Using computers to teach behavior analysis.

When it is impractical to provide behavior analysis students with extensive laboratory experience using real organisms, computers can provide effective demonstrations, simulations, and experiments. Furthermore, such computer programs can establish contingency-shaped behavior even in lecture classes, which usually are limited to establishing rule-governed behavior. We describe the development of computerized shaping simulations and the development of software that teaches students to discriminate among reinforcement schedules on the basis of cumulative records.

Saying and doing: A contingency-space analysis.

Correspondences between verbal responding (saying) and nonverbal responding (doing) may be organized in terms of the classes of verbal/nonverbal relations into which particular instances of verbal/nonverbal response sequences can enter. Contingency spaces, which display relations among events in terms of the probability of one event given or not given another, have been useful in analyses of nonverbal behavior. We derive a taxonomy of verbal/nonverbal behavior relations from a contingency space that takes into account two conditional probabilities: the probability of a nonverbal response given a verbal response and that probability given the absence of the verbal response.

Correspondence between definitions and procedures: A reply to Stokes, Osnes, and Guevremont.

Stokes, Osnes, and Guevremont's (1987) implicit definition of correspondence classes appears close to ours (Matthews, Shimoff, & Catania, 1987). Their definition, however, is fundamentally procedural and thus may have to be modified as experimental methodologies are refined. The advantage of our contingency-space analysis is that it is independent of specific procedures and focuses attention on problems inherent in some procedural definitions.

Human operant performance: Sensitivity and pseudosensitivity to contingencies.

Undergraduates' button presses occasionally produced points exchangeable for money. Left and right buttons were initially correlated with multiple random-ratio (RR) and random-interval (RI) components, respectively. During interruptions of the multiple schedule, students filled out sentence-completion guess sheets describing the schedules, and points were contingent upon the accuracy of guesses.

Post-session verbal reports and the experimental analysis of behavior.

Experimental analyses of the performance of verbal subjects often include verbal reports, obtained during post-session interviews, about within-session covert verbal behavior (e.g., hypotheses about the contingencies).

Effects of uninstructed verbal behavior on nonverbal responding: Contingency descriptions versus performance descriptions.

Undergraduates' button presses occasionally made available points that were exchangeable for money. Lights over left and right buttons were respectively correlated with multiple random-ratio random-interval components. During interruptions of the multiple schedule, students filled out sentence-completion guess sheets.

Instructed versus shaped human verbal behavior: Interactions with nonverbal responding.

Undergraduate students' presses on left and right buttons occasionally made available points exchangeable for money. Blue lights over the buttons were correlated with multiple random-ratio random-interval components; usually, the random-ratio schedule was assigned to the left button and the random-interval to the right. During interruptions on the multiple schedule, students filled out sentence-completion guess sheets (e.

Uninstructed human responding: Sensitivity of low-rate performance to schedule contingencies.

College students' presses on a telegraph key occasionally turned on a light in the presence of which button presses produced points later exchangeable for money. Initially, responding was maintained by low-rate contingencies superimposed on either random-interval or random-ratio schedules. Later, the low-rate contingencies were relaxed.

Uninstructed human responding: sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies.

College students' presses on a telegraph key were occasionally reinforced by light onsets in the presence of which button presses (consummatory responses) produced points later exchangeable for money. One student's key presses were reinforced according to a variable-ratio schedule; key presses of another student in a separate room were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule yoked to the interreinforcement intervals produced by the first student. Instructions described the operation of the reinforcement button, but did not mention the telegraph key; instead, key pressing was established by shaping.

Unequal reinforcer magnitudes and relative preference for cooperation in the dyad.

College-student subjects, who were paired with a confederate, chose to respond either independently or cooperatively for money reinforcers. The subject's relative preference for cooperation was assessed by a procedure (analogous to the psychophysical method of limits) in which response choice was monitored as reinforcer magnitude for one response mode was systematically varied while the other remained constant. Relative preference for cooperation was assessed when the confederate's payoff for cooperation was greater than the subject's (Experiment I) and when the confederate's payoff for independent responding was less than the subject's (Experiment II).

Avoidance responding as a function of stimulus duration and relation to free shock.

Response-independent pairings of a tone and a brief shock were superimposed on uncued avoidance responding in four groups of rhesus monkeys. For one group, tone presentations were immediately followed by an unavoidable electric shock; for the remaining groups, gaps of 5, 20, and 80 sec intervened between tone termination and shock delivery. These temporal values subsume paradigms usually treated as discrete procedures; the conditioned emotional response procedure (0-sec gap between tone and shock), trace procedure (5-sec gap) and safety-signal training (80-sec gap).