Despite the fact that many sociologists see their work as being decidedly empirical, those who conduct social constructionist analyses of social organization and social order are often criticized for not adhering to more stringent empirical protocols. Failure to do so has also resulted in many behavioral scientists, including behavior analysts, rejecting social constructionism outright. Social constructionism offers a valuable insight into human social behavior, however, and should not be disregarded. What needs to occur is a more precise accounting of how social constructions are created and maintained and how they manage to exert influence over human beings despite their lack of materiality; behavior analysis can provide this additional accounting. Ironically, as behavioral scientific enterprises, both behavior analysis and social constructionism share a basic understanding: human society in general and social order in particular, are created and maintained through the ongoing interaction between and among individuals. The differences between the two approaches lie in the specifics of precisely how human society and social order are created and maintained. Despite the fact that some have concluded that the differences are insurmountable, a closer inspection reveals that the differences are paradigmatically significant, but practically, minimal. The following article demonstrates similarities between behavior analysis and a sociological approach to social constructionism and also demonstrates how behavior analysis can serve to empirically ground most forms of social constructionism, but most importantly, sociological social constructionism. Sociological social constructionism There are many variations of social constructionism practiced among social scientific disciplines. Although most share a common view that human beings are reflective and interpretive actors, within the field of sociology, in keeping with our centuries-old focus, social constructionism is generally employed as an analytical approach in the accounting for recurrent, repetitive, individual and collective behavior, otherwise known as social order. As such, for purposes of this paper, and to distinguish the social constructionist approach discussed in this paper from other social constructionist formulations, the qualifier sociological will be added to the term social constructionism so as to maintain the focus on this distinctly sociological preoccupation with social organization and social order. Thus, sociological social constructionism is a social constructionist approach to the study of human behavior, but more importantly, it is an approach to the study of the ongoing production and maintenance of social order among and between human actors. Within the field of sociology, there is no definitive treatment of social constructionism as a unified, systematic theory of either social behavior or social order (a review of several textbooks on formal sociological theory confirms t
{"title":"Behavior Analytic Grounding of Sociological Social Constructionism","authors":"J. Glass","doi":"10.1037/H0100631","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100631","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the fact that many sociologists see their work as being decidedly empirical, those who conduct social constructionist analyses of social organization and social order are often criticized for not adhering to more stringent empirical protocols. Failure to do so has also resulted in many behavioral scientists, including behavior analysts, rejecting social constructionism outright. Social constructionism offers a valuable insight into human social behavior, however, and should not be disregarded. What needs to occur is a more precise accounting of how social constructions are created and maintained and how they manage to exert influence over human beings despite their lack of materiality; behavior analysis can provide this additional accounting. Ironically, as behavioral scientific enterprises, both behavior analysis and social constructionism share a basic understanding: human society in general and social order in particular, are created and maintained through the ongoing interaction between and among individuals. The differences between the two approaches lie in the specifics of precisely how human society and social order are created and maintained. Despite the fact that some have concluded that the differences are insurmountable, a closer inspection reveals that the differences are paradigmatically significant, but practically, minimal. The following article demonstrates similarities between behavior analysis and a sociological approach to social constructionism and also demonstrates how behavior analysis can serve to empirically ground most forms of social constructionism, but most importantly, sociological social constructionism. Sociological social constructionism There are many variations of social constructionism practiced among social scientific disciplines. Although most share a common view that human beings are reflective and interpretive actors, within the field of sociology, in keeping with our centuries-old focus, social constructionism is generally employed as an analytical approach in the accounting for recurrent, repetitive, individual and collective behavior, otherwise known as social order. As such, for purposes of this paper, and to distinguish the social constructionist approach discussed in this paper from other social constructionist formulations, the qualifier sociological will be added to the term social constructionism so as to maintain the focus on this distinctly sociological preoccupation with social organization and social order. Thus, sociological social constructionism is a social constructionist approach to the study of human behavior, but more importantly, it is an approach to the study of the ongoing production and maintenance of social order among and between human actors. Within the field of sociology, there is no definitive treatment of social constructionism as a unified, systematic theory of either social behavior or social order (a review of several textbooks on formal sociological theory confirms t","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"426-433"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58471307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Positive behavior support (PBS) developed in the 1980s and 1990s as an approach to enhance quality of life and minimize challenging behavior (Carr et al., 2002). Founded in 1999, Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions publishes both conceptual and empirical articles on PBS using a variety of methodologies (e.g., Baker-Ericzen, Stahmer, & Burns, 2007; Harvey, Baker, Horner, & Blackford, 2003; Vaughn, White, Johnston, & Dunlap, 2005), though single-subject designs are very common. One feature of JPBI that distinguishes it from other behaviorally oriented journals, including Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, is that the vast majority of published studies are conducted in natural settings rather than in clinical settings. This is not to suggest that research in laboratories or clinical settings is not important or valued; rather, it reflects an emphasis within PBS on external validity and contextual fit of interventions. As noted by Johnston et al. (2006), PBS has been associated with a great deal of federal funding and has been written into policy at the federal level. For example, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 maintains provisions for "positive behavioral interventions and supports" for children with disabilities who display problem behavior. Some states have also adopted statutes prescribing PBS for persons with disabilities. Further, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) of the US Department of Education has dedicated considerable funding to support PBS intervention, training, and research. Importantly, these developments did not come about as a result of campaigning by researchers within PBS, but rather because consumers (e.g., educators and parents) informed policy makers that PBS was having an important and durable impact on the lives of children. The PBS Controversy In recent years, a debate has evolved about positive behavior support and its relation to applied behavior analysis. Origins of the debate may be traced to the position that PBS is a new science, evolved from, yet different than, applied behavior analysis (ABA) (Carr et al., 2002). Although advocates of this position acknowledge the central influence of ABA in the heritage of PBS (Dunlap, 2006), they argue that the combined elements of PBS comprise a fundamentally new science to reduce challenging behavior. In response, some behavior analysts have countered that PBS is not different from ABA (Carr & Sidener, 2002). Proponents of this view posit that the procedures of PBS are largely, if not entirely, drawn from ABA and that attempts to conceptualize PBS as a new science have potentially harmful ramifications for the field of ABA. Furthering this view, other behavior analysts have described PBS as a direct threat to ABA (Johnston et al., 2006; Mulick & Butler, 2005). Accordingly, they imply that the successful dissemination of PBS as a new science will result in consumers' rejection of ABA. Moreover, because many PBS practitio
{"title":"Moving Forward: Positive Behavior Support and Applied Behavior Analysis","authors":"Matthew J. Tincani","doi":"10.1037/H0100635","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100635","url":null,"abstract":"Positive behavior support (PBS) developed in the 1980s and 1990s as an approach to enhance quality of life and minimize challenging behavior (Carr et al., 2002). Founded in 1999, Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions publishes both conceptual and empirical articles on PBS using a variety of methodologies (e.g., Baker-Ericzen, Stahmer, & Burns, 2007; Harvey, Baker, Horner, & Blackford, 2003; Vaughn, White, Johnston, & Dunlap, 2005), though single-subject designs are very common. One feature of JPBI that distinguishes it from other behaviorally oriented journals, including Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, is that the vast majority of published studies are conducted in natural settings rather than in clinical settings. This is not to suggest that research in laboratories or clinical settings is not important or valued; rather, it reflects an emphasis within PBS on external validity and contextual fit of interventions. As noted by Johnston et al. (2006), PBS has been associated with a great deal of federal funding and has been written into policy at the federal level. For example, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 maintains provisions for \"positive behavioral interventions and supports\" for children with disabilities who display problem behavior. Some states have also adopted statutes prescribing PBS for persons with disabilities. Further, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) of the US Department of Education has dedicated considerable funding to support PBS intervention, training, and research. Importantly, these developments did not come about as a result of campaigning by researchers within PBS, but rather because consumers (e.g., educators and parents) informed policy makers that PBS was having an important and durable impact on the lives of children. The PBS Controversy In recent years, a debate has evolved about positive behavior support and its relation to applied behavior analysis. Origins of the debate may be traced to the position that PBS is a new science, evolved from, yet different than, applied behavior analysis (ABA) (Carr et al., 2002). Although advocates of this position acknowledge the central influence of ABA in the heritage of PBS (Dunlap, 2006), they argue that the combined elements of PBS comprise a fundamentally new science to reduce challenging behavior. In response, some behavior analysts have countered that PBS is not different from ABA (Carr & Sidener, 2002). Proponents of this view posit that the procedures of PBS are largely, if not entirely, drawn from ABA and that attempts to conceptualize PBS as a new science have potentially harmful ramifications for the field of ABA. Furthering this view, other behavior analysts have described PBS as a direct threat to ABA (Johnston et al., 2006; Mulick & Butler, 2005). Accordingly, they imply that the successful dissemination of PBS as a new science will result in consumers' rejection of ABA. Moreover, because many PBS practitio","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"492-499"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58471063","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The present study uses the PEM approach to synthesize the effectiveness of treatment on disruptive behaviors and simultaneously tests whether the higher validity of the PEM approach than that of the PND approach is repeatable. A hand search of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis was conducted, and reference lists from reviewed articles were traced to locate relevant studies. Altogether, 106 single-subject studies, which produced 694 effect sizes, were analyzed. The grand mean of 106 averaged effect sizes was significant. Results demonstrated that the PEM approach was more congruent with the original authors’ judgments than the PND approach. Important findings regarding the effectiveness of interventions on the disruptive behaviors are that the strategies of differential reinforcement and the token economy system along with multi-components intervention were highly effective.
{"title":"Effects of Treatment on Disruptive Behaviors: A Quantitative Synthesis of Single-Subject Researches Using the PEM Approach","authors":"Chiu-Wen Chen, Hsen-Hsing Ma","doi":"10.1037/H0100629","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100629","url":null,"abstract":"The present study uses the PEM approach to synthesize the effectiveness of treatment on disruptive behaviors and simultaneously tests whether the higher validity of the PEM approach than that of the PND approach is repeatable. A hand search of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis was conducted, and reference lists from reviewed articles were traced to locate relevant studies. Altogether, 106 single-subject studies, which produced 694 effect sizes, were analyzed. The grand mean of 106 averaged effect sizes was significant. Results demonstrated that the PEM approach was more congruent with the original authors’ judgments than the PND approach. Important findings regarding the effectiveness of interventions on the disruptive behaviors are that the strategies of differential reinforcement and the token economy system along with multi-components intervention were highly effective.","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"380-397"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58470899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
For decades, teacher educators have emphasized the importance of devising more effective ways of preparing preservice teachers for the classroom. Generally, these efforts encompass more effective preparation in content area knowledge, teaching methods, interprofessional skills, and classroom management (Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002). The need for teaching higher levels of professional performance has been exacerbated by numerous calls for teacher education reform and students' academic performance, most recently enshrined in No Child Left Behind (NCLB). These calls for reform imply the need for (a) collaborative team approaches for more effective service delivery, (b) consolidation of organizational configurations requiring increased professional collaboration as school districts strive to become more cost efficient and effective, (c) the move towards including students with special needs in general education classes, (d) an increased understanding that the complex needs of most students require an array of professionals who are able to work together more closely than previously, and (e) that novice teachers, by virtue of these factors, need effective instruction in these areas prior to graduating to their new profession (Cohen & Ball, 1999). Case-Based Instruction Generally, in research and teaching, case studies have been seen as a precursor to legitimate scientific research or as a way of studying extremely rare, "one shot" phenomena (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). An alternative view, however, suggests that cases can describe real-world contextual problems that are probably too complex and unique to approach experimentally (e.g., Cohen & Ball, 1999; Yin, 1984). The current popularity of the approach began after Shulman's 1985 call for a pedagogy of cases (Floyd & Bodur, 2005) Rationales for incorporating real-world situations in preservice and novice teacher education vary, but generally incorporate the following: First, teacher education research has consistently acknowledged that classroom events are contingent on a host of interrelated contributory factors that are mutually influential, to a greater or lesser extent, in producing teacher and student performance (Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002). Teaching via the case method appears to be an ideal way of communicating the detailed, interrelated, and often densely interrelations necessary to explore the multidimensional nature of what students and teachers do in classrooms. Second, there is a pivotal need to ensure that preservice and novice teachers are able to apply what they have learned from research on teaching and learning to complex classroom situations, thereby narrowing the research-to-practice gap (Floyd & Bodur, 2005). In this regard, cases allow for infusing of research knowledge in a comprehensive and comprehensible form to almost any intended audience. Third, the characteristically complex nature of the case study reflects situations and vectors of influence likely t
{"title":"Challenges of Case-Based Teaching.","authors":"M. Mostert","doi":"10.1037/H0100632","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100632","url":null,"abstract":"For decades, teacher educators have emphasized the importance of devising more effective ways of preparing preservice teachers for the classroom. Generally, these efforts encompass more effective preparation in content area knowledge, teaching methods, interprofessional skills, and classroom management (Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002). The need for teaching higher levels of professional performance has been exacerbated by numerous calls for teacher education reform and students' academic performance, most recently enshrined in No Child Left Behind (NCLB). These calls for reform imply the need for (a) collaborative team approaches for more effective service delivery, (b) consolidation of organizational configurations requiring increased professional collaboration as school districts strive to become more cost efficient and effective, (c) the move towards including students with special needs in general education classes, (d) an increased understanding that the complex needs of most students require an array of professionals who are able to work together more closely than previously, and (e) that novice teachers, by virtue of these factors, need effective instruction in these areas prior to graduating to their new profession (Cohen & Ball, 1999). Case-Based Instruction Generally, in research and teaching, case studies have been seen as a precursor to legitimate scientific research or as a way of studying extremely rare, \"one shot\" phenomena (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). An alternative view, however, suggests that cases can describe real-world contextual problems that are probably too complex and unique to approach experimentally (e.g., Cohen & Ball, 1999; Yin, 1984). The current popularity of the approach began after Shulman's 1985 call for a pedagogy of cases (Floyd & Bodur, 2005) Rationales for incorporating real-world situations in preservice and novice teacher education vary, but generally incorporate the following: First, teacher education research has consistently acknowledged that classroom events are contingent on a host of interrelated contributory factors that are mutually influential, to a greater or lesser extent, in producing teacher and student performance (Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002). Teaching via the case method appears to be an ideal way of communicating the detailed, interrelated, and often densely interrelations necessary to explore the multidimensional nature of what students and teachers do in classrooms. Second, there is a pivotal need to ensure that preservice and novice teachers are able to apply what they have learned from research on teaching and learning to complex classroom situations, thereby narrowing the research-to-practice gap (Floyd & Bodur, 2005). In this regard, cases allow for infusing of research knowledge in a comprehensive and comprehensible form to almost any intended audience. Third, the characteristically complex nature of the case study reflects situations and vectors of influence likely t","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"434-442"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58471464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R. Nelson-Gray, John T. Mitchell, N. Kimbrel, Ruth M. Hurst
The current review is concerned with the development and maintenance of personality disorders from a behavior analytic approach. At first glance, a discussion of the concept of personality in general from a behavior analytic perspective appears somewhat contradictory. Below, however, we consider personality and extreme variants of it that result in disordered (i.e., maladaptive) behavior from such a perspective. Specifically, following a review of basic behavioral principles and an attempt to integrate personality concepts within these principles, we review development and maintenance factors associated with personality disorders as defined within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR, American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2000). Following, we provide examples of our model for avoidant and borderline personality disorders to demonstrate its utility. First, however, we must define what we consider behavior. What Is Behavior? We define behavior as anything a person does, which includes overt and covert forms. Overt behaviors refer to behaviors that are publicly observable, such as verbal (e.g., speaking) or physical (e.g., muscle movement) output. Thus, overt behaviors are public events that can be reported by one or more observers. Covert behaviors, conversely, refer to behaviors that are privately observable and occur within the person, such as feeling, thinking, and physical sensations. Thus, covert behaviors are sometimes referred to as private events. Covert behaviors are observable only to the person him or herself (e.g., experiencing a thought such as "I'll never be good at this") and are not subject to public observation. This distinction between overt and covert forms of behavior (i.e., whether or not the behavior is subject to public observation), however, is of little importance from a behavior analytic perspective as overt and covert behaviors are affected by reinforcement and punishment processes in the same way (Baum, 2005). Indeed, as cited in Baum (2005), Skinner (1969) supported the experience of covert behaviors as behavior in stating that "The skin is not all that important as a boundary" (p. 228). Another example of behavioral definitions that are inclusive of thoughts and feelings as behavior includes Lang's (1968) conceptual division of anxiety. Lang divided anxious behavioral responses into three types: motor, psycho-physiological, and cognitive-verbal. First, motor behaviors involve behaviors characterized by activation of skeletal muscle systems. Second, psycho-physiological behaviors involve hormonal activity or automatic nervous system activity. Finally, cognitive-verbal behaviors involve thoughts, attitudes, or beliefs. Whereas the motor and psycho-physiological arousal behavioral responses are overt behaviors that are subject to public observation, cognitive-verbal responses and emotional responses can include covert behaviors as well. Thus, despite making a d
{"title":"The development and maintenance of personality disorders: A behavioral perspective.","authors":"R. Nelson-Gray, John T. Mitchell, N. Kimbrel, Ruth M. Hurst","doi":"10.1037/H0100633","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100633","url":null,"abstract":"The current review is concerned with the development and maintenance of personality disorders from a behavior analytic approach. At first glance, a discussion of the concept of personality in general from a behavior analytic perspective appears somewhat contradictory. Below, however, we consider personality and extreme variants of it that result in disordered (i.e., maladaptive) behavior from such a perspective. Specifically, following a review of basic behavioral principles and an attempt to integrate personality concepts within these principles, we review development and maintenance factors associated with personality disorders as defined within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR, American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2000). Following, we provide examples of our model for avoidant and borderline personality disorders to demonstrate its utility. First, however, we must define what we consider behavior. What Is Behavior? We define behavior as anything a person does, which includes overt and covert forms. Overt behaviors refer to behaviors that are publicly observable, such as verbal (e.g., speaking) or physical (e.g., muscle movement) output. Thus, overt behaviors are public events that can be reported by one or more observers. Covert behaviors, conversely, refer to behaviors that are privately observable and occur within the person, such as feeling, thinking, and physical sensations. Thus, covert behaviors are sometimes referred to as private events. Covert behaviors are observable only to the person him or herself (e.g., experiencing a thought such as \"I'll never be good at this\") and are not subject to public observation. This distinction between overt and covert forms of behavior (i.e., whether or not the behavior is subject to public observation), however, is of little importance from a behavior analytic perspective as overt and covert behaviors are affected by reinforcement and punishment processes in the same way (Baum, 2005). Indeed, as cited in Baum (2005), Skinner (1969) supported the experience of covert behaviors as behavior in stating that \"The skin is not all that important as a boundary\" (p. 228). Another example of behavioral definitions that are inclusive of thoughts and feelings as behavior includes Lang's (1968) conceptual division of anxiety. Lang divided anxious behavioral responses into three types: motor, psycho-physiological, and cognitive-verbal. First, motor behaviors involve behaviors characterized by activation of skeletal muscle systems. Second, psycho-physiological behaviors involve hormonal activity or automatic nervous system activity. Finally, cognitive-verbal behaviors involve thoughts, attitudes, or beliefs. Whereas the motor and psycho-physiological arousal behavioral responses are overt behaviors that are subject to public observation, cognitive-verbal responses and emotional responses can include covert behaviors as well. Thus, despite making a d","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"443-482"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58471507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Psychologists who study human behavior often posit underlying mechanisms that are difficult to measure directly. And because humans are known to be complex organisms with complex motivational systems, researchers studying human behavior may avoid asking if there are simpler accounts of the behavior being studied. One such example is the phenomenon known as transposition. This phenomenon is familiar to musicians who after playing a tune in one key can seamlessly transpose the tune to a different key with no apparent change in the melody (the relations among the notes). A similar effect can be shown in rats, when after training them on a simultaneous light-gray (S+) versus dark-gray (S-) discrimination with responding to the light-gray reinforced, rats are tested with the light-gray stimulus and a still lighter-gray stimulus (Sn). In spite of the fact that responding to the S+ had a history of reinforcement and responding to the Sn had not, rats typically choose the Sn over the S+. That is, it appears that they learned to choose the lighter one during training and they continued to choose the lighter one on test trials. That is, it appears that they had learned the relation between the two training stimuli rather than their absolute properties. But Spence (1937) proposed that when organisms learn to respond to a stimulus for reinforcement, the tendency to respond generalizes to other similar stimuli (defining a gradient of stimulus generalization). Similarly, responding to the S- results in a gradient of inhibition around the value of the S- stimulus. According to Spence, it is the algebraic summation of those gradients at each point along the dimension that determines the strength of responding (the net response strength) at other points on the dimension (brightness in the example described). If one assumes that the gradients are convex (i.e., flatter near the training values) then the net gradient typically has its peak value not at the S+ but at a point away from the S+ in the direction away from the S-. This occurs because, given the presumed shape of the gradients, there would be a smaller decline in response strength as one begins to move away from the S+ than there would be a decline in inhibition at that point in the inhibitory gradient (see Spence, 1937). In this way, paradoxically, Spence's theory of learning about the absolute properties of a stimulus can account for an animal's choice of a novel stimulus, never seen before, over the S+ training value, and hence it can account for transposition without appealing to relational learning. Cognitive Dissonance An even more striking example of a presumably complex human behavior that is likely to be influenced by simpler behavioral processes is the supposed human motivation to reduce cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance occurs when there is a discrepancy between one's beliefs and one's behavior. This can occur when one acts in a way that is inconsistent with the way one believes one sho
{"title":"Reinforcers Following Greater Effort are Preferred: A Within-Trial Contrast Effect","authors":"T. Zentall","doi":"10.1037/H0100637","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100637","url":null,"abstract":"Psychologists who study human behavior often posit underlying mechanisms that are difficult to measure directly. And because humans are known to be complex organisms with complex motivational systems, researchers studying human behavior may avoid asking if there are simpler accounts of the behavior being studied. One such example is the phenomenon known as transposition. This phenomenon is familiar to musicians who after playing a tune in one key can seamlessly transpose the tune to a different key with no apparent change in the melody (the relations among the notes). A similar effect can be shown in rats, when after training them on a simultaneous light-gray (S+) versus dark-gray (S-) discrimination with responding to the light-gray reinforced, rats are tested with the light-gray stimulus and a still lighter-gray stimulus (Sn). In spite of the fact that responding to the S+ had a history of reinforcement and responding to the Sn had not, rats typically choose the Sn over the S+. That is, it appears that they learned to choose the lighter one during training and they continued to choose the lighter one on test trials. That is, it appears that they had learned the relation between the two training stimuli rather than their absolute properties. But Spence (1937) proposed that when organisms learn to respond to a stimulus for reinforcement, the tendency to respond generalizes to other similar stimuli (defining a gradient of stimulus generalization). Similarly, responding to the S- results in a gradient of inhibition around the value of the S- stimulus. According to Spence, it is the algebraic summation of those gradients at each point along the dimension that determines the strength of responding (the net response strength) at other points on the dimension (brightness in the example described). If one assumes that the gradients are convex (i.e., flatter near the training values) then the net gradient typically has its peak value not at the S+ but at a point away from the S+ in the direction away from the S-. This occurs because, given the presumed shape of the gradients, there would be a smaller decline in response strength as one begins to move away from the S+ than there would be a decline in inhibition at that point in the inhibitory gradient (see Spence, 1937). In this way, paradoxically, Spence's theory of learning about the absolute properties of a stimulus can account for an animal's choice of a novel stimulus, never seen before, over the S+ training value, and hence it can account for transposition without appealing to relational learning. Cognitive Dissonance An even more striking example of a presumably complex human behavior that is likely to be influenced by simpler behavioral processes is the supposed human motivation to reduce cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance occurs when there is a discrepancy between one's beliefs and one's behavior. This can occur when one acts in a way that is inconsistent with the way one believes one sho","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"512-527"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58471097","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. Buchanan, Angela M. Christenson, Carly Ostrom, Nicole L. Hofman
The Problem of Aggression Studies examining aggression in persons with dementia typically define aggression in terms of a variety of physical (e.g., hitting, pinching, biting) and/or verbal (e.g., cursing, threatening) behaviors. Estimates of the prevalence of aggression in cognitively impaired individuals vary widely from study to study, likely due to variations in definition of aggression and how aggression was measured. These estimates range from 13-86% (Deutsch, Bylsma, Rovner, Steelt, & Folstein, 1991; Hamel, et al, 1990; Lyketosos, et al., 2000; Pavesa, et al., 1992; Ryden, Bossenmaier, & McLachlan, 1991; Swearer, Drachman, O'Donnell, & Mitchell, 1988; Zimmerman, Watson & Treat, 1984). Aggressive behavior is also strongly correlated with greater dependence during self-care (Schreiner, 2001). These numbers suggest that aggression in persons with dementia is a significant problem and becomes more likely as the disease progresses. Aggressive behavior can have serious consequences for persons with dementia as well as their caregivers. Aggressive behavior increases distress and burden for caregivers, which can result in nursing home placement (Hamel, et al., 1990; Ryden & Feldt, 1992). In addition, approximately 50% of nursing assistants have been injured during resident assaults (Gates, Fitzwater, Telintelo, Succop, & Sommers, 2004). Residents may also be at risk of being injured when engaging in aggressive behaviors (Ryden & Feldt, 1992). Aggressive residents in long-term care facilities may be labeled as "difficult" or "combative", which can result in social isolation and modifications in caregiving that can exacerbate problems (e.g., having 2 or 3 caregivers dress a resident instead of just one). Furthermore, due to the aversive nature of working with patients that are aggressive, the relationship between caregivers and patients is compromised, thereby decreasing quality of life for both parties (Ryden & Feldt, 1992). In fact, aggression is a significant source of job-related stress and frustration for professional caregivers (Everitt, Fields, Soumerai, & Avorn, 1991; Hagen & Sayers, 1995). Another consequence of aggression is the administration of medications to manage the problem (Sloane, Mathew, & Scarborough, 1991). Aggression has been most typically treated using conventional or atypical antipsychotic medications. Studies have indicated that these medications produce only modest benefits in persons with dementia and carry significant dangers such as increased risk of stroke, exacerbation of cognitive decline, and increased risk of death (Schneider, Dagerman, & Insel, 2005; Sink, Holden, & Yaffe, 2005). Excessive sedation is also a common side effect associated with anti-psychotic medication (Zarit & Zarit, 2007, p. 311). These adverse side effects can result in a reduction in the individual's behavioral repertoire in terms of impairing language, causing gait disturbance that can result in falls, reducing the ability to access preferred
{"title":"Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Aggression in Persons with Dementia: A Review of the Literature","authors":"J. Buchanan, Angela M. Christenson, Carly Ostrom, Nicole L. Hofman","doi":"10.1037/H0100630","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100630","url":null,"abstract":"The Problem of Aggression Studies examining aggression in persons with dementia typically define aggression in terms of a variety of physical (e.g., hitting, pinching, biting) and/or verbal (e.g., cursing, threatening) behaviors. Estimates of the prevalence of aggression in cognitively impaired individuals vary widely from study to study, likely due to variations in definition of aggression and how aggression was measured. These estimates range from 13-86% (Deutsch, Bylsma, Rovner, Steelt, & Folstein, 1991; Hamel, et al, 1990; Lyketosos, et al., 2000; Pavesa, et al., 1992; Ryden, Bossenmaier, & McLachlan, 1991; Swearer, Drachman, O'Donnell, & Mitchell, 1988; Zimmerman, Watson & Treat, 1984). Aggressive behavior is also strongly correlated with greater dependence during self-care (Schreiner, 2001). These numbers suggest that aggression in persons with dementia is a significant problem and becomes more likely as the disease progresses. Aggressive behavior can have serious consequences for persons with dementia as well as their caregivers. Aggressive behavior increases distress and burden for caregivers, which can result in nursing home placement (Hamel, et al., 1990; Ryden & Feldt, 1992). In addition, approximately 50% of nursing assistants have been injured during resident assaults (Gates, Fitzwater, Telintelo, Succop, & Sommers, 2004). Residents may also be at risk of being injured when engaging in aggressive behaviors (Ryden & Feldt, 1992). Aggressive residents in long-term care facilities may be labeled as \"difficult\" or \"combative\", which can result in social isolation and modifications in caregiving that can exacerbate problems (e.g., having 2 or 3 caregivers dress a resident instead of just one). Furthermore, due to the aversive nature of working with patients that are aggressive, the relationship between caregivers and patients is compromised, thereby decreasing quality of life for both parties (Ryden & Feldt, 1992). In fact, aggression is a significant source of job-related stress and frustration for professional caregivers (Everitt, Fields, Soumerai, & Avorn, 1991; Hagen & Sayers, 1995). Another consequence of aggression is the administration of medications to manage the problem (Sloane, Mathew, & Scarborough, 1991). Aggression has been most typically treated using conventional or atypical antipsychotic medications. Studies have indicated that these medications produce only modest benefits in persons with dementia and carry significant dangers such as increased risk of stroke, exacerbation of cognitive decline, and increased risk of death (Schneider, Dagerman, & Insel, 2005; Sink, Holden, & Yaffe, 2005). Excessive sedation is also a common side effect associated with anti-psychotic medication (Zarit & Zarit, 2007, p. 311). These adverse side effects can result in a reduction in the individual's behavioral repertoire in terms of impairing language, causing gait disturbance that can result in falls, reducing the ability to access preferred ","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"413-425"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58471002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction The year 2006 marks the 50th anniversary of the earliest space flight research initiatives with living organisms and the first behavior analysis laboratory invitation to participate in the animal pretest flight of the United States space program. There was, at this early date, a rumor abroad that the Soviet Union was planning to initiate the Russian Sputnik spaceflight program by launching a dog and the U.S. Army Ballistic Missile Agency was to prepare a 'one-ups-manship' response with a monkey. And indeed, the Russian Sputnik II experiment with the dog Laika in 1956 did provide the first live organism activity data telemetered from space. Failure of the life support system however, made it impossible for the animal to survive more than a few days of the extended 5-month orbital expedition (Dickson, 2001). Early Primate Spaceflight Experiments It was these mid-1950 events that set the occasion for the first two Sidman-avoidance-trained primates, Able and Baker, to initiate the U.S. 'live organism' spaceflight program launched in the nosecone of a rocket (FIGURE 1, APPENDIX). It is of some significance that these early behavioral experiments occurred several years before the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) actually came into existence in 1960. This first U.S. suborbital space flight with the monkeys was undertaken on the initiative of Dr. Wernher von Braun of the U.S. Army Ballistic Missile Agency in collaboration with the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Laboratories at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center (Brady, 1990; 2005). Not only did the two rhesus monkeys endure launch in their insulated restraining couches (FIGURE 2, APPENDIX) and meet the pre-launch avoidance performance training requirements before experiencing the 300+mile trajectory at speeds approximating 10,000 miles per hour, but they survived reentry as well with no compromise of either their behavioral or physiological integrity (FIGURE 3,APPENDIX). Animal Pretest Flights for 'Project Mercury' The early contribution of experimental analysis of behavior to the study of spaceflight effects was perhaps most prominently represented in the NASA formally designated animal pretest flights for Project Mercury. These were the space flight experiments with the chimpanzees Ham and Enos that preceded Astronauts Alan Sheppard and John Glenn in the early 1960's following the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Responsibility for these animal pretest flights was relegated to the military services of the Department of Defense since had few resources available for such an undertaking at this early stage of its existence. At the early planning meetings, it was readily apparent that both the Navy and the Air Force were enthusiastically receptive to the prospect of participating and indeed 'taking charge' of this obviously futuristic initiative. It was agreed however, that behavioral performance measures would be essential in t
2006年是最早的生物空间飞行研究计划50周年，也是第一个被邀请参加美国太空计划动物预试飞行的行为分析实验室。早在这个时候，国外就有传言说，苏联计划发射一只狗来启动俄罗斯的“斯普特尼克”(Sputnik)太空飞行计划，而美国陆军弹道导弹局(Army Ballistic Missile Agency)准备用一只猴子作为“胜人一筹”的回应。的确，1956年俄罗斯人造卫星2号用狗莱卡进行的实验确实提供了第一个从太空遥测到的活体生物活动数据。然而，生命维持系统的故障使得这只动物在延长的5个月的轨道探险中不可能存活超过几天(Dickson, 2001)。早期灵长类动物太空飞行实验正是这些1950年代中期的事件，为最早的两只接受过西德曼回避训练的灵长类动物——阿贝尔和贝克——创造了机会，开启了美国太空飞行计划“活生物体”太空飞行计划在火箭的鼻锥上发射(图1，附录)。值得注意的是，这些早期的行为实验发生在1960年美国国家航空航天局(NASA)实际成立的几年之前。在美国陆军弹道导弹局的Wernher von Braun博士的倡议下，与沃尔特里德陆军医疗中心的行为实验分析实验室合作，进行了美国第一次猴子亚轨道太空飞行(布雷迪，1990年;2005)。这两只恒河猴不仅在它们的隔热约束沙发上忍受了发射(图2，附录)，并且在以大约每小时10,000英里的速度经历300多英里的轨道之前满足了发射前的躲避性能训练要求，而且它们在重返大气层时也没有损害它们的行为或生理完整性(图3，附录)。“水星计划”的动物预试飞行实验行为分析对太空飞行影响研究的早期贡献可能在美国宇航局正式指定的“水星计划”动物预试飞行中得到了最显著的体现。在美国国家航空航天局(NASA)成立后的20世纪60年代初，在宇航员艾伦·谢泼德(Alan Sheppard)和约翰·格伦(John Glenn)之前，用黑猩猩哈姆(Ham)和埃诺斯(Enos)进行了太空飞行实验。这些动物试验飞行的责任下放给了国防部的军事服务部门，因为在国防部成立的早期阶段，很少有资源可用于这项工作。在早期的规划会议上，很明显，海军和空军都热情地接受了参与并真正“负责”这一明显具有未来主义色彩的倡议的前景。然而，人们一致认为，行为表现测量在这些动物预测试飞行中是必不可少的，陆军沃尔特里德医疗中心的行为分析实验室是国防部唯一一个拥有成功动物太空飞行记录的机构，其中包括20世纪50年代末的Able和Baker实验。此外，在白宫的大力支持下，他们决定，这些动物预试飞行的首选生物是黑猩猩(图4)，附录)——与人类宇航员继任者的系统发育接近和身体相似——沃尔特·里德小组通过与马里兰大学行为研究所(IBR)的合作互动，是“大型灵长类动物”领域为数不多的拥有经验丰富的行为分析师(查尔斯·费斯特和杰克·芬德利)的机构之一!在美国空军在新墨西哥州提供的一个专门建造的黑猩猩训练设施里，即将成名的“太空黑猩猩”哈姆和埃诺斯与来自沃尔特里德学院和马里兰大学帕克分校行为研究所的行为分析师一起度过了一年的大部分时间，在工作小组上掌握了“匹配样本”的表现。．．．
{"title":"Behavior Analysis in the Space Age","authors":"J. Brady","doi":"10.1037/H0100640","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100640","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction The year 2006 marks the 50th anniversary of the earliest space flight research initiatives with living organisms and the first behavior analysis laboratory invitation to participate in the animal pretest flight of the United States space program. There was, at this early date, a rumor abroad that the Soviet Union was planning to initiate the Russian Sputnik spaceflight program by launching a dog and the U.S. Army Ballistic Missile Agency was to prepare a 'one-ups-manship' response with a monkey. And indeed, the Russian Sputnik II experiment with the dog Laika in 1956 did provide the first live organism activity data telemetered from space. Failure of the life support system however, made it impossible for the animal to survive more than a few days of the extended 5-month orbital expedition (Dickson, 2001). Early Primate Spaceflight Experiments It was these mid-1950 events that set the occasion for the first two Sidman-avoidance-trained primates, Able and Baker, to initiate the U.S. 'live organism' spaceflight program launched in the nosecone of a rocket (FIGURE 1, APPENDIX). It is of some significance that these early behavioral experiments occurred several years before the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) actually came into existence in 1960. This first U.S. suborbital space flight with the monkeys was undertaken on the initiative of Dr. Wernher von Braun of the U.S. Army Ballistic Missile Agency in collaboration with the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Laboratories at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center (Brady, 1990; 2005). Not only did the two rhesus monkeys endure launch in their insulated restraining couches (FIGURE 2, APPENDIX) and meet the pre-launch avoidance performance training requirements before experiencing the 300+mile trajectory at speeds approximating 10,000 miles per hour, but they survived reentry as well with no compromise of either their behavioral or physiological integrity (FIGURE 3,APPENDIX). Animal Pretest Flights for 'Project Mercury' The early contribution of experimental analysis of behavior to the study of spaceflight effects was perhaps most prominently represented in the NASA formally designated animal pretest flights for Project Mercury. These were the space flight experiments with the chimpanzees Ham and Enos that preceded Astronauts Alan Sheppard and John Glenn in the early 1960's following the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Responsibility for these animal pretest flights was relegated to the military services of the Department of Defense since had few resources available for such an undertaking at this early stage of its existence. At the early planning meetings, it was readily apparent that both the Navy and the Air Force were enthusiastically receptive to the prospect of participating and indeed 'taking charge' of this obviously futuristic initiative. It was agreed however, that behavioral performance measures would be essential in t","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"398-412"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58471163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Post-injury vocational achievement is an important index of successful rehabilitation. This study involved the identification of factors reported to influence (positively or negatively) labour force participation of people with spinal cord injury (SCI). Forty participants were selected from a larger study of 450 based on the most extreme prediction errors from the application of a discriminant function analysis, which aimed to predict vocational achievement (both in and not in the labour force) post-SCI. Participants were interviewed to gain an understanding of their explanations for their labour force status. Factors nominated as most influencing post-injury achievements were family, friends and representatives of pre-injury employers. Implications of these findings for the delivery of rehabilitation services are presented, including the value of having service plans based on a behaviour analysis of the influence of environmental factors. Key words: vocational rehabilitation, social support, spinal cord injury. ********** In a previous paper (see Murphy, Young, & Reid, 2003) we proposed that, based on an analysis of the contents of selected contemporary behaviour therapy and rehabilitation journals, behaviourally-oriented psychologists at the start of the 21st century are far less involved in rehabilitation service delivery research than they were in previous decades. The current paper presents data from a recent study of vocational achievement following traumatic spinal cord injury that allows an examination of the extent to which behaviour analysis can usefully contribute to enhanced rehabilitation outcomes. Of all injuries, spinal cord injury (SCI) is arguably one of the most devastating. By definition, SCI implies permanent impairment and is associated with potential disabilities that affect not just mobility and sensation but also, inter alia, such diverse areas as sexual functioning, body temperature regulation, and bowel and bladder function. In addition, chronic pain is highly prevalent within the population. In order for persons with SCI to return to community participation and achieve a good quality of life, much new learning is required and new goals need to be set. In theory, behavioural psychologists are the best placed of the rehabilitation professionals to design environments supportive of identified rehabilitation goals. Because most spinal cord injuries occur to the young adult (see Stover & Fine, 1986), the achievement of vocational goals is especially important, as is a proper understanding of the antecedent and consequent stimuli that prompt and reinforce job-seeking behaviour. For almost all injury groups, return to work is the gold standard by which to judge the success of the rehabilitation effort (see Britell, 1991). However, in order for rehabilitation services to maximise their success in terms of vocational rehabilitation achievements made by clients, an understanding of the individual and environmental factors that im
{"title":"Clinical data illustrating the need for greater involvement of behaviourally-oriented psychologists in the design and delivery of rehabilitation services","authors":"G. Murphy, N. King","doi":"10.1037/H0100619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100619","url":null,"abstract":"Post-injury vocational achievement is an important index of successful rehabilitation. This study involved the identification of factors reported to influence (positively or negatively) labour force participation of people with spinal cord injury (SCI). Forty participants were selected from a larger study of 450 based on the most extreme prediction errors from the application of a discriminant function analysis, which aimed to predict vocational achievement (both in and not in the labour force) post-SCI. Participants were interviewed to gain an understanding of their explanations for their labour force status. Factors nominated as most influencing post-injury achievements were family, friends and representatives of pre-injury employers. Implications of these findings for the delivery of rehabilitation services are presented, including the value of having service plans based on a behaviour analysis of the influence of environmental factors. Key words: vocational rehabilitation, social support, spinal cord injury. ********** In a previous paper (see Murphy, Young, & Reid, 2003) we proposed that, based on an analysis of the contents of selected contemporary behaviour therapy and rehabilitation journals, behaviourally-oriented psychologists at the start of the 21st century are far less involved in rehabilitation service delivery research than they were in previous decades. The current paper presents data from a recent study of vocational achievement following traumatic spinal cord injury that allows an examination of the extent to which behaviour analysis can usefully contribute to enhanced rehabilitation outcomes. Of all injuries, spinal cord injury (SCI) is arguably one of the most devastating. By definition, SCI implies permanent impairment and is associated with potential disabilities that affect not just mobility and sensation but also, inter alia, such diverse areas as sexual functioning, body temperature regulation, and bowel and bladder function. In addition, chronic pain is highly prevalent within the population. In order for persons with SCI to return to community participation and achieve a good quality of life, much new learning is required and new goals need to be set. In theory, behavioural psychologists are the best placed of the rehabilitation professionals to design environments supportive of identified rehabilitation goals. Because most spinal cord injuries occur to the young adult (see Stover & Fine, 1986), the achievement of vocational goals is especially important, as is a proper understanding of the antecedent and consequent stimuli that prompt and reinforce job-seeking behaviour. For almost all injury groups, return to work is the gold standard by which to judge the success of the rehabilitation effort (see Britell, 1991). However, in order for rehabilitation services to maximise their success in terms of vocational rehabilitation achievements made by clients, an understanding of the individual and environmental factors that im","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"28 1","pages":"273-283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58470212","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Prison reform has always been a major social agenda. Large portions of state and local agency budgets are consumed with people who have involvement with the criminal justice system. Indeed, one out of every 35 Americans has involvement with the criminal justice system on some level. Keywords: Prison reform, criminal justice system, behavioral technologies, juvenile offenders. ********** First generation behavioral technologies used in the criminal justice setting have demonstrated effectiveness. Several programs exist based on practices of contingency management are at least moderately effective. The use of fines is a good example. Several studies support the use of examine fining practices (see Hillsman et al. 1984; Casale and Hillsman 1986; Cole et al. 1987; Glaser and Gordon 1988; Hillsman and Green 1987, 1988). Looking at impact, Gordon and Glaser (1991) examined traditional fines on recidivism rates of offenders. They used a quasi-experimental study, which compared financial penalties to similar sentences without the fine (probation or probation plus jail). While there were no statistically significant differences between the groups, offenders who received a fine with probation have lower recidivism rates than offenders who received only probation. Looking at more comprehensive first generation technology packages, Andrews et al (1990) undertook a meta-analysis of 154 treatment comparisons (behavioral and non-behavioral). In their meta-analysis they created a system to divide up studies and participants on whether the treatment was clinically indicated or not. They called this variable appropriate versus in appropriate treatment. In this meta-analysis, most of the studies were classified as behavioral in nature. Behavioral interventions were classified as strategies that focused on changing behaviors by setting behavioral goals and using positive and negative reinforcement to encourage or discourage clearly identified behaviors. Unfortunately, few of the studies could be classified on the basis of risk or treatment integrity. Inappropriate treatments were those that employed deterrence (e.g., "Scared Straight"), nondirective approaches, non-behavioral milieu approaches, and group interactions. They found an effect size of .63 for appropriate treatment and this was significantly larger than the mean values for inappropriate services and criminal justice sanctions (warnings, probation, intensive probation, custody). Recent meta analysis have found similar effects with general prison populations however the sizes are not as large (Redondo-Illescas, Sanchez-Meca, & Garrido-Genovaes, 2001) suggesting that their might be an appropriate type of prisoner for treatment. Behavioral interventions in prison have been shown to reduce misconduct of prisoners (French, & Gendreau, 2006) and build self control such as operant biofeedback programs (Quirk, 1995). With specialized populations, behavioral interventions in the criminal justice system have also sh
{"title":"Editorial: Behavior Analysis in Criminal Justice","authors":"Joseph D. Cautilli, Michael Weinberg","doi":"10.1037/H0100617","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100617","url":null,"abstract":"Prison reform has always been a major social agenda. Large portions of state and local agency budgets are consumed with people who have involvement with the criminal justice system. Indeed, one out of every 35 Americans has involvement with the criminal justice system on some level. Keywords: Prison reform, criminal justice system, behavioral technologies, juvenile offenders. ********** First generation behavioral technologies used in the criminal justice setting have demonstrated effectiveness. Several programs exist based on practices of contingency management are at least moderately effective. The use of fines is a good example. Several studies support the use of examine fining practices (see Hillsman et al. 1984; Casale and Hillsman 1986; Cole et al. 1987; Glaser and Gordon 1988; Hillsman and Green 1987, 1988). Looking at impact, Gordon and Glaser (1991) examined traditional fines on recidivism rates of offenders. They used a quasi-experimental study, which compared financial penalties to similar sentences without the fine (probation or probation plus jail). While there were no statistically significant differences between the groups, offenders who received a fine with probation have lower recidivism rates than offenders who received only probation. Looking at more comprehensive first generation technology packages, Andrews et al (1990) undertook a meta-analysis of 154 treatment comparisons (behavioral and non-behavioral). In their meta-analysis they created a system to divide up studies and participants on whether the treatment was clinically indicated or not. They called this variable appropriate versus in appropriate treatment. In this meta-analysis, most of the studies were classified as behavioral in nature. Behavioral interventions were classified as strategies that focused on changing behaviors by setting behavioral goals and using positive and negative reinforcement to encourage or discourage clearly identified behaviors. Unfortunately, few of the studies could be classified on the basis of risk or treatment integrity. Inappropriate treatments were those that employed deterrence (e.g., \"Scared Straight\"), nondirective approaches, non-behavioral milieu approaches, and group interactions. They found an effect size of .63 for appropriate treatment and this was significantly larger than the mean values for inappropriate services and criminal justice sanctions (warnings, probation, intensive probation, custody). Recent meta analysis have found similar effects with general prison populations however the sizes are not as large (Redondo-Illescas, Sanchez-Meca, & Garrido-Genovaes, 2001) suggesting that their might be an appropriate type of prisoner for treatment. Behavioral interventions in prison have been shown to reduce misconduct of prisoners (French, & Gendreau, 2006) and build self control such as operant biofeedback programs (Quirk, 1995). With specialized populations, behavioral interventions in the criminal justice system have also sh","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"8 1","pages":"256-259"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"58470154","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：