Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Behavior Analyst logoLink to The Behavior Analyst
. 1995 Fall;18(2):209–224. doi: 10.1007/BF03392709

Contingency and behavior analysis

Kennon A Lattal
PMCID: PMC2733721  PMID: 22478219

Abstract

The concept of contingency is central to theoretical discussions of learned behavior and in the application of learning research to problems of social significance. This paper reviews three aspects of the contingency concept as it has been developed by behavior analysts. The first is the empirical analysis of contingency through experimental studies of both human and nonhuman behavior. The second is the synthesis of experimental studies in theoretical and conceptual frameworks to yield a more general account of contingency and to integrate the concept with other behavioral processes. The third aspect is one of practical considerations in the application of the contingency concept in both laboratory and applied settings.

Keywords: contingency, response—reinforcer relations, functional analysis, molar and molecular accounts, applications

Full text

PDF
209

Selected References

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

  1. ANGER D. The dependence of interresponse times upon the relative reinforcement of different interresponse times. J Exp Psychol. 1956 Sep;52(3):145–161. doi: 10.1037/h0041255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Arbuckle J. L., Lattal K. A. Changes in functional response units with briefly delayed reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Mar;49(2):249–263. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.49-249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bacotti A. V. Responding under schedules combining response-dependent and response-independent shock delivery. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Mar;29(2):267–272. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baum W. M. Quantitative prediction and molar description of the environment. Behav Anal. 1989 Fall;12(2):167–176. doi: 10.1007/BF03392493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Catania A. C., Sagvolden T. Preference for free choice over forced choice in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Jul;34(1):77–86. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dickinson A. M. The detrimental effects of extrinsic reinforcement on "Intrinsic motivation". Behav Anal. 1989 Spring;12(1):1–15. doi: 10.1007/BF03392473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Freeman T. J., Lattal K. A. Stimulus control of behavioral history. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Jan;57(1):5–15. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Gibbon J., Berryman R., Thompson R. L. Contingency spaces and measures in classical and instrumental conditioning. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):585–605. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Gleeson S., Lattal K. A. Response-reinforcer relations and the maintenance of behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Nov;48(3):383–393. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hawkes L., Shimp C. P. Reinforcement of behavioral patterns: shaping a scallop. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Jan;23(1):3–16. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.23-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Herrnstein R. J., Hineline P. N. Negative reinforcement as shock-frequency reduction. J Exp Anal Behav. 1966 Jul;9(4):421–430. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Herrnstein R. J. On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):243–266. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hineline P. N. A self-interpretive behavior analysis. Am Psychol. 1992 Nov;47(11):1274–1286. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.47.11.1274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Iwata B. A. The development and adoption of controversial default technologies. Behav Anal. 1988 Fall;11(2):149–157. doi: 10.1007/BF03392468. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Killeen P. R. Superstition: a matter of bias, not detectability. Science. 1978 Jan 6;199(4324):88–90. doi: 10.1126/science.199.4324.88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Lattal K. A. Combinations of response-reinforcer dependence and independence. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):357–362. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-357. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Lattal K. A., Freeman T. J., Critchfield T. S. Response-reinforcer dependency location in interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 Jan;51(1):101–117. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Lattal K. A., Gleeson S. Response acquisition with delayed reinforcement. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1990 Jan;16(1):27–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Lattal K. A., Maxey G. C. Some effects of response independent reinforcers in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Sep;16(2):225–231. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Lattal K. A., Metzger B. Response acquisition by Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens) with delayed visual reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 Jan;61(1):35–44. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Lattal K. A., Poling A. D. Describing response-event relations: Babel revisited. Behav Anal. 1981 Fall;4(2):143–152. doi: 10.1007/BF03391861. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Lattal K. A. Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Mar;23(2):241–246. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.23-241. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Lattal K. A. Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli: II. Effects of changes in stimulus probability. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Jan;31(1):15–22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.31-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lattal K. A., Ziegler D. R. Briefly delayed reinforcement: An interresponse time analysis. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 May;37(3):407–416. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Nevin J. A. Response strength in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):389–408. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Nevin J. A., Smith L. D., Roberts J. Does contingent reinforcement strengthen operant behavior? J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Jul;48(1):17–33. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Redd W. H., Birnbrauer J. S. Adults as discriminative stimuli for different reinforcement contingencies with retarded children. J Exp Child Psychol. 1969 Jun;7(3):440–447. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(69)90006-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Redd W. H. Effects of mixed reinforcement contingencies on adults' control of children's behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1969 Winter;2(4):249–254. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1969.2-249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Rescorla R. A. Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychol Rev. 1967 Jan;74(1):71–80. doi: 10.1037/h0024109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. SKINNER B. F. Superstition in the pigeon. J Exp Psychol. 1948 Apr;38(2):168–172. doi: 10.1037/h0055873. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Sizemore O. J., Lattal K. A. Dependency, temporal contiguity, and response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Jan;27(1):119–125. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Sizemore O. J., Lattal K. A. Unsignalled delay of reinforcement in variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Sep;30(2):169–175. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Staddon J. E. The 'superstition' experiment: a reversible figure. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1992 Sep;121(3):270–272. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.121.3.270. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Wanchisen B. A., Tatham T. A., Mooney S. E. Variable-ratio conditioning history produces high- and low-rate fixed-interval performance in rats. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 Sep;52(2):167–179. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.52-167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Williams B. A. The effects of unsignalled delayed reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Nov;26(3):441–449. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-441. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Zeiler M. D. Fixed and variable schedules of response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jul;11(4):405–414. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Zeiler M. D. Superstitious behavior in children: an experimental analysis. Adv Child Dev Behav. 1972;7:1–29. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2407(08)60438-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES