PS560 Discussion
Begin by describing the three-term contingency, and explain why it is described as the basic unit of analysis for operant behavior. In reviewing the contingencies of reinforcement and punishment, discuss how each set of contingencies has an effect on an individual's behavior.
Choose a behavior from your own experience that has been reinforced, and identify whether that behavior was positively or negatively reinforced, outlining the specific three term contingency of that operant behavior. Next, choose a behavior from your own experience that has been punished and identify whether that behavior was positively or negatively punished; outline the specific three term contingency of that operant behavior. Finally, in either of those behaviors, discuss how matching law or schedules of reinforcement may contribute to the maintenance of the behavior under certain circumstances.
Review two of your classmate's responses using following ideas as a guide:
- Provide feedback on the accuracy of the contingencies described.
- Does the peer accurately evaluate whether the behavior was positively or negatively reinforced? If not, provide corrective feedback for consideration.
- Is the discussion of matching law/schedules of reinforcement in relation to maintenance of behavior clear?
- Ask at least one thoughtful follow up question.
Reply to Destinii Hills: The three-term contingency is a foundational concept in ABA and it is described as the basic unit of analysis for operant behavior. In the third edition of Applied Behavior Analysis (2020), the three-term contingency consists of (A) an antecedent stimulus, (B) a behavior, and (C) a consequence. This three-term contingency is described as the basic unit of analysis for operant behavior because it identifies the functional relationship between behavior and the environmental variables that influence it. According to Cooper et al. (2020), understanding this functional relationship allows behavior analysts to predict and influence why a behavior continues or stops.
When reviewing contingencies of reinforcement, reinforcement increases the chance of a behavior happening more in the future. Reinforcement can be positive or negative. Positive reinforcement occurs when something or a stimulus is added after a behavior, and that increases the likelihood of the behavior happening again. Negative reinforcement occurs when something or a stimulus is removed, reduced, or avoided after a behavior, and this increases the future frequency of the behavior (Cooper et al., 2020). On the other hand, punishment contingencies decrease the future chance of a behavior. Positive punishment involves adding something or a stimulus after a behavior that results in a decrease in that future behavior. Negative punishment involves removing something or stimulus after a behavior, which also results in a decrease in the behavior (Cooper et al., 2020).
In my own life as a mom of two toddlers one behavior that has been reinforced for me is giving my 2yr old a snack to stop whining. This can be broken down into the three-term contingency framework where the (A) antecedent is me being in the middle of folding laundry and my toddler is beginning to whine. The (B) behavior is that I hand her a snack, and the (C) consequence is that the whining stops. When the whining is removed (an aversive stimulus) immediately after I give the snack, my behavior of giving her a snack is negatively reinforced. The immediate relief from the unpleasant sound increases the chance that I will give her snacks again under similar conditions. However, Baron and Galizio (2005) states that the functional difference between “positive” and “negative” reinforcement can be murky, and the essence of reinforcement is really about whether a consequence increases future responding, regardless of how it is labeled (i.e., stimulus added vs. removed). An example of punishment from my experience occurred when I raised my voice at both toddlers during a loud argument over a toy. The (A) antecedent was noisy, escalated fighting and my (B) behavior was yelling. The (C) consequence was increased crying which made the situation worse. The addition of stress that followed my yelling led me to avoiding yelling at them in future similar situations. This is considered positive punishment because something aversive was added after my behavior and it decreased the chance of yelling again.
In terms of schedules of reinforcement, the snack example shows how behavior can become persistent under intermittent contingencies. At first, a snack may consistently end whining (continuous reinforcement), but as toddlers learn that whining sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t, my response becomes more variable and resistant to change. This resembles an intermittent reinforcement schedule, which is known to maintain behavior more strongly over time than continuous reinforcement (Cooper et al., 2020).
References
Cooper, J., Heron, T., & Heward, W. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Baron, A. & Galizio, M. (2005). Positive and negative reinforcement: Should the distinction
be preserved? The Behavior Analyst, 28, 85–98.
Reply to Kaitlyn Bailey: According to Cooper et al. (2020), the three-term contingency is composed of a discriminative stimulus which emits a response and is followed closely by a change in stimulus. This could also be described as an antecedent, behavior, and consequence (ABC). The three-term contingency is essential in understanding operant behavior because, like evolution, “reinforcement selects adaptive responses within each individual’s lifetime” (Baron and Galizio, 2005, p.85). To further explain, operant behavior is the behavior learned by each organism through their individual experience of life and ontogeny. The organism continues to engage in the behavior that is reinforced throughout their lifetime. The three-term contingency helps behavior analysts understand what causes this behavior and how it is reinforced or punished.
There are several contingencies of reinforcement and punishment such as positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment. Positive reinforcement is when a response is immediately followed by “the presentation of a stimulus change that increases the future occurrence of similar responses” (Cooper et al., 2020, p.253). With positive reinforcement, you are presenting stimuli that increases the likelihood of the behavior happening in the future, and with negative reinforcement, you are taking away aversive stimuli to increase the likelihood of the behavior. With positive punishment, you are presenting aversive stimuli to decrease the likelihood of the behavior continuing, and with negative punishment, you are removing preferred stimuli to decrease the likelihood of the behavior continuing.
When thinking of past behaviors of mine that have been reinforced, I thought of when I would do chores around the house in middle school. The antecedent in this scenario would be my mom telling me that she would give me an allowance if I did chores around the house. The behavior would be me doing the chores, and the consequence would be my mom giving me my allowance. In this scenario I received positive reinforcement for doing my chores since my mom presented stimuli (money) that increased the likelihood of me engaging in the behavior (doing my chores) in the future. A behavior of mine that has been punished was when I was in elementary school and would laugh with my friends loudly and frequently during class, causing disruption in the classroom. The antecedent would be my friend making a silly face; the behavior would be my laughing and disrupting the class; and the consequence would be my teacher reprimanding me in front of my peers. In this scenario I received positive punishment for disrupting the class as the teacher presented aversive stimuli (reprimand) which significantly decreased my likelihood of engaging in the behavior in the future.
Cooper et al. (2020) states, matching law is the allocation of responses to “choices available with concurrent schedules of reinforcement” (p. 316). He further explains, “the rate of responding is proportional to the rate of reinforcement received” (Cooper et al., 2020, p.316). My behavior of doing my chores is still maintained today because of matching law. My mom would pay me every week and depending on how many chores I did she decided how much to pay me. The more chores I did, the more allowance I received which, in turn, gave me motivation to do more and more chores, causing a cycle of motivation and reinforcement. According to Cooper et al. (2020), an important goal for the majority of behavior programs is “the development of naturally occurring activities, stimuli, or events to function as reinforcement” (p. 302). Eventually as I got my own job in high school, my motivation for taking care of my space slowly changed from the reinforcement of allowance to the reinforcement of having a clean and calm space. Because of the progression of my motivation from a tangible to a naturally occurring reinforcement, this behavior will most likely be maintained for the rest of my life.
References
Baron, A., & Galizio, M. (2005). Positive and negative reinforcement: Should the distinction be preserved? The Behavior Analyst, 28(2), 85–98.
O. Cooper, J., E. Heron, T., & L. Heward, W. (2020). Applied Behavior Analysis (3rd ed.). Kevin M. Davis.