Skip to main content
PMC home page
The Behavior Analyst logoLink to The Behavior Analyst
. 1996 Fall;19(2):257–272. doi: 10.1007/BF03393168

Envisioning cultural practices

Mark A Mattaini
PMCID: PMC2733617  PMID: 22478262

Abstract

Graphic visualization has demonstrated its value for organizing transactional data and modeling complex phenomena in a wide variety of fields, from theoretical physics to medicine. Behavior analysts have historically used a variety of graphic tools not only for presentation but also for analysis and teaching. As they turn increasingly to the analysis and design of cultural practices, the phenomena behavior analysts study are becoming increasingly complicated. Many cultural practices of interest are embedded in extensive webs of interlocking practices and contingencies that can be difficult to grasp comprehensively. Building on contingency diagrams, which have proven to be useful for the analysis of operant behavior, and graphic tools developed for object-oriented systems analysis, this paper suggests graphic tools for capturing the interlocking contingencies that constitute cultures. These diagrams offer a broad-bandwidth technology for analyzing and designing cultural practices.

Keywords: cultural practices, interlocking contingencies, graphic visualization

Full text

PDF
257

Images in this article

262Figure 3
on p.262

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Chisholm D. C., Cook D. A. A model of cause-effect relations in the study of behavior. Behav Anal. 1995 Spring;18(1):99–111. doi: 10.1007/BF03392696. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Glenn S. S. Contingencies and metacontingencies: Toward a synthesis of behavior analysis and cultural materialism. Behav Anal. 1988 Fall;11(2):161–179. doi: 10.1007/BF03392470. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Malott R. W. Rule-governed behavior and behavioral anthropology. Behav Anal. 1988 Fall;11(2):181–203. doi: 10.1007/BF03392471. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Mattaini M. A. Contingency diagrams as teaching tools. Behav Anal. 1995 Spring;18(1):93–98. doi: 10.1007/BF03392695. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. McDowell J. J. Matching theory in natural human environments. Behav Anal. 1988 Fall;11(2):95–109. doi: 10.1007/BF03392462. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Michael J., Shafer E. State notation for teaching about behavioral procedures. Behav Anal. 1995 Spring;18(1):123–140. doi: 10.1007/BF03392698. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Michael J. What every student of behavior analysis ought to learn: a system for classifying the multiple effects of behavioral variables. Behav Anal. 1995 Fall;18(2):273–284. doi: 10.1007/BF03392714. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Serna L. A., Schumaker J. B., Sherman J. A., Sheldon J. B. In-home generalization of social interactions in families of adolescents with behavior problems. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Winter;24(4):733–746. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-733. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Skinner B. F. Selection by consequences. Science. 1981 Jul 31;213(4507):501–504. doi: 10.1126/science.7244649. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Behavior Analyst are provided here courtesy of Association for Behavior Analysis International

RESOURCES