Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology: A Social Systems Approach to Environmental Problems

  • Don F. Hake

Abstract

The behavior analyst who is considering a career in the area of environmental problems faces a variety of complex questions. The area has changed since the early 1970s when behavior analysts first began to work on littering. The major questions then were standard openers for a new area: (1) “Is there anything that will cause people to pick up trash?” (2) “Can the dependent variable be measured accurately?” However, the questions have become more difficult as problems have become more serious, more research is done, more disciplines enter the field, and researchers and society more closely approach the heart of the problems. Instead of becoming more concerned with the principles and/or methodology of behavior analysis, some questions concern topics more closely related to other disciplines and to the analysis of society’s overall goals and policies. The first question is an economic one: (1) “The procedure is effective, but do its benefits outweigh its costs?” (2) “The procedure worked on my three neighbors, but will it work on a larger scale in an industry, with an entire community, or statewide?” (3) “Will my procedure be selected over those from other areas? Will behavior-analysis solutions be major ones, or will those come from the harder sciences, from economics, or be imposed by law?” For example: “In the area of gasoline conservation, will behavioral conservation programs be of major importance relative to small cars, synthetic fuel, gadgets to save gasoline, laws, and agreements in international politics?” (4) “Would my skills be put to better use if I worked with professionals from other disciplines such as engineers to change technology into innovation or, with politicians and governmental agencies to determine the most effective laws, and to ensure accurate reports from industry?” (5) “Is my program aimed at the crucial target population? Perhaps the heart of the problem lies with big industry or streamlining governmental agencies to act effectively?” (6) “Why must we always wait for a crisis? Is not prevention the area where an effective methodology or procedure could have its most important impact?”

Keywords

Discriminative Stimulus Behavior Analysis Behavioral Ecology Governmental Agency Chemical Pollution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altman, I. The environment and social behavior. Monterey, Calif.: Brooks, Cole, 1975.Google Scholar
  2. Baer, D. M. On the relation between basic and applied research. In A. C. Catania & T. A. Brigham (Eds.), Handbook of applied behavior analysis: Social and instructional processes. New York: Irvington, 1978.Google Scholar
  3. Baltes, M. M., & Hayward, S. C. Application and evaluation of strategies to reduce pollution: Behavioral control of littering in a football stadium. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1976, 61, 501–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bittle, R. G., Valesano, R., & Thaler, G. The effects of daily cost feedback on residential electricity consumption. Behavior Modification, 1979, 3, 187–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burgess, R. L., Clark, R. N., & Handee, J. C. An experimental analysis of anti-litter procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1971, 4, 71–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Byrd, L. P., & Marr, M. J. Relations between patterns of responding and the presentation of stimuli under second-order schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1969, 12, 713–722.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chapman, C, & Risley, T. R. Anti-litter procedures in an urban high-density area. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974, 7, 377–383.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark, R. N., Burgess, R. L., & Hendee, J. D. The development of anti-litter behavior in a forest campground. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1972, 5, 1–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cone, J. D., & Hayes, S. C. Applied behavior analysis and the solution of environmental problems. In I. Altman & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Human behavior and environment: Advances in theory and research (Vol. 2), New York: Plenum Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  10. Davis, H. R. Change and Innovation. In S. Feldman (Ed.), The administration of mental health services. Springfield, I11.: Charles C Thomas, 1973.Google Scholar
  11. Elms, A. C. The crisis of confidence in social psychology. American Psychologist, 1976, 30, 967–976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans, H. L., & Weiss, B. Behavioral toxicology. In D. E. Blackman & D. J. Sanger (Eds.), Contemporary research in behavioral pharmacology. New York: Plenum Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  13. Everett, P. B., Hayward, S. C, & Meyers, A. W. The effects of a token reinforcement procedure on bus ridership. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974, 7, 1–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fawcett, S. B., & Fletcher, R. K. Community applications of instructional technology: Teaching writers of instructional packages. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 739–746.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feingold, B. F. Why your child is hyperactive. New York: Random House, 1975.Google Scholar
  16. Finnie, W. C. Field experiments in litter control. Environment and Behavior, 1973, 5, 123–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foxx, R. M., & Hake, D. F. Gasoline conservation: A procedure for measuring and reducing the driving of college students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 61–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Geller, E. S. Prompting anti-litter behaviors. Proceedings of the 81st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 1973, 8, 901–902.Google Scholar
  19. Geller, E. S., Farris, J. C., & Post, D. S. Prompting a consumer behavior for consumer control. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 367–376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gilbert, T. F. Human competence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.Google Scholar
  21. Hake, D. F., & Foxx, R. M. Promoting gasoline conservation: The effects of reinforcement schedule, a leader, and self-recording. Behavior Modification, 1978, 2, 339–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hake, D. F., & Zane, T. A community-based gasoline conservation project: Practical and methodological considerations. Behavior Modification, in press.Google Scholar
  23. Hake, D. F., Vukelich, R., & Kaplan, S. Audit responses: Responses maintained by access to existing self or coactor scores during non-social, parallel work, and cooperation procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973, 19, 409–423.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hall, E. T. The silent language. New York: Doubleday, 1959.Google Scholar
  25. Hayes, S. C, & Cone, J. D. Reducing residential electrical energy use: Payments, information, and feedback. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 425–435.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Illich, I. Medical nemesis: The expropriation of health. New York: Random House, 1976.Google Scholar
  27. Ittelson, W. H., Proshansky, H. M., & Rivlin, L. G. The environmental psychology of the psychiatric ward. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, & L. G. Rivlin (Eds.), Environmental psychology: Man and his physical setting. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970.Google Scholar
  28. Ittelson, W. H., Proshansky, H. M., Rivlin, L. G., & Winkel, G. H. An introduction to environmental psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1974.Google Scholar
  29. Kelleher, R. T. Chaining and conditioned reinforcement. In W. R. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.Google Scholar
  30. Kohlenberg, R., & Phillips, T. Reinforcement and rate of litter depositing. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 391–396.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kohlenberg, R., Phillips, T., & Proctor, W. A behavioral analysis of peaking in residential electrical energy consumption. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1976, 9, 13–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liberman, R. P., King, L. W., & De Risi, W. J. Behavior analysis and therapy in community mental health. In H. Leitenberg (Ed.), Handbook of behavior modification and behavior therapy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1976.Google Scholar
  33. Marston, A. R. Behavioral ecology emerges from behavior modification. Behavior Modification, 1979, 3, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Morse, W. H., & Kelleher, R. T. Determinants of reinforcement and punishment. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon, Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1977.Google Scholar
  35. Nahemow, L, & Lawton, M. P. Similarity and propinquity in friendship formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 205–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nietzel, M. T., Winett, R. A., MacDonald, M. L, & Davidson, W. S. Behavioral approaches to community psychology. New York: Pergamon Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  37. Powers, R. B., Osborne, J. G., & Anderson, E.G. Positive reinforcement of litter removal in the natural environment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 579–586.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Proshansky, H. Environmental psychology and the real world. American Psychologist, 1976, 39, 303–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rappaport, J., Davidson, W., Wilson, M., & Mitchell, A. Alternatives to blaming the victim or the environment: Our places to stand have not moved the earth. American Psychologist, 1975, 30, 525–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schaeffer, M. H., & Foxx, R. M. Using a company-based lottery to reduce employees’ nonessential driving. Paper presented at the 87th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, September 1979.Google Scholar
  41. Schumacher, E. F. Small is beautiful: Economics as if people mattered. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.Google Scholar
  42. Skinner, B. F. Waiden two. New York: Macmillan, 1948.Google Scholar
  43. Sommer, R. Small group ecology. Psychological Bulletin, 1967, 67, 145–152.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Strodtbeck, F. L, & Hook, L. H. The social dimensions of a twelve man jury table. Sociometry, 1961, 24, 397–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Office of Public Affairs. EDM-055. Washington, D.C., 1975.Google Scholar
  46. Vukelich, R., & Hake, D. F. Basic research in a natural setting: Auditing or social comparison behavior as a function of class rank. The Psychological Record, 1980, 30, 17–24.Google Scholar
  47. Weiss, B., & Laties, V. G. Assays for behavioral toxicity: A strategy for the environmental protection agency. Neurobehavioral Toxicology, 1979, 1, 213–215.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Willems, E. P. Behavioral technology and behavioral ecology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974, 7, 151–166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Winett, R. A., & Nietzel, M. T. Behavioral ecology: Contingency management of consumer energy use. American Journal of Community Psychology, 1975, 3, 123–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zifferblatt, S. M., & Hendricks, C. G. Applied behavioral analysis of societal problems: Population change, a case in point. American Psychologist, 1974, 29, 750–761.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Don F. Hake
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA

Personalised recommendations