Abstract
The present investigation examined whether distinguishing between the discriminative and function-altering properties of contingency-specifying stimuli (CSS) is of heuristic value in conceptualizing child compliance. Groups of “compliant” and “noncompliant” children were instructed to place several blocks in a box. During half of the trials the children had an immediate opportunity to respond to the instruction (IOR), and during the other trials the children’s opportunity to respond was delayed by 10 min (DOR). Results showed that 5 of the 8 children were more likely to comply in the IOR condition, whereas the 3 remaining children were equally compliant in IOR and DOR conditions. In addition, the study investigated the influence of condition presentation sequence on child compliance. Thus, half of the children entered the IOR condition first, and the other half entered the DOR condition first. Results showed no differences in compliance for 3 of 4 children in the IOR-first sequence. However, in the DOR-first sequence, all children, regardless of classification, were more compliant in IOR than in DOR conditions. Presentation order appeared to strongly influence compliance and could likely have affected the results of prior investigations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baer, R. A. (1990). Correspondence training: Review and current issues. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 11, 379–393.
Baldwin, J. D., & Baldwin, J. I. (1981). Behavior principles in everyday life. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barkley, R. A. (1990). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment. New York: Guilford Press.
Barkley, R. A. (1994). Impaired delayed responding: A unified theory of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. In D. K. Routh (Ed.), Disruptive behavior disorders in childhood (pp. 11–57). New York: Plenum Press.
Barkley, R. A. (1997). ADHD and the nature of self-control. New York: Guilford Press.
Bean, A. W., & Roberts, M. W. (1981). The effect of time-out release contingencies on changes in child compliance. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 9, 95–105.
Blakely, E., & Schlinger, H. D. (1987). Rules: Function-altering contingency-specifying stimuli. The Behavior Analyst, 10, 183–187.
Braam, C., & Malott, R. W. (1990). “I’ll do it when the snow melts”: The effects of deadlines and delayed outcomes on rulegoverned behavior in preschool children. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 8, 67–76.
Brumfield, B. D., & Roberts, M. W. (1998). A comparison of two measures of child compliance with normal preschool children, Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27, 109–116.
Cerutti, D. T. (1989). Discrimination theory of rule-governed behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 259–276.
Conners, C. K. (1997). Conners’ Rating Scales-revised technical manual. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.
Galizio, M. (1979). Contingency-shaped and rule-governed behavior: Instructional control of human loss avoidance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 53–70.
Mace, E C., & Belfiore, P. (1990). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of escapemotivated stereotypy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 507–514.
Mace, E. C., Hock, M. L., Lalli, J., West, B. J., Belfiore, P., Pimter, E., & Brown, D. K. (1988). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of noncompliance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 123–141.
Malott, R. W., Whaley, D. L., & Malott, M. E. (1997). Elementary principles ofbehavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Michael, J. (1980). The discriminative stimulus or SD. The Behavior Analyst, 3, 47–49.
Mistr, K. N., & Glenn, S. S. (1992). Evocative and function-altering effects of contingency-specifying stimuli. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 10, 11–21.
Reitman, D., & Gross, A. M. (1996). Delayed outcomes and rule-governed behavior among “noncompliant” and “compliant” boys: A replication and extension. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 13, 65–77.
Schlinger, H. D. (1990). A reply to behavior analysts writing about rules and rule-governed behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 8, 77–82.
Schlinger, H. D. (1993). Separating discriminative and function-altering effects of verbal stimuli. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 9–23.
Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Willis, T. J., & Lovaas, I. O. (1977). A behavioral approach to treating hyperactive children: The parent’s role. In J. B. Millichap (Ed.), Learning disabilities and related disorders (pp. 119–140). Chicago: Year Book Medical.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This paper is based on a thesis submitted by the first author to Louisiana State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a masters degree in clinical psychology. We are grateful to Mary Lou Kelley, John Northup, Joseph Witt, Andrea Ridgeway, Patrick O’Callaghan, Monique LeBlanc, Chris Matassa, and the children, teachers, and staff at Ascension Parish Head Start. We also acknowledge the insightful criticisms of Genae Hall, Hank Schlinger, and other anonymous reviewers on an earlier version of this manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hupp, S.D.A., Reitman, D. The Effects of Stating Contingency-Specifying Stimuli on Compliance in Children. Analysis Verbal Behav 16, 17–27 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392944
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392944