The Analysis of Verbal Behavior

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 101–104 | Cite as

The Abative Effect: A New Term to Describe the Action of Antecedents that Reduce Operant Responding

  • Sean Laraway
  • Susan Snycerski
  • Jack Michael
  • Alan Poling
Article

Abstract

Behavior-analytic terminology concerning the so-called inhibitory effect of operant antecedents lacks precision. The present paper describes the problem with current nomenclature concerning the effects of antecedent events that reduce operant responding and offers a solution to this problem. The solution consists of adopting a new term, abative, for the effect in question. This paper suggests that the new term has several advantages over terms currently used and that adopting this term will yield a variety of practical and theoretical benefits, including, but not limited to, a more consistent vocabulary to describe antecedent—behavior relations.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Heritage dictionary of the English language (3rd ed.). (1996). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  2. Azrin, N. H., & Hake, D. F. (1969). Positive conditioned suppression: Conditioned suppression using positive reinforcers as the unconditioned stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 12, 167–173.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Chiesa, M. (1994). Radical behaviorism: The philosophy and the science. Boston: Authors Cooperative.Google Scholar
  4. Clark, F. C. (1958). The effect of deprivation and frequency of reinforcement on variable interval responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 1, 221–228.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Dinsmoor, J. A. (1995). Stimulus control: Part I. The Behavior Analyst, 18, 51–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Estes, W. K., & Skinner, B. F. (1941). Some quantitative properties of anxiety. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 390–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Farthing, G. W., & Hearst, E. (1968). Generalization gradients of inhibition after different amounts of training. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 11, 743–752.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Gilbert, R. (1967). Sensitivity of measures of rat performance under a progressive ratio schedule to daily changes in body weight. Psychological Reports, 20, 497–498.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hearst, E. (1968). Discrimination learning as the summation of excitation and inhibition. Science, 162, 1303–1306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hodos, W. (1961). Progressive ratio as a measure of reward strength. Science, 134, 943–944.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Honig, W. K., & Slivka, R. M. (1964). Stimulus generalization of the effects of punishment. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 7, 21–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Hymowitz, N. (1976). Effects on responding of mixed and multiple schedules of signaled and unsignaled response-dependent electric shock delivery. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 25, 321–326.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Hymowitz, N. (1981). Effects of signaled and unsignaled shock on schedule-controlled lever pressing and schedule-induced licking: Shock intensity and body weight. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 35, 197–207.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Lattal, K. A., & Poling, A. (1981). Describing response-event relations: Babel revisited. The Behavior Analyst, 4, 143–152.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Lyon, D. O. (1968). Conditioned suppression: Operant variables and aversive control. The Psychological Record, 18, 317–338.Google Scholar
  16. McGill, P. (1999). Establishing operations: Implications for the assessment, treatment, and prevention of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 393–418.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Michael, J. (1975). Positive and negative reinforcement, a distinction that is no longer necessary; or a better way to talk about bad things. Behaviorism, 3, 33–44.Google Scholar
  18. Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 37, 149–155.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Michael, J. (1983). Evocative and repertoire-altering effects of an environmental event. The Analysis of Verbal behavior, 2, 19–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191–206.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. New Webster’s dictionary of the English language. (1989). New York: Lexicon Publications.Google Scholar
  22. O’Donnell, J., Crosbie, J., Williams, D. C., & Saunders, K. J. (2000). Stimulus control and generalization of point-loss punishment with humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 73, 261–274.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Schlinger, H. D., Jr., Blakely, E., Fillhard, J., & Poling, A. D. (1991). Defining terms in behavior analysis: Reinforcer and discriminative stimulus. The Analysis of Verbal behavior, 9, 153–161.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Skinner, B. F. (1931). The concept of the reflex in the description of behavior. Journal of General Psychology, 5, 427–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  26. Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Weisman, R. G., & Palmer, J. A. (1969). Factors influencing inhibitory stimulus control: Discrimination training and prior non-differential reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 12, 229–237.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilder, D. A., & Carr, J. E. (1998). Recent advances in the modification of establishing operations to reduce aberrant behavior. Behavioral Interventions, 13, 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Woods, T. S. (1987). On the diversity in the terminology concerning inhibitory stimulus control: Implications for practitioners of applied behavior analysis. The Analysis of Verbal behavior, 5, 77–79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sean Laraway
    • 1
  • Susan Snycerski
    • 1
  • Jack Michael
    • 1
  • Alan Poling
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWestern Michigan UniversityKalamazooUSA

Personalised recommendations