instruction

  • Published:
Journal of Behavioral Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes a mathematical account of behavior known as matching theory. Matching theory evolved out of basic operant research and assumes that individuals can engage in a variety of behaviors at any moment, but they choose one to the exclusion of others. According to the matching equation, choices in behavior match the relative amount of reinforcement provided for each alternative. Although the principles of matching theory have proven useful in developing novel treatment strategies, few data exist validating the matching equation in natural human environments. Recent applications of matching theory to children's classroom behavior are described, and the implications of matching theory for classroom management and effective teaching are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Atwater, J. B., & Morris, E. K. (1988). Teachers' instructions and children's compliance in preschool classrooms: A descriptive analysis.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 157–167.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ayllon, T., Layman, D., & Burke, S. (1972). Disruptive behavior and reinforcement of academic behavior.The Psychological Record, 22, 315–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayllon, T., Layman, D., & Kandel, H. (1975). A behavioral-educational alternative to drug control of hyperactive children.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 137–146.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ayllon, T., & Roberts, M. (1974). Eliminating discipline problems by strengthening academic performance.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 71–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, W. M., & Rachlin, H. C. (1969). Choice as time allocation.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 861–874.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broden, M., Bruce, C., Mitchell, M. A., Carter, V., & Hall, R. V. (1970). Effects of teacher attention on attending behavior of two boys at adjacent desks.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 199–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, J. E. (1983). Classroom organization and management.The Elementary School Journal, 83, 265–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catania, A. C. (1963). Concurrent performances: Reinforcement interaction and response independence.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 253–263.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davison, M., & McCarthy, D. C. (1988).The matching law: research review. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Villiers, P. (1977). Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.),Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 233–287). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowd, J. E., & Riggs, D. S. (1965). A comparison of estimates of Michaelis-Menten kinetic constants from various linear transformations.The Journal of Biological Chemistry, 240, 863–869.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 392–431). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferritor, D. E., Buckholdt, D., Hamblin, R. L., & Smith, L. (1972). The noneffects of contingent reinforcement for attending behavior on work accomplished.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957).Schedules of reinforcement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Findley, J. D. (1958). Preference and switching under concurrent scheduling.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 123–144.

  • Fuqua, R. W. (1984). Comments on the applied relevance of the matching law.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 381–386.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gettinger, M. (1986). Issues and trends in academic engaged time of students.Special Services in the Schools, 2, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gettinger, M. (1988). Methods of proactive classroom management.School Psychology Review, 17, 227–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., & Hall, R. V. (1988). The use of peer tutoring strategies in classroom management and educational instruction.School Psychology Review, 17, 258–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. (1985). Definitional, parametric, and procedural considerations in timeout interventions and research.Exceptional Children, 51, 279–288.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hawking, S. W. (1988).A brief history of time. New York: Bantam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrnstein, R. J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267–272.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrnstein, R. J. (1979). Derivatives of matching.Psychological Review, 86, 486–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrnstein, R. J. (1990). Rational choice theory: Necessary but not sufficient.American Psychologist, 45, 356–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoge, R. D., & Andrews, D. A. (1987). Enhancing academic performance: Issues in target selection.School Psychology Review, 16, 228–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Symptom substitution, generalization, and response covariation: Implications for psychotherapy outcome.Psychological Bulletin, 91, 349–365.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kazdin, A. E., & Klock, J. (1973). The effect of nonverbal teacher approval on student attentive behavior.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 643–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kounin, J. (1970).Discipline and group management in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lentz, F. E. (1988). Reductive procedures. In J. C. Witt, S. N. Elliott, & F. M. Gresham (Eds.),Handbook of behavior therapy in education (pp. 439–468). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace, F. C., Hock, M. L., Lalli, J. S., West, B. J., Belfiore, P., Pinter, E., & Brown, D. K. (1988). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of noncompliance.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 123–141.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mace, F. C., McCurdy, B., & Quigley, E. A. (1990). effect of reward predicted by matchingtheory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,23, 197–205.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, C. H., Becker, W. C. & Thomas, D. R. (1968). Rules, praise, and ignoring: Elements of elementary classroom control.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 139–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martens, B. K. (1990). A context analysis of contingent teacher attention.Behavior Modification, 14, 138–156.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martens, B. K., Halperin, S., Rummel, J. E., & Kilpatrick, D. (1990). Matching theory applied to contingent teacher attention.Behavioral Assessment, 12, 139–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martens, B. K., & Houk, J. L. (1989). The application of Herrnstein's law of effect to disruptive and on-task behavior of a retarded adolescent girl.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 17–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martens, B. K., Lochner, D. G., & Kelly, S. Q. (1992). The effects of variable-interval reinforcement on academic engagement: A demonstration of matching theory.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 143–151.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martens, B. K., & Meiler, P. J. (1990). The application of behavioral principles to educational settings. In T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.),The handbook of school psychology (2nd ed., pp. 612–634). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martens, B. K., & Witt, J. C. (1988). Ecological behavior analysis. In M. Hersen, R. M. Eisler, & P. M. Miller (Eds.),Progress in behavior modification (Vol. 22, pp. 115–140). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, J. J. (1982). The importance of Herrnstein's mathematical statement of the law of effect for behavior therapy.American Psychologist, 37, 771–779.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, J. J. (1988). Matching theory in natural human environments.The Behavior Analyst, 11, 95–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, J. J. (1989). Two modern developments in matching theory.The Behavior Analyst, 12, 153–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millenson, J. R. & Leslie, J. C. (1979).Principles of behavior analysis. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (1984). Practical implications of the matching law.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 367–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuringer, A. (1991). Humble behaviorism.The Behavior Analyst, 14, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parrish, J. M., Cataldo, M. F., Kolko, D. J., Neef, N. A., & Egel, A. L. (1986). Experimental analysis of response covariation among compliant and inappropriate behaviors.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 241–254.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, W. D., & Epling, W. F. (1980). What happened to analysis in applied behavior analysis?The Behavior Analyst, 3, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, G. S. (1975).A primer of operant conditioning. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, D. C., Cataldo, M. F., & Cushing, P. J. (1981). Compliance training and behavioral covariation in the treatment of multiple behavior problems.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 209–222.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sajwaj, T., Twardosz, S., & Burke, M. (1972). Side effects of extinction procedures in a remedial preschool.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 163–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, W. N., & Farmer, J. (1970). Reinforcement schedules and the “behavior stream”. In W. N. Schoenfeld (Ed.),The theory of reinforcement schedules (pp. 215–245). New York: Appleton Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutte, R. C., & Hopkins, B. L. (1970). The effects of attention on following instructions in a kindergarten class.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 117–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, S. J., Ayllon, T., & Milan, M. A. (1982). Behavioral compensation: Contrastlike effects in the classroom,Behavior Modification, 6, 407–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, D. R., Becker, W. C., & Armstrong, M. (1968). Production and elimination of disruptive classroom behavior by systematically varying teacher's behavior.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, M. A. (1975). Natural rates of teacher approval and disapproval in the classroom.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 367–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt, J. C., Hannafin, M. J., & Martens, B. K. (1983). Home-based reinforcement: Behavioral covariation between academic performance and inappropriate behavior.Journal of School Psychology, 21, 337–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt, J. C., & Martens, B. K. (1988). Problems with problem-solving consultation: A re-analysis of assumptions, methods, and goals.School Psychology Review, 17, 211–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyne, M. D., & Stuck, G. B. (1982). Time and learning: Implications for the classroom teacher.Elementary School Journal, 83, 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and School of Education, Syracuse University, New York

    Brian K. Martens Ph.D. (Associate Professor)

Authors
  1. Brian K. Martens Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martens, B.K. Contingency and choice: The implications of matching theory for classroom instruction. J Behav Educ 2, 121–137 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00947116

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00947116

Key words

Search

Navigation