Behavior modification

Behavior modification refers to behavior-change procedures that were employed during the 1970s and early 1980s. Based on methodological behaviorism,[1] overt behavior was modified with presumed consequences, including artificial positive and negative reinforcement contingencies to increase desirable behavior, or administering positive and negative punishment and/or extinction to reduce problematic behavior.[2][3][4] For the treatment of phobias, habituation and punishment were the basic principles used in flooding, a subcategory of desensitization.

Applied behavior analysis (ABA)the application of behavior analysisis based on radical behaviorism, which refers to B. F. Skinner's viewpoint that cognition and emotions are covert behavior that are to be subjected to the same conditions as overt behavior.


The first use of the term behavior modification appears to have been by Edward Thorndike in 1911. His article Provisional Laws of Acquired Behavior or Learning makes frequent use of the term "modifying behavior".[5] Through early research in the 1940s and the 1950s the term was used by Joseph Wolpe's research group.[6] The experimental tradition in clinical psychology used it to refer to psycho-therapeutic techniques derived from empirical research.[7] It has since come to refer mainly to techniques for increasing adaptive behavior through reinforcement and decreasing maladaptive behavior through extinction or punishment (with emphasis on the former).

In recent years, the concept of punishment has had many critics, though these criticisms tend not to apply to negative punishment (time-outs) and usually apply to the addition of some aversive event. The use of positive punishment by board certified behavior analysts is restricted to extreme circumstances when all other forms of treatment have failed and when the behavior to be modified is a danger to the person or to others (see professional practice of behavior analysis). In clinical settings positive punishment is usually restricted to using a spray bottle filled with water as an aversive event. When misused, more aversive punishment can lead to affective (emotional) disorders, as well as to the receiver of the punishment increasingly trying to avoid the punishment (i.e., "not get caught").

Behavior modification relies on the following:

Some areas of effectiveness

Functional behavior assessment forms the core of applied behavior analysis. Many techniques in this therapy are specific techniques aimed at specific issues. Interventions based on behavior analytic principles have been extremely effective in developing evidence-based treatments.[8]

In addition to the above, a growing list of research-based interventions from the behavioral paradigm exist. With children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), one study showed that over a several year period, children in the behavior modification group had half the number of felony arrests as children in the medication group.[9][10] These findings have yet to be replicated, but are considered encouraging for the use of behavior modification for children with ADHD. There is strong and consistent evidence that behavioral treatments are effective for treating ADHD. A recent meta-analysis found that the use of behavior modification for ADHD resulted in effect sizes in between group studies (.83), pre-post studies (.70), within group studies (2.64), and single subject studies (3.78) indicating behavioral treatments are highly effective.[11]

Behavior modification programs form the core of many residential treatment facility programs. They have shown success in reducing recidivism for adolescents with conduct problems and adult offenders. One particular program that is of interest is teaching-family homes (see Teaching Family Model), which is based on a social learning model that emerged from radical behaviorism. These particular homes use a family style approach to residential treatment, which has been carefully replicated over 700 times.[12] Recent efforts have seen a push for the inclusion of more behavior modification programs in residential re-entry programs in the U.S. to aid prisoners in re-adjusting after release.

One area that has repeatedly shown effectiveness has been the work of behaviorists working in the area of community reinforcement for addictions.[13] Another area of research that has been strongly supported has been behavioral activation for depression.[14]

One way of giving positive reinforcement in behavior modification is in providing compliments, approval, encouragement, and affirmation; a ratio of five compliments for every one complaint is generally seen as being effective in altering behavior in a desired manner[15] and even in producing stable marriages.[16]

Of notable interest is that the right behavioral intervention can have profound system effects. For example, Forgatch and DeGarmo (2007) found that with mothers who were recently divorced, a standard round of parent management training (programs based on social learning principles that teaches rewarding good behavior and ignoring bad behavior combined with communication skills) could help elevate the divorced mother out of poverty.[17] In addition, parent management training programs, sometimes referred to as behavioral parent training programs, have shown relative cost effectiveness for their efforts[18] for the treatment of conduct disorder. Thus, such intervention can have profound effects on socializing the child in a relatively cost effective fashion and help get the parent out of poverty. This level of effect is often looked for and valued by those who practice behavioral engineering and results of this type have caused the Association for Behavior Analysis International to take a position that those receiving treatment have a right to effective treatment[19] and a right to effective education.[20]

In job performance

Based on the conceptual premises of classical behaviorism and reinforcement theory, the Organizational Behavior Modification Model (aka O.B. Mod) represents a behavioral approach to the management of human resources in organizational settings.[21] The application of reinforcement theory to modification of behavior as it relates to job performance first requires analysis of necessary antecedents (e.g., job design, training) of the desired behavior.[21] After it has been determined that the necessary antecedents are present, managers must first identify the behaviors to change. These behaviors must be observable, measurable, task-related, and critical to the task at hand. Next, a baseline measure of the behavior must be assessed and functional consequences analyzed.[21] Now that the link between the antecedent, behavior, and contingent consequences has been established, an intervention to change the behavior can be introduced. If the intervention is successful in modifying the behavior, it must be maintained using schedules of reinforcement and must be evaluated for performance improvement.[21] The O.B. Mod has been found to have a significant positive effect on task performance globally,[21][22] with performance on average increasing 17%.[23]

A study that examined the differential effects of incentive motivators administered with the O.B. Mod on job performance found that using money as a reinforcer with O.B. Mod was more successful at increasing performance compared to routine pay for performance (i.e., money administered on performance not using O.B. Mod).[24] The authors also found that using money administered through the O.B. Mod produced stronger effects (37% performance increase), compared to social recognition (24% performance increase) and performance feedback (20% performance increase).[24]


Behavior modification is critiqued in person-centered psychotherapeutic approaches such as Rogerian Counseling and Re-evaluation Counseling,[25] which involve "connecting with the human qualities of the person to promote healing", while behaviorism is "denigrating to the human spirit".[26] B.F. Skinner argues in Beyond Freedom and Dignity that unrestricted reinforcement is what led to the "feeling of freedom", thus removal of aversive events allows people to "feel freer".[27] Further criticism extends to the presumption that behavior increases only when it is reinforced. This premise is at odds with research conducted by Albert Bandura at Stanford University. His findings indicate that violent behavior is imitated, without being reinforced, in studies conducted with children watching films showing various individuals "beating the daylights out of Bobo". Bandura believes that human personality and learning is the result of the interaction between environment, behavior and psychological process. There is evidence, however, that imitation is a class of behavior that can be learned just like anything else. Children have been shown to imitate behavior that they have never displayed before and are never reinforced for, after being taught to imitate in general.[28]

Several people have criticized the level of training required to perform behavior modification procedures, especially those that are restrictive or use aversives, aversion therapy, or punishment protocols. Some desire to limit such restrictive procedures only to licensed psychologists or licensed counselors. Once licensed for this group, post-licensed certification in behavior modification is sought to show scope of competence in the area through groups like the World Association for Behavior Analysis.[29] Still others desire to create an independent practice of behavior analysis through licensure to offer consumers choices between proven techniques and unproven ones (see Professional practice of behavior analysis). Level of training and consumer protection remain of critical importance in applied behavior analysis and behavior modification.

See also


  1. Mahoney, M. J., Kazdin, A. E., & Lesswing, N. J.; Franks, C. M., Wilson, G. T. (1974). "Behavior modification: delusion or deliverance?". Annual Review of Behavior Therapy: Theory and Practice. 2. Brunner/Mazel. pp. 11–40.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. Mace, F. C. (1994). "The significance and future of functional analysis methodologies". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 27 (2): 385–92. doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-385. PMC 1297814. PMID 16795830.
  3. Pelios, L., Morren, J., Tesch, D., and Axelrod, S. (1999). "The impact of functional analysis methodology on treatment choice for self-injurious and aggressive behavior". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 32 (2): 185–95. doi:10.1901/jaba.1999.32-185. PMC 1284177. PMID 10396771.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. Mace, F. C., and Critchfield, T. S. (2010). "Translational research in behavior analysis: Historical traditions and imperative for the future". J Exp Anal Behav. 93 (3): 293–312. doi:10.1901/jeab.2010.93-293. PMC 2861871. PMID 21119847.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  5. Thorndike, E.L. (1911). "Provisional Laws of Acquired Behavior or Learning". Animal Intelligence. New York: The Macmillan Company.
  6. Wolpe, J. (1968). "Psychotheraphy by Reciprocal Inhibition". Conditional Reflex. 3 (4): 234–240. doi:10.1007/BF03000093 (inactive 2019-08-20).
  7. In Bachrach, A. J., ed. (1962). Experimental Foundations of Clinical Psychology. New York: Basic Books. pp. 3–25.
  8. O'Donohue, W.; Ferguson, K. E. (2006). "Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology and Behavior Analysis". The Behavior Analyst Today. 7 (3): 335–52. doi:10.1037/h0100155.
  9. Satterfield, J. H.; Satterfield, B. T.; Schell, A. M. (1987). "Therapeutic interventions to prevent delinquency in hyperactive boys". Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 26 (1): 56–64. doi:10.1097/00004583-198701000-00012.
  10. Satterfield, J. H.; Schell, A. (1997). "A prospective study of hyperactive boys with conduct problems and normal boys: Adolescent and adult criminality". Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 36 (12): 1726–35. doi:10.1097/00004583-199712000-00021. PMID 9401334.
  11. Fabiano, G. A.; Pelham Jr., W. E.; Coles, E. K.; Gnagy, E. M.; Chronis-Tuscano, A.; O'Connor, B. C. (2008). "A meta-analysis of behavioral treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder". Clinical Psychology Review. 29 (2): 129–40. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2008.11.001. PMID 19131150.
  12. Dean L. Fixsen, Karen A. Blasé, Gary D. Timbers and Montrose M. Wolf (2007) In Search of Program Implementation: 792 Replications of the Teaching-Family Model. Behavior Analyst Today Volume 8, No. 1, pp. 96–106 Behavior Analyst Online
  13. Milford, J.L.; Austin, J.L.; Smith, J.E. (2007). Community Reinforcement and the Dissemination of Evidence-based Practice: Implications for Public Policy. IJBCT, 3(1), pp. 77–87 )
  14. Spates, R.C.; Pagoto, S.; Kalata, A. (2006). "A Qualitative and Quantitative Review of Behavioral Activation Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder". The Behavior Analyst Today. 7 (4): 508–17. doi:10.1037/h0100089.
  15. Kirkhart, Robert; Kirkhart, Evelyn (1972). "The Bruised Self: Mending in the Early Years". In Yamamoto, Kaoru (ed.). The Child and His Image: Self Concept in the Early Years. New York: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-0-395-12571-7.
  16. Gottman, J.M.; Levenson, R.W. (1999). "What predicts change in marital interaction over time? A study of alternative models". Family Process. 38 (2): 143–58. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1999.00143.x. PMID 10407716.
  17. Forgatch, M.; DeGarmo (2007). "Accelerating recovery from poverty: Prevention effects for recently separated mothers". Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention. 4 (4): 681–72. doi:10.1037/h0100400. PMC 2587348. PMID 19043620.
  18. Olchowski, A.E.; Foster, E.M.; Webster-Stratton, C.H. (2007). Implementing Behavioral Intervention Components in a Cost-Effective Manner: Analysis of the Incredible Years Program. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention, Vol. 3(4) and Vol. 4(1), Combined Edition, pp. 284–304.
  19. ABA:I Archived November 19, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  20. "ABA:I". Archived from the original on 2008-11-19. Retrieved 2007-12-27.
  21. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1997). "A meta-analysis of the effects of organizational behavior modification on task performance, 1975-1995". Academy of Management. 40 (5): 1122–1149. doi:10.2307/256929. JSTOR 256929.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  22. Luthans, F., Stajkovic, A. D., Luthans, B. C., & Lutherans, K. W. (1998). "Applying Behavioral Management in Eastern Europe". European Management Journal. 16: 446–475.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  23. Luthans, F., & Stajkovic, A. D. (1999). "Reinforce for performance: The need to go beyond pay and even rewards". Academy of Management Executive. 13 (2): 49–57. doi:10.5465/ame.1999.1899548.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  24. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (2001). "Differential effects of incentive motivators on work performance". Academy of Management Journal. 4 (3): 580–590. doi:10.2307/3069372. JSTOR 3069372. Archived from the original on 2018-07-23. Retrieved 2019-07-13.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  25. "Re-evaluation Counseling".
  26. Holland, J.L. (1976). "A new synthesis for an old method and a new analysis of some old phenomena". The Counseling Psychologist. 6 (3): 12–15. doi:10.1177/001100007600600303.
  27. Skinner, B. F. (1974). Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  28. D. Baer, R.F.; Peterson, J.A. Sherman Psychological Modeling: Conflicting Theories, 2006
  29. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2011-01-10. Retrieved 2011-01-21.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.