A discriminative stimulus is a stimulus condition which, (1) given the momentary effectiveness of some particular type of reinforcement (2) increases the frequency of a particular type of response (3) because that stimulus condition has been correlated with an increase in the frequency with which that type of response has been followed by that type of reinforcement. Operations such as deprivation have two different effects on behavior. One is to increase the effectiveness of some object or event as reinforcement, and the other is to evoke the behavior that has in the past been followed by that object or event. "Establishing operation" is suggested as a general term for operations having these two effects. A number of situations involve what is generally assumed to be a discriminative stimulus relation, but with the third defining characteristic of the discriminative stimulus absent. Here the stimulus change functions more like an establishing operation than a discriminative stimulus, and the new term, "establishing stimulus," is suggested. There are three other possible approaches to this terminological problem, but none are entirely satisfactory.
The first two books on behavior analysis (Skinner, 1938; Keller & Schoenfeld, 1950) had chapter-length coverage of motivation. The next generation of texts also had chapters on the topic, but by the late 1960s it was no longer being given much treatment in the behavior-analytic literature. The present failure to deal with the topic leaves a gap in our understanding of operant functional relations. A partial solution is to reintroduce the concept of the establishing operation, defined as an environmental event, operation, or stimulus condition that affects an organism by momentarily altering (a) the reinforcing effectiveness of other events and (b) the frequency of occurrence of that part of the organism's repertoire relevant to those events as consequences. Discriminative and motivative variables can be distinguished as follows: The former are related to the differential availability ofan effective form ofreinforcement given a particular type of behavior; the latter are related to the differential reinforcing effectiveness ofenvironmental events. An important distinction can also be made between unconditioned establishing operations (UEOs), such as food deprivation and painful stimulation, and conditioned establishing operations (CEOs) that depend on the learning history of the organism. One type of CEO is a stimulus that has simply been paired with a UEO and as a result may take on some of the motivative properties ofthat UEO. The warning stimulus in avoidance procedures is another important type of CEO referred to as reflexive because it establishes its own termination as a form of reinforcement and evokes the behavior that has accomplished such termination. Another CEO is closely related to the concept of conditional conditioned reinforcement and is referred to as a transitive CEO, because it establishes some other stimulus as a form of effective reinforcement and evokes the behavior that has produced that other stimulus. The multiple control of human behavior is very common, and is often quite complex. An understanding ofunlearned and learned establishing operations can contribute to our ability to identify and control the various components of such multiple determination.
Over the past decade, behavior analysts have increasingly used the term establishing operation (EO) to refer to environmental events that influence the behavioral effects of operant consequences. Nonetheless, some elements of current terminology regarding EOs may interfere with applied behavior analysts' efforts to predict, control, describe, and understand behavior. The present paper (a) describes how the current conceptualization of the EO is in need of revision, (b) suggests alternative terms, including the generic term motivating operation (MO), and (c) provides examples of MOs and their behavioral effects using articles from the applied behavior analysis literature.DESCRIPTORS: motivation, establishing operations, abolishing operations, motivating operations, behavior-analytic terminologyThe term establishing operation (EO), originally used by Keller and Schoenfeld (1950) and then by Millenson (1967) to denote motivating events, has been revived and reformulated in a series of papers by Michael (e.g., 1982Michael (e.g., , 1983Michael (e.g., , 1988Michael (e.g., , 1993aMichael (e.g., , 1993bMichael (e.g., , 2000. Michael defined EOs as environmental events, operations, or stimulus conditions that affect an organism's behavior by altering (a) the reinforcing or punishing effectiveness of other environmental events and (b) the frequency of occurrence of that part of the organism's repertoire relevant to those events as consequences. Michael termed the first effect the reinforcer-establishing effect and the second effect the evocative effect. Unconditioned establishing operations (UEOs) do not require a learning history to change the effectiveness of consequences. In contrast, conditioned establishing operations (CEOs) acquire their motivating function as a result of a particular learning history. Michael
Behavior analysis has already contributed substantially to the treatment of children with autism, and further gains can result from more use of Skinner's analysis of language in Verbal Behavior (1957) and in the resulting conceptual and experimental work. The approach emphasizes a unit of analysis consisting of the relations between behavior, motivative and discriminative variables, and consequences. Skinner identifies seven types of verbal operants--echoic, mand, tact, intraverbal, textual, transcriptive, and copying a text--which function as components of more advanced forms of language. This approach focuses on the development of each verbal operant (rather than on words and their meanings) and on the independent training of speaker and listener repertoires. Five more specific contributions are described that relate to the importance of (a) an effective language assessment, (b) mand training in early intervention, (c) establishing operations, (d) an intraverbal repertoire, and (e) automatic reinforcement.
In this paper I discuss (a) three steps in the development of establishing operation (EO) terminology, (b) my early neglect of its possible relevance to applied behavior analysis, (c) the importance of functional analysis methodology for increasing awareness of EO issues, and (d) three comprehensive reviews that clarify the role of EOs in applied work. I then review and further analyze seven topics that require further clarification or that have been raised since my 1982 and 1993 articles: the EO evocative effect, deprivation and satiation, problem behavior maintained by attention, decreasing behavior evoked by a transitive conditioned establishing operation, EOs in the context of escape and avoidance, academic demand, and decreasing behavior evoked by a reflexive conditioned establishing operation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.