Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Behavior Analyst logoLink to The Behavior Analyst
. 2005;28(2):85–98. doi: 10.1007/BF03392107

Positive and negative reinforcement: Should the distinction be preserved?

Alan Baron, Mark Galizio
PMCID: PMC2755378  PMID: 22478443

Abstract

Michael (1975) reviewed efforts to classify reinforcing events in terms of whether stimuli are added (positive reinforcement) or removed (negative reinforcement). He concluded that distinctions in these terms are confusing and ambiguous. Of necessity, adding a stimulus requires its previous absence and removing a stimulus its previous presence. Moreover, there is no good basis, either behavioral or physiological, that indicates the involvement of distinctly different processes, and on these grounds he proposed that the distinction be abandoned. Despite the cogency of Michael's analysis, the distinction between positive and negative reinforcement is still being taught. In this paper, we reconsider the issue from the perspective of 30 years. However, we could not find new evidence in contemporary research and theory that allows reliable classification of an event as a positive rather than a negative reinforcer. We conclude by reiterating Michael's admonitions about the conceptual confusion created by such a distinction.

Keywords: classification of reinforcers, positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, stimulus onset, stimulus offset

Full text

PDF
85

Selected References

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

  1. Baron A., Kaufman A. Human, free-operant avoidance of "time out" from monetary reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1966 Sep;9(5):557–565. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-557. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brown J. F., Hendy S. A step towards ending the isolation of behavior analysis: A common language with evolutionary science. Behav Anal. 2001 Fall;24(2):163–171. doi: 10.1007/BF03392027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Crowley T. J. The reinforcers for drug abuse: why people take drugs. Compr Psychiatry. 1972 Jan;13(1):51–62. doi: 10.1016/0010-440x(72)90034-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Davis M., Astrachan D. I. Conditioned fear and startle magnitude: effects of different footshock or backshock intensities used in training. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1978 Apr;4(2):95–103. doi: 10.1037//0097-7403.4.2.95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Farber P. D., Khavari K. A., Douglass F. M., 4th A factor analytic study of reasons for drinking: empirical validation of positive and negative reinforecement dimensions. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1980 Dec;48(6):780–781. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.48.6.780. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Friman P. C., Hayes S. C., Wilson K. G. Why behavior analysts should study emotion: the example of anxiety. J Appl Behav Anal. 1998 Spring;31(1):137–156. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Galbicka G., Platt J. R. Interresponse-time punishment: a basis for shock-maintained behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 May;41(3):291–308. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hineline P. N. Aversive control: A separate domain? J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Nov;42(3):495–509. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-495. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Iwata B. A., Pace G. M., Dorsey M. F., Zarcone J. R., Vollmer T. R., Smith R. G., Rodgers T. A., Lerman D. C., Shore B. A., Mazalesk J. L. The functions of self-injurious behavior: an experimental-epidemiological analysis. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):215–240. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. KELLEHER R. T., MORSE W. H. ESCAPE BEHAVIOR AND PUNISHED BEHAVIOR. Fed Proc. 1964 Jul-Aug;23:808–817. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kiyatkin E. A. Functional significance of mesolimbic dopamine. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1995 Winter;19(4):573–598. doi: 10.1016/0149-7634(95)00029-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Knutson Brian, Burgdorf Jeffrey, Panksepp Jaak. Ultrasonic vocalizations as indices of affective states in rats. Psychol Bull. 2002 Nov;128(6):961–977. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.6.961. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Laurence M. T., Hineline P. N., Bersh P. J. The puzzle of responding maintained by response-contingent shock. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 Mar;61(2):135–153. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. McCullough L. D., Sokolowski J. D., Salamone J. D. A neurochemical and behavioral investigation of the involvement of nucleus accumbens dopamine in instrumental avoidance. Neuroscience. 1993 Feb;52(4):919–925. doi: 10.1016/0306-4522(93)90538-q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-705. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  16. Perone M., Galizio M. Variable-interval schedules of timeout from avoidance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Jan;47(1):97–113. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Perone Michael. Negative effects of positive reinforcement. Behav Anal. 2003 Spring;26(1):1–14. doi: 10.1007/BF03392064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Salamone J. D., Correa M., Mingote S., Weber S. M. Nucleus accumbens dopamine and the regulation of effort in food-seeking behavior: implications for studies of natural motivation, psychiatry, and drug abuse. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2003 Apr;305(1):1–8. doi: 10.1124/jpet.102.035063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Salamone J. D., Cousins M. S., Snyder B. J. Behavioral functions of nucleus accumbens dopamine: empirical and conceptual problems with the anhedonia hypothesis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1997 May;21(3):341–359. doi: 10.1016/s0149-7634(96)00017-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Skinner B. F. Selection by consequences. Science. 1981 Jul 31;213(4507):501–504. doi: 10.1126/science.7244649. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Small D. M., Zatorre R. J., Dagher A., Evans A. C., Jones-Gotman M. Changes in brain activity related to eating chocolate: from pleasure to aversion. Brain. 2001 Sep;124(Pt 9):1720–1733. doi: 10.1093/brain/124.9.1720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Solomon R. L., Corbit J. D. An opponent-process theory of motivation. I. Temporal dynamics of affect. Psychol Rev. 1974 Mar;81(2):119–145. doi: 10.1037/h0036128. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Solomon R. L. The opponent-process theory of acquired motivation: the costs of pleasure and the benefits of pain. Am Psychol. 1980 Aug;35(8):691–712. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.35.8.691. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Stone G. C. Nondiscriminated Avoidance Behavior in Human Subjects. Science. 1961 Mar 3;133(3453):641–642. doi: 10.1126/science.133.3453.641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. VERHAVE T. The functional properties of a time out from an avoidance schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:391–422. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. WEISS B., LATIES V. G. Behavioral thermoregulation. Science. 1961 Apr 28;133(3461):1338–1344. doi: 10.1126/science.133.3461.1338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Wise R. A., Bozarth M. A. A psychomotor stimulant theory of addiction. Psychol Rev. 1987 Oct;94(4):469–492. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES