Indexador

El presente trabajo describe una propuesta para el estudio de los contactos de acoplamiento y alteración. Empleando un procedimiento similar a los reportados en la literatura sobre seguimiento y captura (tracking and catching) se diseñó y adaptó una tarea en la que se presentaron dos situaciones en las que los participantes debían ajustarse por medio de su desplazamiento en la pantalla de una computadora a un objeto en movimiento. En la primera situación, las condiciones de ocurrencia del objeto en movimiento (velocidad o trayectoria) fueron constantes y no se modificaron por el patrón de respuesta desplegado por los participantes; en la segunda situación, el patrón de respuesta alteraba las condiciones de ocurrencia del objeto (su velocidad). La primera situación se consideró equivalente a una condición de acoplamiento; la segunda, a una de alteración. En los resultados se muestran ejemplares de las medidas molares que pueden obtenerse a partir de los registros. Se considera que el procedimiento es útil para la evaluación de los contactos de acoplamiento y alteración.

AbstractDespite the efficacy of functional analyses in identifying the function of challenging behavior, clinicians report not always using them, partly due to safety concerns. Understanding how researchers employ safeguards to mitigate risks, particularly with dangerous topographies like self‐injurious behavior (SIB), is important to guide research and practice. However, the results of a scoping review of functional analyses of self‐injurious behavior conducted by Weeden et al. (2010) revealed that only 19.83% of publications included protections. We extended the work of Weeden et al. to determine whether reporting has improved. We observed increases in all but two types of protections reviewed by Weeden et al. Additionally, we included new protections not reported by Weeden et al. In total, 69.52% of the studies included at least one protective procedure and 44.39% specified that the protections were used for safety. It appears that reporting has increased since Weeden et al. called for improved descriptions of participant protections.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

AbstractLiterature concerning operant behavioral economics shows a strong preference for the coefficient of determination (R2) metric to (a) describe how well an applied model accounts for variance and (b) depict the quality of collected data. Yet R2 is incompatible with nonlinear modeling. In this report, we provide an updated discussion of the concerns with R2. We first review recent articles that have been published in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior that employ nonlinear models, noting recent trends in goodness‐of‐fit reporting, including the continued reliance on R2. We then examine the tendency for these metrics to bias against linear‐like patterns via a positive correlation between goodness of fit and the primary outputs of behavioral‐economic modeling. Mathematically, R2 is systematically more stringent for lower values for discounting parameters (e.g., k) in discounting studies and lower values for the elasticity parameter (α) in demand analysis. The study results suggest there may be heterogeneity in how this bias emerges in data sets of varied composition and origin. There are limitations when using any goodness‐of‐fit measure to assess the systematic nature of data in behavioral‐economic studies, and to address those we recommend the use of algorithms that test fundamental expectations of the data.

The cost of operant chambers used to teach students basic concepts and principles of behavior analysis and learning has increased across time, adding a barrier for instructors who wish to incorporate animal models within their laboratory courses, instead using virtual and analog models. Researchers have begun to investigate the use of 3D-printed operant chambers in laboratory classes as a low-cost alternative to traditional operant chambers. The current paper extends the literature on low-cost alternatives and provides an overview of the methodology to create and use 3D-printed operant chambers designed to function as basketball courts. In addition to specific instructions to assemble these boxes, we present a rationale as to how instructors can use these chambers in assignments designed to teach concepts and principles of operant conditioning, while establishing novel topographies of behavior not commonly seen in rats (i.e., placing basketball in hoop). We present sample data from the course assignment to highlight the utility of these chambers. It is our hope that researchers and instructors can use these methods to replicate this novel extension of traditional operant conditioning procedures to behaviors not commonly established in operant conditioning laboratories.

AbstractRelational frame theory (RFT) as a behavior-analytic approach to understanding human language and cognition is now over 40 years old. However, the last 8 years have seen a relatively intense period of empirical and conceptual developments within the theory. Some of this work has begun to draw on early and much underplayed features of RFT, including field-theoretical analyses and concepts. These analyses are relatively nascent and thus the current article aims to provide a relatively detailed example of a field-theoretical analysis of a specific RFT research program. We begin with a brief overview of the “traditional” RFT approach to human language and cognition, followed by a summary of recent research involving the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and the differential arbitrarily applicable relational responding effects (DAARRE) model. We then go on to consider the DAARRE model in the context of J. R. Kantor’s interbehavioral formula for the psychological event. Having done so, we conclude that the challenge involved in analyzing increasingly complex forms of human language and cognition appears to call for more field-based theorizing in some form or another.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

AbstractA resurgence in research on response disequilibrium theory has prompted a concise review of the literature from the past 5 years. Response disequilibrium, also known as response deprivation, attributes reinforcement and punishment effects to constraints on free‐operant baseline levels of behavior. By describing clinically relevant behaviors in terms of instrumental and contingent activities, researchers and practitioners can predict intervention outcomes with a disequilibrium model. We summarize the empirical outcomes of disequilibrium‐informed interventions across six articles and discuss areas of future research.

AbstractThe concept of response strength and the process of strengthening by reinforcement are controversial in terms of their explanatory power. We clarify potential theoretical misconceptions following from a strength-based account such as essentialist thinking and circular reasoning. These problems also arise in the practice of latent variable modeling in psychometrics. To solve these conceptual problems, we discuss the Multilevel Model of Behavioral Selection (MLBS; Borgstede & Eggert, 2021) as an alternative theoretical framework. We use blocking from Pavlovian conditioning as an example to demonstrate how the MLBS framework prevents misconceptions arising from strength-based accounts and how it provides a more parsimonious and coherent explanation of the phenomenon. We illustrate the need for precisely defined and theoretically meaningful concepts and offer a reinterpretation of “strengthening by reinforcement.” The reconceptualization in terms of the MLBS renders the concept of response strength superfluous. We conclude by highlighting the importance of theoretical reconsideration, putting aside difficulties that arise when attempting to validate strength by empirical means.

Study objective: Effects of individual consumers’ interventions on corporate behavior were examined using consumers’ attempts to reduce the amount of …