Advertisement

An Experimental Analysis of Rule-Governed Behavior

  • A. Charles Catania
  • Eliot Shimoff
  • Byron A. Matthews

Abstract

Contingency-shaped behavior is behavior directly controlled by the relations between responses and their consequences. But behavior may also come under the control of antecedent stimuli, stimuli in the presence of which responses produce their consequences. We find important examples of such stimuli in human verbal communities, which arrange contingencies that bring behavior under the control of antecedent verbal stimuli called commands, instructions, or rules.

Keywords

Verbal Behavior Contingency Description Point Delivery Left Button Verbal Rule 
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. Bentall, R. P., Lowe, C. F., & Beasty, A. (1985). The role of verbal behavior in human learning: II. Developmental differences. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43, 165 – 181.Google Scholar
  2. Brewer, W. F. (1975). There is no convincing evidence for operant or classical conditioning in adult humans. In W. B. Weimer & D. S. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition and the symbolic processes (pp. 1–42). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Catania, A. C. (1986). Rule-governed behavior and the origins of language. In C. F. Lowe, M. Richelle, D. E. Blackman, & C. Bradshaw (Eds.), Behavior analysis and contemporary psychology (pp. 135–156). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Catania, A. C., Matthews, B. A., & Shimoff, E. (1982). Instructed versus shaped human verbal behavior: Interactions with nonverbal responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 38, 233–248.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Catania, A. C., Shimoff, E., and Matthews, B. A. (1987). Correspondences between definitions and procedures: A reply to Stokes, Osnes, and Guevremont. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 401–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chaiklin, S. (1984). On the nature of verbal rules and their role in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 8, 131–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dulany, D. E., Carlson, R. A., & Dewey, G. I. (1984). A case of syntactical learning and judgment: How conscious and how abstract? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 541–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dulany, D. E., Carlson, R. A., & Dewey, G. I. (1985). On consciousness in syntactic learning and judgment: A reply to Reber, Allen, and Regan. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Greenspoon, J. (1955). The reinforcing effect of two spoken sounds on the frequency of two responses. American Journal of Psychology, 68, 409–416.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hefferline, R. F., & Keenan, B. (1961). Amplitude-induction gradient of a small human operant in an escape-avoidance situation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 41–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaufman, A., Baron, A., & Kopp, R. E. (1966). Some effects of instructions on human operant behavior. Psychonomic Monograph Supplements, 1(11), 243–250.Google Scholar
  14. Lowe, C. F. (1979). Determinants of human operant behaviour. In M. D. Zeiler & P. Harzem (Eds.), Advances in analysis of behaviour: Vol. 1. Reinforcement and the organization of behaviour (pp. 159–192). Chichester, England: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Lowe, C. F. (1983). Radical behaviorism and human psychology. In G. C. L. Davey (Ed.), Animal models of human behavior: Conceptual, evolutionary and neurobiological perspectives (pp. 71–93). Chichester, England: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Lowe, C. F., Beasty, A., & Bentall, R. P. (1983). The role of verbal behavior in human learning: Infant performance on fixed-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39, 157–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Matthews, B. A., Shimoff, E., Catania, A. C., & Sagvolden, T. (1977). Uninstructed human responding: Sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 453–467.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Matthews, B. A., Catania, A. C., & Shimoff, E. (1985). Effects of uninstructed verbal behavior on nonverbal responding: Contingency descriptions versus performance descriptions. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43, 155–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Matthews, B. A., Shimoff, E., & Catania, A. C. (1987). Saying and doing: A contingency-space analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 69–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Reber, A. S., Allen, R., & Regan, S. (1985). Syntactic learning and judgment, still unconscious and still abstract: Comment on Dulany, Carlson, and Dewey. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Risley, T. R., & Hart, B. (1968). Developing correspondence between the non-verbal and verbal behavior of pre-school children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 267–281.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shimoff, E., Catania, A. C., & Matthews, B. A. (1981). Uninstructed human responding: Sensitivity of low-rate performance to schedule contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36, 207–220.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shimoff, E., Matthews, B. A., & Catania, A. C. (1986). Human operant performance: Sensitivity and pseudosensitivity to contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 46, 149–157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Skinner, B. F. (1956). A case history in scientific method. American Psychologist, 11, 221–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Skinner, B. F. (1966). An operant analysis of problem solving. In B. Kleinmuntz (Ed.), Problem solving: Research, method, and theory. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  28. Weiner, H. (1969). Controlling human fixed-interval performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 349–373.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Winer, B. J. (1962). Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zettle, R. D., & Hayes, S. C. (1982). Rule-governed behavior: A potential theoretical framework for cognitive-behavioral therapy. In Advances in cognitive behavioral research and therapy. Volume 1 (pp. 73–118). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Charles Catania
    • 1
  • Eliot Shimoff
    • 1
  • Byron A. Matthews
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of Maryland Baltimore CountyCatonsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations