Coal Is Not Black, Snow Is Not White, Food Is Not a Reinforcer: The Roles of Affordances and Dispositions in the Analysis of Behavior

Individual corticosterone response to intermittent swim stress predicts a shift in economic demand for ethanol from pre- stress to post-stress in male rats

This study investigated the relationship between stress exposure and subsequent ethanol use, focusing on individual differences among male rats. We combined operant self-administration with behavioral economics to assess how intermittent swim stress affects ethanol consumption. This approach allowed for a nuanced analysis of the transition from regular ethanol intake to stress-induced escalation in economic demand. Results showed a consistent rise in ethanol demand post-stress among subjects, irrespective of exposure to actual swim stress or a sham procedure. This increase may result from a two-week abstinence or an inherent rise in demand over time. Significantly, we identified a direct link between post-stress corticosterone levels and the demand for ethanol, considering baseline levels. This correlation was particularly pronounced when examining the shifts in both corticosterone levels and demand for ethanol post-stress. However, neither post-stress corticosterone levels nor their change over time correlated significantly with changes in ethanol demand following a forced swim test that was administered 24 hours after the intermittent swim stress test. This suggests potential context-specific or stressor-specific effects. Importantly, pre-stress ethanol demand did not significantly predict the corticosterone response to stress, indicating that high ethanol-demand rats do not inherently exhibit heightened stress sensitivity. Our research brings to light the complex interplay between stress and ethanol consumption, highlighting the critical role of individual differences in this relationship. This research introduces a nuanced perspective, underscoring the need for future studies in the realm of stress and substance use to give greater consideration to individual variability.

Assessment of ethanol and nicotine interactions using a reinforcer demand modeling with grouped and individual levels of analyses in a long-access self-administration model using male rats

Previous reports have indicated the reciprocal effects of nicotine and ethanol on their rewarding and reinforcing properties, but studies using methodological approaches resembling substance use in vulnerable populations are lacking. In our study, rats first self-administered ethanol, and their sensitivity to ethanol's reinforcing effects was assessed using a reinforcer demand modeling approach. Subsequently, rats were equipped with intravenous catheters to self-administer nicotine, and their sensitivity to nicotine's reinforcing effects was evaluated using the same approach. In the final phase, rats were allowed to self-administer ethanol and nicotine concurrently, investigating the influence of one substance on the rate of responding for the other substance. Group analyses revealed notable differences in demand among sucrose, sweetened ethanol, and ethanol-alone, with sucrose demonstrating the highest demand and ethanol-alone exhibiting greater sensitivity to changes in cost. At the individual level, our study finds significant correlations between rats' demand for sucrose and sweetened ethanol, suggesting parallel efforts for both substances. Our individual data also suggest interconnections in the elasticity of demand for sweetened ethanol and ethanol-alone, as well as a potential relationship in price response patterns between ethanol and nicotine. Furthermore, concurrent self-administration of ethanol and nicotine at the group level displayed reciprocal effects, with reduced responding for nicotine in the presence of ethanol and increased responding for ethanol in the presence of nicotine. This study provides valuable insights into modeling the co-use of ethanol and nicotine and assessing their interaction effects using reinforcer demand modeling and concurrent self-administration or noncontingent administration tests. These findings contribute to our understanding of the complex interplay between ethanol and nicotine and have implications for elucidating the underlying mechanisms involved in polydrug use.

Theory of reinforcement schedules

The three principles of reinforcement are (1) events such as incentives and reinforcers increase the activity of an organism; (2) that activity is bounded by competition from other responses; and (3) animals approach incentives and their signs, guided by their temporal and physical conditions, together called the "contingencies of reinforcement." Mathematical models of each of these principles comprised mathematical principles of reinforcement (MPR; Killeen, 1994). Over the ensuing decades, MPR was extended to new experimental contexts. This article reviews the basic theory and its extensions to satiation, warm-up, extinction, sign tracking, pausing, and sequential control in progressive-ratio and multiple schedules. In the latter cases, a single equation balancing target and competing responses governs behavioral contrast and behavioral momentum. Momentum is intrinsic in the fundamental equations, as behavior unspools more slowly from highly aroused responses conditioned by higher rates of incitement than it does from responses from leaner contexts. Habits are responses that have accrued substantial behavioral momentum. Operant responses, being predictors of reinforcement, are approached by making them: The sight and feel of a paw on a lever is approached by placing paw on lever, as attempted for any sign of reinforcement. Behavior in concurrent schedules is governed by approach to momentarily richer patches (melioration). Applications of MPR in behavioral pharmacology and delay discounting are noted.

Is superstitious responding a matter of detectability? A replication of Killeen (1978)

Organisms may sometimes behave as if a contingency exists between behavior and consequences, even if this is not actually the case. Killeen (1978) suggested that such superstition occurs because of factors that bias subjects to behave "superstitiously" rather than because of failures of discrimination. We systematically replicated Killeen's experiment and compared contingency discrimination between different consequences. Six pigeons responded in a matching-to-sample procedure in which a response-independent or response-dependent stimulus change, food delivery, or blackout occurred. The pigeons reported whether the consequence was response dependent or response independent by choosing between two side keys. Discrimination was strongest after stimulus changes, weaker after blackouts, and weakest after food deliveries. These differences persisted even after additional training, suggesting asymmetries that may reflect differences in the disruptive effects of different consequences on remembering and/or behavioral mnemonics. Importantly, the pigeons were not biased to report response-dependent consequences unless that response was consistent with locational biases; that is, they behaved "superstitiously" when there was a reason to be biased to do so. These findings corroborate Killeen's and demonstrate that behavior may deviate from contingencies not necessarily because subjects cannot discriminate those contingencies but because they are biased to behave otherwise.

Bridging the gap between laboratory and applied research on response-independent schedules

In 1948, Skinner described the behavior of pigeons under response-independent schedules as "superstitious," and proposed that the responses were reinforced by contiguous, adventitious food deliveries. Subsequently, response-independent schedules have been of interest to both basic and applied researchers, first to understand the mechanisms involved, and later, as "noncontingent reinforcement" (NCR) to reduce undesirable behavior. However, the potential superstitious effects produced by these schedules have been challenged, with some researchers arguing that antecedent variables play a significant role. This paper examines the evidence for adventitious reinforcement from both laboratory and applied research, the results of which suggest that antecedent, nonoperant functions may be important in fully understanding the effects of NCR. We propose an applied-basic research synthesis, in which attention to potential nonoperant functions could provide a more complete understanding of response-independent schedules. We conclude with a summary of the applied implications of the nonoperant functions of NCR schedules.

A Theory of the Extinction Burst

A preliminary theory of a temporary increase in the rate of an operant response with the transition to extinction (i.e., the extinction burst) is proposed. The theory assumes reinforcers are events permitting access to some valuable activity, and that such activity can compete for allocation with the target response under some conditions (e.g., very high reinforcement rates). With the transition to extinction, elimination of this competition for allocation can produce an increase in the the target response, but the increase is transient because the value of the target response decreases with exposure to extinction. The theory provides a way to understand why the extinction burst is not ubiquitous, seems more common following very small ratio schedules, occurs for a short period of time following the transition to extinction, and may be eliminated with the availability of alternative reinforcement. It appears to provide a reasonable starting point for a theory of the extinction burst that does not necessarily require inclusion of invigorating effects of frustration, and it is closely aligned with Resurgence as Choice theory. Additional research on factors modulating reinforcement-related activities and how they affect the extinction burst could help to further evaluate the theory.

Choosing a future from a murky past: A generalization-based model of behavior

Remembering the past appears critical in allowing organisms to detect order in an environment, and hence to behave in accordance with likely future events. Yet the shortcomings of remembering and perceiving typically mean that the remembered past differs from the actual past, and hence that behavior does not perfectly track the structure of the environment. Here, we outline how the process of generalization might be used to understand differences between what an organism does, and the structure of the past and potential structure of the environment. We explore how different sources of generalization - both from within the same stimulus situation, and from different stimulus situations - might be modeled quantitatively, and how predictions made by this modeling approach are supported by research. Finally, we discuss how generalization from multiple stimulus situations, longer-term experience, and from stimulus situations in the past that are not identical to the stimulus situation in the present, might contribute to our understanding of how an organism's experience translates into behavior.

Logical fallacies and misinterpretations that hinder progress in translational addiction neuroscience

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are heterogeneous and complex, making the development of translationally predictive rodent and nonhuman primate models to uncover their neurobehavioral underpinnings difficult. Neuroscience-focused outcomes have become highly prevalent, and with this, the notion that SUDs are disorders of the brain embraced as a dominant theoretical orientation to understand SUD etiology and treatment. These efforts, however, have led to few efficacious pharmacotherapies, and in some cases (as with cocaine or methamphetamine), no pharmacotherapies have translated from preclinical models for clinical use. In this theoretical commentary, we first describe the development of animal models of substance use behaviors from a historical perspective. We then define and discuss three logical fallacies including 1) circular explanation, 2) affirming the consequent, and 3) reification that can apply to developed models. We then provide three case examples in which conceptual or logical issues exist in common methods (i.e., behavioral economic demand, escalation, and reinstatement). Alternative strategies to refocus behavioral models are suggested for the field to better bridge the translational divide between animal models, the clinical condition of SUDs, and current and future regulatory pathways for intervention development.

Pigeons prefer to invest early for future reinforcers

Five pigeons were trained in a series of conditions in which food was delivered after 25 responses, but only when a different (Investing) response had been made before the 25 responses had been completed. If an Investing response was not made, the 25 responses ended in blackout. In various conditions, effective Investing responses either had to be made before the first of the 25 responses, or anywhere within the 25 responses; and effective Investing responses either resulted in a stimulus change or did not. Pigeons Invested even when the consequences were temporally and spatially distant, but Investing was most likely when it produced an immediate stimulus change. When given the choice, pigeons preferred to make Investing responses at the beginning of a trial. These findings again demonstrate that behavior may be maintained by events that are separated in time and space from the present.

Enhancing the Effects of Neurofeedback Training: The Motivational Value of the Reinforcers

The brain activity that is measured by electroencephalography (EEG) can be modified through operant conditioning, specifically using neurofeedback (NF). NF has been applied to several disorders claiming that a change in the erratic brain activity would be accompanied by a reduction of the symptoms. However, the expected results are not always achieved. Some authors have suggested that the lack of an adequate response may be due to an incorrect application of the operant conditioning principles. A key factor in operant conditioning is the use of reinforcers and their value in modifying behavior, something that is not always sufficiently taken into account. This work aims to clarify the relevance of the motivational value versus the purely informational value of the reinforcer. In this study, 113 subjects were randomly assigned two different reinforcer conditions: a selected reinforcer—the subjects subjectively selected the reinforcers—or an imposed reinforcer—the reinforcers were assigned by the experimenter—and both groups undertook NF sessions to enhance the sensorimotor rhythm (SMR). In addition, the selected reinforcer group was divided into two subgroups: one receiving real NF and the other one sham NF. There were no significant differences between the groups at baseline in terms of SMR amplitude. After the intervention, only those subjects belonging to the selected reinforcer group and receiving real NF increased their SMR. Our results provide evidence for the importance of the motivational value of the reinforcer in Neurofeedback success.

On the "Strength" of Behavior

The place of the concept of response strength in a natural science of behavior has been the subject of much debate. This article reconsiders the concept of response strength for reasons linked to the foundations of a natural science of behavior. The notion of response strength is implicit in many radical behaviorists' work. Palmer (2009) makes it explicit by applying the response strength concept to three levels: (1) overt behavior, (2) covert behavior, and (3) latent or potential behavior. We argue that the concept of response strength is superfluous in general, and an explication of the notion of giving causal status to nonobservable events like latent behavior or response strength is harmful to a scientific endeavor. Interpreting EEG recordings as indicators of changes in response strength runs the risk of reducing behavior to underlying mechanisms, regardless of whether such suggestions are accompanied by behavioral observations. Many radical behaviorists understand behavior as a discrete unit, inviting conceptual mistakes reflected in the notion of response strength. A molar view is suggested as an alternative that accounts for the temporally extended nature of behavior and avoids the perils of a response-strength based approach.

Stimulus control depends on the subjective value of the outcome

Stimuli that provide information about likely future reinforcers tend to shift behavior, provided a reliable relation between the stimulus and the reinforcer can be discriminated. Stimuli that are apparently more reliable exert greater control over behavior. We asked how the subjective value (measured in terms of preference) of reinforcers associated with stimuli influences stimulus control. Five pigeons worked on a concurrent chains procedure in which half of all trials ended in a smaller reinforcer sooner, and the other half in a larger reinforcer later. In Signaled trials, the color and flash duration on the keys in the initial link signaled the outcome of the trial. In Conflicting probe trials, the color and the flash duration signaled conflicting information about the outcome of the trial. Choice in Signaled trials shifted toward the signaled outcome, but was never exclusive. In Conflicting probe trials, control was divided idiosyncratically between the 2 stimulus dimensions, but still favored the outcome with the higher subjective value. Thus, stimulus control depends not only on the perceived reliability of stimuli, but also on the subjective value of the outcome.

Generalizing from the Past, Choosing the Future

Behavior in the present depends critically on experience in similar environments in the past. Such past experience may be important in controlling behavior not because it determines the strength of a behavior, but because it allows the structure of the current environment to be detected and used. We explore a prospective-control approach to understanding simple behavior. Under this approach, order in the environment allows even simple organisms to use their personal past to respond according to the likely future. The predicted future controls behavior, and past experience forms the building blocks of the predicted future. We explore how generalization affects the use of past experience to predict and respond to the future. First, we consider how generalization across various dimensions of an event determines the degree to which the structure of the environment exerts control over behavior. Next, we explore generalization from the past to the present as the method of deciding when, where, and what to do. This prospective-control approach is measurable and testable; it builds predictions from events that have already occurred, and assumes no agency. Under this prospective-control approach, generalization is fundamental to understanding both adaptive and maladaptive behavior.

Being there on time: Reinforcer effects on timing and locating

In research on timing, reinforcers often are assumed to influence discrimination of elapsed time. We asked whether changes in choice used to measure timing arise because of joint control by elapsed time and reinforcers, rather than from the direct modification of control by elapsed time by reinforcers. Pigeons worked on a concurrent-choice task in which 1 response was 9 times more likely to produce a reinforcer, reversing between locations when 19 s had elapsed since the marker event. Across conditions, we manipulated the percentage of reinforcers arranged before the probability reversal from 5 to 95%. These changes in reinforcer percentages altered control by location-based elements of the contingency, but not by time-based elements. Choice was well described by a model that assumes that control by the contingency is weakened by generalization across the time and location of reinforcers, and that these generalizations become more likely at later times since a marker. These findings add to a growing body of research that suggests that reinforcers share the same function as other environmental events in determining how the environment controls behavior.

Out of the Lab: Shaping an Ecological and Constructional Cultural Systems Science

Contemporary societies face critical, interlocking, "wicked" challenges, including economic inequities and marginalization, personal and collective violence, ethnic and religious conflicts, degradation of "the commons," climate change, and more, and all of these issues clearly are grounded in behavior. An adequate culturo-behavior science could be positioned to advance and leverage research and interventions supporting community well-being, and contribute to overcoming urgent societal and global challenges. The current state of cultural systems science, however, is limited by theory and methodology, and by competition for attention with well-established research and practice opportunities related to individual-level challenges. In this article, the author explores those limitations, and suggests a more expansive perspective drawing on historical and contemporary ecological science and contemporary theories of complex systems. Research guided by established science within those disciplines offers opportunities to move cultural systems science out of the lab, and into a more adequate, environmentally rich stance drawing on ecological strategies, recursively integrating contextual observations, conceptual advances, and in vivo experimentation. Examples of each of those strategies and exploration of developmental programs of research grounded in such integration are explored.

The Will to Fight: Aversion-Induced Aggression and the Role of Motivation in Intergroup Conflicts

Aggressive behavior is a source of many significant human problems, most notably the catastrophic loss of life and resources that can result from violent conflicts between groups. Aggressive behavior is particularly likely to arise from aversive conditions that function as motivating operations (MOs) that establish the stimulation produced by aggressive acts as reinforcing. We describe the behavior that arises from these circumstances as aversion-induced aggression (AIA) and argue that the MOs associated with AIA are important factors in initiating and sustaining violent conflicts between groups. In support of this, we survey the basic nonhuman research that has demonstrated the aggression-motivating functions of aversive stimuli. We extend our analysis of AIA to humans and describe how the special properties of verbal stimuli serve as the basis for notable differences between AIA in humans and nonhumans. We describe how aversive conditions may be exploited by leaders to establish support for aggression against another group in the pursuit of their objectives. We suggest that conflicts between groups cannot be resolved in the long term unless the motivational conditions from which conflicts arise are alleviated. Aggression is rarely effective in this regard because it exacerbates these conditions. For this reason, we advocate against the use of aggression as a tool for resolving conflicts between groups and consider how behavior science may contribute to the development and evaluation of alternative nonviolent practices.

Behavioral Science and the Prevention of Adolescent Substance Abuse

This article reviews the evidence regarding behavioral science approaches to the prevention of substance use disorders. Prevention science grew out of research on family and school-based interventions that were designed to treat common behavioral problems of children and adolescents. That research showed that the amelioration of problems such as aggressive behavior could prevent the development of later problems including substance use, depression, and academic failure. We begin by reviewing evidence regarding the risk factors that contribute to the development of substance use disorders, as well as the protective factors that can reduce their likelihood. We then describe a variety of family, school, and community prevention programs that have been shown to prevent youthful use and abuse of substances. We conclude by describing the progress that has been made in getting these programs widely and effectively implemented, and the challenges we face in getting to the point where most communities are achieving considerable success in prevent substance use and the other common and costly behavioral and psychological problems of children and adolescents.

Reinforcer quality matters: A test of the Mathematical Principles of Reinforcement with domestic hens (Gallus gallus domesticus)

This study evaluated the ability of Killeen's (1994) Mathematical Principles of Reinforcement to account for the effects of changes in reinforcer quality on hens' rates of responding on fixed-ratio schedules. Hens were trained to peck a key on a fixed-ratio schedule of reinforcement and then experienced an ascending series of ratio values in two separate conditions. In different conditions, the food reinforcer was either wheat or puffed wheat. Response rates initially increased with increases in ratio requirement before eventually decreasing at larger ratios. Quantitative fits of the model accounted for the data well. The fits revealed that different foods were systematically associated with changes in the specific activation parameter, a, and these were consistent with previous reports of preference for those food items.

On the behavioral economics of medication choice: A research story

Behavioral economics has been consistently useful in describing a wide range of clinical phenomena, particularly in reference to behavioral excesses such as substance abuse, problematic gambling and obesity/overeating. Given an opportunity to explore these processes as they relate to treatment adherence in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), our central thesis was that behavioral economic tools/processes that have been helpful in other areas of application (e.g., substance abuse, obesity) could be leveraged to help understand treatment non-adherence and hopefully lead to efforts to combat it. The current paper tells a story of how an interdisciplinary set of researchers came to combine their separate expertise in MS and behavioral economics to yield novel insights into the failures of treatment adherence often experienced in this clinical population.

Suing for Peace in the War Against Mentalism

The antimentalists' war against mentalism has not vanquished it. To examine why, we focus on two theses-mind as causal and internal-and three standard attacks against mentalism as defined by both theses: 1) mentalism implies dualism; 2) mind is unobservable, which hinders its scientific study; and 3) mentalism is impractical. These salients fail because: 1) if the mind is causal and internal, it must be material; 2) the observable/unobservable distinction is too problematic, with antimentalists equivocal about where to draw that line, with some even embracing publicly unobservable behavior as causally relevant; and 3) mentalism has not been demonstrated to be less practical than antimentalism. For the war on mentalism to succeed, stronger attacks must be devised, both scientific and philosophical. We contemplate some possibilities, while expressing doubts as to the wisdom of continuing the war. Peace may be better than war, and the resulting intellectual commerce may be good for both sides.

Motivating operations and stimulus control

The motivating operations concept has generated substantial conceptual analysis and research interest. Following an analysis of how motivating operations affect behavior, one which emphasizes the interactive role of motivating operations and discriminative stimuli, we propose: a) redefining motivating operations as operations that modulate the reinforcing or punishing effectiveness of particular kinds of events and the control of behavior by discriminative stimuli historically relevant to those events, b) dropping the distinction between behavior-altering and function-altering effects of motivating operations, and c) reducing or eliminating emphasis on conditioned motivating operations. This reconceptualization of the motivating operations concept is intended to increase its value in predicting and gainfully changing behavior.

Narrative: Why It's Important, and How It Works

Behavior analysts have said little about narrative and storytelling, emphasizing instead the functional/pragmatic aspects of verbal behavior. Nevertheless, these are ubiquitous human activities, and they are important to understand. Stories are prominent in essays on social issues, fund-raising appeals and political speeches, and they are the bedrock of theater. Foundational narratives are at the roots of major religions and of conflicts between them, and narrative has been proposed as an organizing basis for psychological wellbeing as well as a source of empathetic reactions. The ongoing process of reading or hearing a good story entails interlocking relations between establishing stimuli and their related, differentiated reinforcing consequences, with a story's coherence providing a key to its reinforcing effects. What are the behavioral principles that underlie the repertoires involved in all this? Behavior analysts have defined and studied some-the basic verbal classes, of course, although temporally extended sequences require some adjustments in these. Intraverbal behavior needs to be parsed into sub-categories to delineate highly varied sequences such as occur in paraphrase and translation. These two, along with imitation, generalized imitation and re-telling of stories, entail a salient role of complex invariance. The terms pliance and tracking help to balance the roles of speaker and listener, and to account for joint attention, which appears important in early verbal development. Transfer and transformation of function are additional ubiquitous processes, addressed through stimulus equivalence, relational frames, and other higher-order operants, especially naming, which entails the fusion of speaking and listening. Finally, we should consider ways in which a behavioral understanding of narrative can serve both behavior analysis and its surrounding culture.

Does a negative discriminative stimulus function as a punishing consequence?

The study and use of punishment in behavioral treatments has been constrained by ethical concerns. However, there remains a need to reduce harmful behavior unable to be reduced by differential-reinforcement procedures. We investigated whether response-contingent presentation of a negative discriminative stimulus previously correlated with an absence of reinforcers would punish behavior maintained by positive reinforcers. Across four conditions, pigeons were trained to discriminate between a positive discriminative stimulus (S+) signaling the presence of food, and a negative discriminative stimulus (S-) signaling the absence of food. Once learned, every five responses on average to the S+ produced S- for a duration of 1.5 s. S+ response rate decreased for a majority of pigeons when responses produced S-, compared to when they did not, or when a neutral control stimulus was presented. In Condition 5, choice between two concurrently presented S+ alternatives shifted away from the alternative producing S-, despite a 1:1 reinforcer ratio. Therefore, presenting contingent S- stimuli punishes operant behavior maintained on simple schedules and in choice situations. Development of negative discriminative stimuli as punishers of operant behavior could provide an effective approach to behavioral treatments for problem behavior and subverting suboptimal choices involved in addictions.

Related to Anxiety: Arbitrarily Applicable Relational Responding and Experimental Psychopathology Research on Fear and Avoidance

Humans have an unparalleled ability to engage in arbitrarily applicable relational responding (AARR). One of the consequences of this ability to spontaneously combine and relate events from the past, present, and future may, in fact, be a propensity to suffer. For instance, maladaptive fear and avoidance of remote or derived threats may actually perpetuate anxiety. In this narrative review, we consider contemporary AARR research on fear and avoidance as it relates to anxiety. We first describe laboratory-based research on the emergent spread of fear- and avoidance-eliciting functions in humans. Next, we consider the validity of AARR research on fear and avoidance and address the therapeutic implications of the work. Finally, we outline challenges and opportunities for a greater synthesis between behavior analysis research on AARR and experimental psychopathology.

The non-Darwinian evolution of behavers and behaviors

Many readers of this journal have been schooled in both Darwinian evolution and Skinnerian psychology, which have in common the vision of powerful control of their subjects by their sequalae. Individuals of species that generate more successful offspring come to dominate their habitat; responses of those individuals that generate more reinforcers come to dominate the repertoire of the individual in that context. This is unarguable. What is questionable is how large a role these forces of selection play in the larger landscape of existing organisms and the repertoires of their individuals. Here it is argued that non-Darwinian and non-Skinnerian selection play much larger roles in both than the reader may appreciate. The argument is based on the history of, and recent advances in, microbiology. Lessons from that history re-illuminate the three putative domains of selection by consequences: The evolution of species, response repertoires, and cultures. It is argued that before, beneath, and after the cosmically brief but crucial epoch of Darwinian evolution that shaped creatures such as ourselves, non-Darwinian forces pervade all three domains.

Predicting the Effects of Interventions: A Tutorial on the Disequilibrium Model

The disequilibrium approach to reinforcement and punishment, derived from the probability-differential hypothesis and response deprivation hypothesis, provides a number of potentially useful mathematical models for practitioners. The disequilibrium approach and its accompanying models have proven effective in the prediction and control of behavior, yet they have not been fully espoused and integrated into clinical practice. The purpose of this tutorial is to detail the disequilibrium approach and adapt its mathematical models for use as a tool in applied settings. The disequilibrium models specify how to arrange contingencies and predict the effects of those contingencies. We aggregate these models, and provide them as a single tool, in the form of a Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet that calculates the direction and magnitude of behavior change based on baseline measures and a practitioner's choice of intervention parameters. How practitioners take baseline measures and select intervention parameters in accordance with disequilibrium models is explicated. The proposed tool can be accessed and downloaded for use at https://osf.io/knf7x/.

Moving Beyond Reinforcement and Response Strength

Behavior analysis has often simultaneously depended upon and denied an implicit, hypothetical process of reinforcement as response strengthening. I discuss what I see as problematic about the use of such an implicit, possibly inaccurate, and likely unfalsifiable theory and describe issues to consider with respect to an alternative view without response strengthening. In my take on such an approach, important events (i.e., "reinforcers") provide a means to measure learning about predictive relations in the environment by modulating (i.e., inducing) performance dependent upon what is predicted and the relevant motivational mode or behavioral system active at that time (i.e., organismic state). Important events might be phylogenetically important, or they might acquire importance by being useful as signals for guiding an organism to where, when, or how currently relevant events might be obtained (or avoided). Given the role of learning predictive relations in such an approach, it is suggested that a potentially useful first step is to work toward formal descriptions of the structure of the predictive relations embodied in common facets of operant behavior (e.g., response-reinforcer contingencies, conditioned reinforcement, and stimulus control). Ultimately, the success of such an approach will depend upon how well it integrates formal characterizations of predictive relations (and how they are learned without response strengthening) and the relevant concomitant changes in organismic state across time. I also consider how thinking about the relevant processes in such a way might improve both our basic science and our technology of behavior.