Recent basic research on human temporal discounting is reviewed to illustrate procedures, summarize key findings, and draw parallels with both nonhuman animal research and conceptual writings on self-control. Lessons derived from this research are then applied to the challenge of analyzing socially important behaviors such as drug abuse, eating and exercise, and impulsiveness associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Attending to the broader temporal context in which behavior occurs may aid in the analysis of socially important behavior. Applying this perspective to the study of behavior in natural environments also highlights the importance of combining methodological flexibility with conceptual rigor to promote the extension of applied behavior analysis to a broader array of socially important behaviors.

"Pure basic" science can become detached from the natural world that it is supposed to explain. "Pure applied" work can become detached from fundamental processes that shape the world it is supposed to improve. Neither demands the intellectual support of a broad scholarly community or the material support of society. Translational research can do better by seeking innovation in theory or practice through the synthesis of basic and applied questions, literatures, and methods. Although translational thinking has always occurred in behavior analysis, progress often has been constrained by a functional separation of basic and applied communities. A review of translational traditions in behavior analysis suggests that innovation is most likely when individuals with basic and applied expertise collaborate. Such innovation may have to accelerate for behavior analysis to be taken seriously as a general-purpose science of behavior. We discuss the need for better coordination between the basic and applied sectors, and argue that such coordination compromises neither while benefiting both.

This investigation compared the predictions of two models describing the integration of reinforcement and punishment effects in operant choice. Deluty's (1976) competitive-suppression model (conceptually related to two-factor punishment theories) and de Villiers' (1980) direct-suppression model (conceptually related to one-factor punishment theories) have been tested previously in nonhumans but not at the individual level in humans. Mouse clicking by college students was maintained in a two-alternative concurrent schedule of variable-interval money reinforcement. Punishment consisted of variable-interval money losses. Experiment 1 verified that money loss was an effective punisher in this context. Experiment 2 consisted of qualitative model comparisons similar to those used in previous studies involving nonhumans. Following a no-punishment baseline, punishment was superimposed upon both response alternatives. Under schedule values for which the direct-suppression model, but not the competitive-suppression model, predicted distinct shifts from baseline performance, or vice versa, 12 of 14 individual-subject functions, generated by 7 subjects, supported the direct-suppression model. When the punishment models were converted to the form of the generalized matching law, least-squares linear regression fits for a direct-suppression model were superior to those of a competitive-suppression model for 6 of 7 subjects. In Experiment 3, a more thorough quantitative test of the modified models, fits for a direct-suppression model were superior in 11 of 13 cases. These results correspond well to those of investigations conducted with nonhumans and provide the first individual-subject evidence that a direct-suppression model, evaluated both qualitatively and quantitatively, describes human punishment better than a competitive-suppression model. We discuss implications for developing better punishment models and future investigations of punishment in human choice.

A mathematical model of operant choice, the generalized matching law was used to analyze play-calling data from the 2004 National Football League season. In all analyses, the relative ratio of passing to rushing plays was examined as a function of the relative ratio of reinforcement, defined as yards gained, from passing versus rushing. Different analyses focused on season-aggregate data for the league as a whole, game-by-game data for the league as a whole, and game-by-game data for individual teams. In all analyses except those for a few individual teams, the generalized matching law accounted for a majority of variance in play calling. The typical play-calling pattern reflected undermatching (suggesting imperfect sensitivity of play calling to yardage-gained reinforcers) and a bias for calling rushing plays. Bias was found to be a function of both the relative risk of turnovers and the relative variability in yards gained associated with passing versus rushing plays. The external validity of the matching analyses was supported by significant correlations between parameters of the generalized matching law and team success on offense and season winning percentage. These results illustrate the broad applicability of the generalized matching law to problems outside of the laboratory.

The results of many human operant conditioning experiments appear to show that humans are less sensitive than nonhumans to operant consequences, suggesting species discontinuities in basic behavioral processes. A reanalysis of 311 data sets from 25 studies employing variable-interval schedules of reinforcement designed to assess sensitivity to reinforcement corroborates the claim that human behavioral allocation among alternatives often deviates from predictions based on rates of experimentally programmed consequences. Close inspection of the studies in question, however, suggests that methodological issues contribute heavily to the differences noted so far between humans and nonhumans and that an explanation based upon species discontinuities is not tenable.Consequences clearly influence the behavior of nonhuman organisms. The rich operant conditioning literature shows that reinforcing consequences alter the strength of behavior that produces them and forge relations between behavior and antecedent stimuli. These effects hold across a wide range of species, settings, response classes, and types of reinforcers, placing them among the most widely replicated outcomes in the biological and behavioral sciences. As a result, the threeterm operant contingency, which encompasses the relations among antecedent conditions, operant behavior, and reinforcers, has been proposed as the foundation of a broad range of complex capabilities both in nonhuman species (e.g., Donahoe, Burgos, & Palmer, 1993) and, perhaps more speculatively, in humans (e.g., Skinner, 1953Skinner, , 1957.Successful applications to human affairs, based on the core notion that human behavior is sensitive to its consequences, provide reason for optimism about the generality of operant principles. As can be expected ofa successful science, applications have flowed from the laboratory since the earliest days of operant psychology. They include, but are not limited to, animal models of substance abuse and treatment (e

Two experiments investigated the role of an immediate, response-produced auditory stimulus during acquisition, via delayed reinforcement, of a response selected to control for possible unprogrammed, operandum-related sources of response feedback. Experimentally naive rats were exposed to a delayedfood reinforcement condition, specifically a tandem fixed-ratio 1 differential-reinforcement-of-otherbehavior 30-s schedule. The response was defined as breaking a photocell beam located near the ceiling at the rear of the operant conditioning chamber. In Experiment 1, rates of photobeam breaking by each rat increased from near zero, regardless of the presence or absence of a tone that immediately followed the response initiating the delay interval. Though not essential, the tone facilitated response acquisition and resulted in more efficient response patterns at stability. Experiment 2 demonstrated that photobeam-breaking response rates under the delayed reinforcement contingency exceeded those in a preceding baseline condition in which no food was delivered. In addition, upon introduction of the delayed reinforcement procedure, correspondence between response patterns and the requirements of the reinforcement schedule increased over baseline levels in the absence of a food contingency. Together with a previous report of Lattal and Gleeson (1990), the present results suggest that response acquisition with delayed reinforcement is a robust phenomenon that may not depend on a mechanically defined response or an immediate external stimulus change to mediate the temporal gap between response and reinforcer.

Undergraduates participated in two experiments to develop methods for the experimental analysis of self-reports about behavior. The target behavior was the choice response in a delayed-matching-to-sample task in which monetary reinforcement was contingent upon both speed and accuracy of the choice. In Experiment 1, the temporal portion of the contingency was manipulated within each session, and the presence and absence of feedback about reinforcement was manipulated across sessions. As the time limits became stricter, target response speeds increased, but accuracy and reinforcement rates decreased. When feedback was withheld, further reductions in speed and reinforcement occurred, but only at the strictest time limit. Thus, the procedures were successful in producing systematic variation in the speed, accuracy, and reinforcement of the target behavior. Experiment 2 was designed to assess the influence of these characteristics on self-reports. In self-report conditions, each target response was followed by a computer-generated query: "Did you earn points?" The subject reported by pressing "Yes" or "No" buttons, with the sole consequence of advancing the session. In some cases, feedback about reinforcement of the target response followed the reports; in other cases it was withheld. Self-reports were less accurate when the target responses occurred under greater time pressure. When feedback was withheld, the speed of the target response influenced reports, in that the probability of a "Yes" report increased directly with the speed of accurate target responses. In addition, imposing the self-report procedure disrupted target performance by reducing response speeds at the strictest time limit. These results allow investigation of issues in both behavioral and cognitive psychology. More important, the overall order in the data suggests promise for the experimental analysis of self-reports by human subjects.

The bias (B'11) and discriminability (A') of college students' self-reports about choices made in a delayed identity matching-to-sample task were studied as a function of characteristics of the response about which they reported. Each matching-to-sample trial consisted of two, three, or four simultaneously presented sample stimuli, a 1-s retention interval, and two, three, or four comparison stimuli. One sample stimulus was always reproduced among the comparisons, and choice of the matching comparison in less than 800 ms produced points worth chances in a drawing for money. After each choice, subjects pressed either a "yes" or a "no" button to answer a computer-generated query about whether the choice met the point contingency. The number of sample and comparison stimuli was manipulated across experimental conditions. Rates of successful matching-to-sample choices were negatively correlated with the number of matching-to-sample stimuli, regardless of whether samples or comparisons were manipulated. As in previous studies, subjects exhibited a pronounced bias for reporting successful responses. Self-report bias tended to become less pronounced as matching-tosample success became less frequent, an outcome consistent with signal-frequency effects in psychophysical research. The bias was also resistant to change, suggesting influences other than signal frequency that remain to be identified. Self-report discriminability tended to decrease with the number of sample stimuli and increase with the number of comparison stimuli, an effect not attributable to differential effects of the two manipulations on matching-to-sample performance. Overall, bias and discriminability indices revealed effects that were not evident in self-report accuracy scores. The results indicate that analyses based on signal-detection theory can improve the description of correspondence between self-reports and their referents and thus contribute to the identification of environmental sources of control over verbal self-reports.