Skip to main content
Log in

Commentary on “Coming to Terms with Motivation in the Behavior-Analytic Literature” by Aló and Cançado

  • In Response
  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aló and Cançado’s (this issue) primary argument is that motivation should be described in terms of an intervening variable. Furthermore, they raise secondary points concerning the status and usage of technical terms and the scope of the motivational concept in behavior analysis. We agree with Aló and Cançado that a clear definition of motivation is essential. However, we disagree with their analysis on a number of fundamental points, such as the correct use of technical terms, the range of phenomena that should be considered as motivational, and we argue that the concept of the intervening variable is incompatible with radical behaviorism. We contend that motivation is best conceptualized as factors that influence the rate of operant responding but that are not part of the operant contingency and that, as with the term reinforcement, the terms operation and process are useful distinctions that should be employed.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • CATANIA C. A. (1969). On the vocabulary and the grammar of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 845–846.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • CATANIA, C. A. (1992). Learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • CATANIA, A. C. & HARNAD, S. (Eds.). (1988). The selection of behavior: The operant behaviorism of B. F. Skinner: Comments and consequences. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • COLE, M. R. (2001). The long-term effect of high-and low-rate responding histories on fixed-interval responding in rats. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 75, 43–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • COOPER, J. O., HERON, T. E., & HEWARD, W. L. (1987). Applied behavior analysis. New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • MACCORQUODALE, K., & MEEHL, P. E. (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review, 55(2), 307–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • MOORE, J. (2008). A critical appraisal of contemporary approaches in the quantitative analysis of behavior. The Psychological Record, 58(4), 641–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MOORE, J. (2010). Philosophy of science, with special consideration given to behaviorism as the philosophy of the science of behavior. The Psychological Record, 60(1), 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SKINNER, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. Oxford, UK: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • SKINNER, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHELAN, R., & BARNES-HOLMES, D. (2010). Consequence valuing as operation and process: A parsimonious analysis. The Psychological Record, 60, 337–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Whelan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Whelan, R., Barnes-Holmes, D. Commentary on “Coming to Terms with Motivation in the Behavior-Analytic Literature” by Aló and Cançado. Psychol Rec 63, 655–660 (2013). https://doi.org/10.11133/j.tpr.2013.63.3.017

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.11133/j.tpr.2013.63.3.017

Keywords

Navigation