Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T01:28:33.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Behavioural Momentum: Implications for Clinical Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2014

John A. Nevin
John A. Nevin*
Affiliation:
University of New Hampshire
*
Department of Psychology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA. Email: [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

Behavioural momentum refers to the tendency for reinforced behaviour to persist when conditions are altered. Research on persistence with pigeons as subjects has suggested that response rate under steady-state conditions and its persistence when conditions are altered are independent aspects of behaviour, with response rate determined by response-reinforcer contingencies and persistence determined by stimulus-reinforcer contingencies. These results have been replicated with humans in a natural setting, and may therefore be relevant to clinical practice. The following prescriptions are suggested by the research results: (a) To eliminate undesirable behaviour, it is not sufficient to reinforce alternative behaviour in the same setting because this may actually enhance persistence of the undesired response; change to a new setting may also be necessary; (b) to establish desirable behaviour, the behaviour should be reinforced frequently, and to make it persistent, both the therapeutic and natural environments should be highly correlated with reinforcement.

Type
Research Article
Information
Behaviour Change , Volume 10 , Issue 3: Special Issue: The Relevance of Basic Research to Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy , September 1993 , pp. 162 - 168
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

DeGrandpre, R.J., & Bickel, W.K. (in press). Stimulus control and drug dependence. The Psychological Record.Google Scholar
Ferster, C.B., & Skinner, B.F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Honig, W.K. (Ed.). (1966). Operant behaviour: Areas of research and application. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Honig, W.K., & Staddon, J.E.R. (Eds.). (1977). Handbook of operant behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Koegel, R.L., & Rincover, A. (1977). Research on the difference between generalisation and maintenance in extra-therapy responding. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewinsohn, P.M., Biglan, A., & Zeiss, A.M. (1976). Behavioral treatment of depression. In Davidson, P.O. (Ed.), Behavioral management of anxiety, depression, and pain. New York: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
Mace, F.C. (1991, 05). Recent advances and functional analysis of behaviour disorders. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Behaviour Analysis, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Mace, F.C., Hock, M.L., Lalli, J.S., West, B.J., Belfiore, P., Pinter, E., & Brown, D.K. (1988). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of noncompliance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 123–141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mace, F.C., Lalli, J.S., Shea, M.C., Lalli, E.P., West, B.J., Roberts, M., & Nevin, J.A. (1990). The momentum of human behaviour in a natural setting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 54, 163–172.Google Scholar
McDowell, J.J. (1982). The importance of Herrnstein's mathematical statement of the law of effect for behaviour therapy. American Psychologist, 37, 771–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morse, W.H. (1966). Intermittent reinforcement. In Honig, W.K. (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application (pp. 52–108). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Nation, J.R., & Woods, D.J. (1980). Persistence: The role of partial reinforcement in psychotherapy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 175–207.Google Scholar
Nevin, J.A. (1974). Response strength in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 389–408.Google Scholar
Nevin, J.A. (1979). Reinforcement schedules and response strength. In Zeiler, M.D. & Harzem, P. (Eds.), Reinforcement and the organization of behaviour (pp. 117–158). Chichester, England: Wiley.Google Scholar
Nevin, J.A. (1984). Pavlovian determiners of behavioral momentum. Animal Learning and Behavior, 12, 363–370.Google Scholar
Nevin, J.A. (1988). Behavioral momentum and the partial reinforcement effect. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 44–56.Google Scholar
Nevin, J.A., Smith, L.D., & Roberts, J. (1987). Does contingent reinforcement strengthen operant behavior? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 17–33.Google Scholar
Nevin, J.A., Tota, M.E., Torquato, R.D., & Shull, R.L. (1990). Alternative reinforcement increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 359–379.Google Scholar
Rachlin, H., & Baum, W.M. (1972). Effects of alternative reinforcement: Does the source matter? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 18, 231–241.Google Scholar
Rogers, C.R. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Skinner, B.F. (1983). The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Stokes, T.F., & Osnes, P.G. (1989). An operant pursuit of generalisation. Behaviour Therapy, 20, 337–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tota, M.E. (1991). Alternative reinforcement and resistance to change. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Greensboro.Google Scholar
Zeiler, M.D. (1977). Schedules of reinforcement: The controlling variables. In Honig, W.K. & Staddon, J.E.R. (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 201–232). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar