The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 209–224 | Cite as

Contingency and Behavior Analysis

Article

Abstract

The concept of contingency is central to theoretical discussions of learned behavior and in the application of learning research to problems of social significance. This paper reviews three aspects of the contingency concept as it has been developed by behavior analysts. The first is the empirical analysis of contingency through experimental studies of both human and nonhuman behavior. The second is the synthesis of experimental studies in theoretical and conceptual frameworks to yield a more general account of contingency and to integrate the concept with other behavioral processes. The third aspect is one of practical considerations in the application of the contingency concept in both laboratory and applied settings.

Key words

contingency response-reinforcer relations functional analysis molar and molecular accounts applications 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anger, D. (1956). The dependence of interresponse times upon the relative reinforcement of different interresponse times. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 145–161.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arbuckle, J. L., & Lattal, K. A. (1988). Changes in functional response units with briefly delayed reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 49, 249–263.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Azrin, N. H. (1956). Effects of two intermittent schedules of immediate and nonimmediate punishment. Journal of Psychology, 42, 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bacotti, A. V. (1978). Responding under schedules combining response-dependent and response-independent shock delivery. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 267–272.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Baum, W. M. (1989). Quantitative prediction and molar description of the environment. The Behavior Analyst, 12, 167–176.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Catania, A. C. (1991). Glossary. In I. H. Iversen & K. A. Lattal (Eds.), Techniques in the behavioral and neural sciences: Vol. 6. Experimental analysis of behavior (Part 2, pp. G1–G44). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  7. Catania, A. C., & Sagvolden, T. (1980). Preference for free choice over forced choice in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 34, 77–86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dickinson, A. M. (1989). The detrimental effects of extrinsic reinforcement on “intrinsic” motivation. The Behavior Analyst, 12, 1–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferster, C. B. (1965). Arbitrary and natural reinforcement. The Psychological Record, 17, 341–347.Google Scholar
  11. Freeman, T. J., & Lattal, K. A. (1990). Stimulus control of behavioral history. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freud, S. (1969). An outline of psychoanalysis (rev. ed.). New York: Norton. (Original work published 1940)Google Scholar
  13. Gibbon, J., Berryman, R., & Thompson, R. L. (1974). Contingency spaces and measures in classical and instrumental conditioning. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 585–605.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibson, D. A. (1967). Effects of d-amphetamine on multiple schedule performance in the pigeon. Psychonomic Science, 7, 3–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gleeson, S., & Lattal, K. A. (1987). Response-reinforcer relations and the maintenance of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 383–393.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Glenn, S. S., Ellis, J., & Greenspoon, J. (1992). On the revolutionary nature of the operant as a unit of behavioral selection. American Psychologist, 47, 1329–1336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Hawkes, L., & Shimp, C. P. (1975). Reinforcement of behavioral patterns: Shaping a scallop. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 23, 3–16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Heidbreder, E. (1933). Seven psychologies. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  20. Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–266.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Herrnstein, R. J., & Hineline, P. N. (1966). Negative reinforcement as shock frequency reduction. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 421–430.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Hineline, P. N. (1992). A self-interpretive behavior analysis. American Psychologist, 47, 1274–1285.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Iwata, B. A. (1988). The development and adoption of controversial default technologies. The Behavior Analyst, 11, 149–157.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. James, W. (1963). Pragmatism. Cleveland, OH: Meridian Books. (Original work published 1907)Google Scholar
  25. Killeen, P. (1978). Superstition: A matter of bias, not detectability. Science, 199, 88–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kohn, A. (1989, January). Incentives can be bad for business. Inc., pp. 93–94.Google Scholar
  27. Kornorski, J., & Miller, S. (1937). On two types of conditioned reflex. Journal of General Psychology, 16, 264–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lattal, K. A. (1974). Combinations of response-reinforcer dependence and independence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 357–362.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Lattal, K. A. (1975). Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 23, 241–246.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Lattal, K. A. (1979). Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli: II. Effects of changes in stimulus probability. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 15–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Lattal, K. A. (1981). Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli: Implications for schedule performance. In M. L. Commons & J. A. Nevin (Eds.), Quantitative studies of operant behavior: Discriminative properties of reinforcement schedules (pp. 113–133). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  32. Lattal, K. A. (1989). Contingencies on response rate and resistance to change. Learning and Motivation, 20, 191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lattal, K. A. (1991). Scheduling positive reinforcers. In I. H. Iversen & K. A. Lattal (Eds.), Techniques in the behavioral and neural sciences: Vol. 6. Experimental analysis of behavior (Part 1, pp. 87–134). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  34. Lattal, K. A., Freeman, T. J., & Critchfield, T. (1989). Dependency location in interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 101–117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Lattal, K. A., & Gleeson, S. (1990). Response acquisition with delayed reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 27–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Lattal, K. A., & Maxey, G. C. (1971). Some effects of response-independent reinforcers in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 16, 225–231.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Lattal, K. A., & Metzger, B. A. (1994). Response acquisition by Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens) with delayed visual reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 61, 35–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Lattal, K. A., & Poling, A. D. (1982). Describing response-event relations: Babel revisited. The Behavior Analyst, 4, 143–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lattal, K. A., & Ziegler, D. R. (1982). Briefly delayed reinforcement: An interresponse time analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 407–416.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (Eds.). (1978). The hidden cost of reward: New perspectives on the psychology of human motivation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Morse, W. H., & Kelleher, R. T. (1977). Determinants of reinforcement and punishment. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 174–188). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  42. Nevin, J. A. (1974). Response strength in multiple schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 389–408.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Nevin, J. A., Smith, L. D., & Roberts, J. (1987). Does contingent reinforcement strengthen operant behavior? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 17–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Nussear, V. P., & Lattal, K. A. (1983). Discriminative stimulus properties of brief disruptions in response-reinforcer temporal contiguity. Learning and Motivation, 14, 472–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Peele, D. B., Casey, J., & Silberberg, A. (1984). Primacy of interresponse-time reinforcement in accounting for rate differences under variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 10, 149–167.Google Scholar
  46. Perone, M., Galizio, M., & Baron, A. (1988). The relevance of animal-based principles in the laboratory study of human operant behavior. In G. Davey & C. Cullen (Eds.), Human operant conditioning and behavior modification (pp. 59–85). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  47. The Random House dictionary of the English language. (1971). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  48. Redd, W. H. (1969). Effects of mixed reinforcement contingencies on adults control of children’s behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2, 249–254.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Redd, W. H., & Birnbrauer, J. S. (1969). Adults as discriminative stimuli for different reinforcement contingencies with retarded children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 7, 440–447.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Rescorla, R. A. (1967). Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychological Review, 74, 71–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Scott, G. K., & Platt, J. R. (1985). Models of response-reinforcer contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 152–171.Google Scholar
  52. Shanks, D. R., Pearson, S. M., & Dickinson, A. (1989). Temporal contiguity and the judgement of causality by human subjects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41B, 139–159.Google Scholar
  53. Sidman, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal classes. In T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213–245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  54. Sizemore, O. J., & Lattal, K. A. (1977). Dependency, temporal contiguity, and response-independent reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 119–125.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Sizemore, O. J., & Lattal, K. A. (1978). Unsignaled delay of reinforcement in variable-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30, 169–175.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  57. Skinner, B. F. (1948). “Superstition” in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168–172.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  59. Skinner, B.F. (1961a). The generic nature of the concepts of stimulus and response. In Cumulative record (enlarged ed., pp. 347–366). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Reprinted from The Journal of General Psychology, 1935, 12, 40–65)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Skinner, B. F. (1961b). Two types of conditioned reflex: A reply to Kornorski and Miller. In Cumulative record (enlarged ed., pp. 376–383). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Reprinted from The Journal of General Psychology, 1937, 16, 272–279)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  62. Staddon, J. E. R. (1992). The “superstition” experiment: A reversible figure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 270–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Staddon, J. E. R., & Simmelhag, V. L. (1971). The “superstition” experiment: A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior. Psychological Review, 78, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Terrace, H. S. (1973). Classical conditioning. In J. A. Nevin & G. S. Reynolds (Eds.), The study of behavior: Learning, motivation, emotion, and instinct (pp. 70–112). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
  65. Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Animal intelligence. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  66. Wanchisen, B. A., Tathum, T. A., & Mooney, S. E. (1989). Variable-ratio conditioning history produces high- and low-rate fixed-interval performance in rats. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 52, 167–179.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Wertheimer, M. (1972). Fundamental issues in psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
  68. Wiener, P. P. (Ed.). (1958). Charles S. Peirce: Selected writings. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  69. Wilcoxon, H. A. (1969). Historical introduction to the problem of reinforcement. In J. T. Tapp (Ed.), Reinforcement and behavior (pp. 1–46). New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Williams, B. A. (1976). The effects of unsignaled delayed reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 26, 441–449.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. Williams, B. A. (1983). Revising the principle of reinforcement. Behaviorism, 11, 63–85.Google Scholar
  72. Zeiler, M. D. (1968). Fixed and variable schedules of response independent reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11, 405–414.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. Zeiler, M. D. (1972). Superstitious behavior in children: An experimental analysis. In H. W. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 1–29). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  74. Zuriff, G. E. (1986). Behaviorism: A conceptual reconstruction. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA

Personalised recommendations