Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The premack principle, response deprivation, and establishing operations

  • Published:
The Behavior Analyst Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes response deprivation as an establishing operation. In this context, we review the concept of establishing operation, in particular, its reinforcer-establishing and evocative effects; we place response deprivation in the literature on the reinforcing effects of behavioral activity, wherein response deprivation subsumes the Premack principle; we describe the reinforcer-altering and evocative effects of response deprivation; and we address a methodological concern about the evocative effect. In closing, we discuss some conceptual and empirical implications of the foregoing analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, L. D., & Iwata, B. A. (1980). Reinforcing exercise maintenance: Using existing high-rate activities. Behavior Modification, 4, 337–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, J. (1993). Response deprivation, reinforcement, and economics. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 129–140.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, J., & Castellan, N. J. (1970). Temporal characteristics of nutritive drinking in rats and humans. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 70, 116–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, J., & Timberlake, W. (1974). Instrumental and contingent saccharin licking in rats: Response deprivation and reinforcement. Learning and Motivation, 5, 231–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, J., & Timberlake, W. (1975). Response deprivation and instrumental performance in the controlled-amount paradigm. Learning and Motivation, 6, 122–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azrin, N. H., Hutchinson, R. R., & McLaughlin, R. (1965). The opportunity for aggression as an operant reinforcer during aversive stimulation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 8, 171–180.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, D. J., & Ebbesen, E. B. (1978). Reinforcement and substitution in humans: A multiple-response analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30, 243–253.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bijou, S. W. (1996). Setting factors in the behavior analysis of human development. In S. W. Bijou & E. Ribes (Eds.), New directions in behavior development (pp. 147–154). Reno, NV: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bijou, S. W., & Baer, D. M. (1961). Child development: Vol. 1. A systematic and empirical theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Catania, A. C. (1993). Coming to terms with establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 219–224.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Catania, A. C. (1998). Learning (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chance, P. (1999). Learning and behavior. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougher, M. J. (1983). Clinical effects of response deprivation and response satiation procedures. Behavior Therapy, 14, 286–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougher, M. J., & Hackbert, L. (2000). Establishing operations, cognition, and emotion. The Behavior Analyst, 23, 11–24.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dunham, P. J., & Grantmyre, J. (1982). Changes in a multiple-response repertoire during response-contingent punishment and response restriction: Sequential relationships. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 123–133.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberger, R., Karpman, M., & Trattner, J. (1967). What is the necessary and sufficient condition for reinforcement in the contingency situation? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 342–350.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, J. L. (1977). The origins and function of adjunctive behavior. Animal Learning & Behavior, 5, 325–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, H. W. (1987). A dictionary of modern English usage (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gewirtz, J. L. (1972). Some contextual determinants of stimulus potency. In R. D. Parke (Ed.), Recent trends in social learning theory (pp. 7–33). New York: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, H. L., Iwata, B. A., Shore, B. A., DeLeon, I. G., Lerman, D. C., Ulrich, S. M., & Smith, R. G. (1995). An analysis of the reinforcing properties of hand mouthing. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 269–283.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Goldiamond, I., & Dyrud, J. (1968). Behavioral analysis for psychotherapy. In J. Schlien (Ed.), Research in psychotherapy (Vol. 3, pp. 54–89). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Heth, C. D., & Warren, A. G. (1978). Response deprivation and response satiation as determinants of instrumental performance: Some data and theory. Animal Learning & Behavior, 6, 294–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homme, L. E., deBaca, P. C, Devine, J. V., Steinhorst, R., & Rickert, E. J. (1963). Use of the Premack principle in controlling the behavior of nursery school children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 544.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bau-man, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1982). Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 2, 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iwata, B. A., Smith, R. G., & Michael, J. (2000). Current research on the influence of establishing operations on behavior in applied settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 411–418.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. M., & Moore, B. R. (1973). The form of the auto-shaped response with food and water reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 20, 163–181.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kantor, J. R. (1918). Conscious behavior and the abnormal. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 13, 158–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantor, J. R. (1959). Interbehavioral psychology. Chicago: Principia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, F. S., & Schoenfeld, W. N. (1950). Principles of psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, C. H., & Meyer, K. A. (1996). Sleep deprivation, allergy symptoms, and negatively reinforced problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 133–135.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, T. J. (1976). The Premack principle in human experimental and applied settings. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 14, 133–147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Konarski, E. A., Jr. (1987). Effects of response deprivation on the instrumental performance of mentally retarded persons. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 91, 537–542.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Konarski, E. A., Jr., Johnson, M. R., Crowell, C. R., & Whitman, T. L. (1979). An alternative approach to reinforcement for applied researchers: Response deprivation. Behavior Therapy, 12, 653–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konarski, E. A., Jr., Johnson, M. R., Crowell, C. R., & Whitman, T. L. (1980). Response deprivation and reinforcement in applied settings: A preliminary analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 595–609.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Leslie, J. C. (1996). Principles of behavioral analysis. Amsterdam: Harwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, J. C. (1990). Theories of learning: A historical approach. Belmont, CA: Wads-worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malott, R. W, Malott, M. E., & Trojan, E. A. (2000). Elementary principles of behavior (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, G., & Pear, J. (1996). Behavior modification: What it is and how to do it. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, J. E. (1975). The matching law and quantifications related to Premack’s principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavioral Processes, 104, 374–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, J. E. (1998). Learning and behavior (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDevitt, M. A., & Fantino, E. (1993). Establishing operations and the discriminative stimulus. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 225–227.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McGill, P. (1999). Establishing operations: Implications for assessment, treatment, and prevention of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 393–418.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149–155.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (1983). Evocative and repertoire-al-tering effects of an environmental event. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 2, 19–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (1985). Behavior analysis: A radical perspective. In B. L. Hammonds (Ed.), Psychology and learning (pp. 99–121). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (1988). Establishing operations and the mand. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 6, 3–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191–206.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Millenson, J. R. (1967). Principles of behavioral analysis. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W. S., & Stoffelmayr, B. E. (1973). Application of the Premack principle to the behavioral control of extremely inactive schizophrenics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 419–423.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D. (1959). Toward empirical behavior laws: I. Positive reinforcement. Psychological Review, 66, 219–233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D. (1961). Predicting instrumental performance from the independent rate of the contingent response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 613–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D. (1962). Reversibility of the reinforcement relation. Science, 136, 255–257.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D. (1963). Rate differential reinforcement in monkey manipulation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 81–89.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D. (1965). Reinforcement theory. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 13, pp. 123–188). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, G. S. (1961). An analysis of interactions in a multiple schedule. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 107–117.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, C. P. (1922). A behavioral study of the activity of the rat. Comparative Psychology Monographs, 1(2).

  • Schlinger, H. D., & Blakely, E. (1987). Function-altering effects of contingency-specifying stimuli. The Behavior Analyst, 10, 41–45.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sheffield, F. D. (1948). Avoidance training and the contiguity principle. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 41, 165–177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sheffield, E D., Wulff, J. J., & Backer, R. (1951). Reward value of copulation without sex drive reduction. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 44, 3–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1931). The concept of the reflex in the description of behavior. Journal of General Psychology, 5, 427–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1991). Behavior for lasting change. Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timberlake, W (1980). A molar equilibrium theory of learned performance. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 14, pp. 1–58). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timberlake, W, & Allison, J. (1974). Response deprivation: An empirical approach to instrumental performance. Psychological Review, 81, 146–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timberlake, W., & Farmer-Dougan, V. A. (1991). Reinforcement in applied settings: Figuring out ahead of time what will work. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 379–391.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wasik, B. H. (1970). The application of Pre-mack’s generalization on reinforcement to the management of classroom behavior. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 10, 33–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilder, D. A., & Carr, J. E. (1998). Recent advances in the modification of establishing operations to reduce aberrant behavior. Behavioral Interventions, 13, 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Kansas, USA

    Kevin P. Klatt & Edward K. Morris

Authors
  1. Kevin P. Klatt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward K. Morris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Klatt, K.P., Morris, E.K. The premack principle, response deprivation, and establishing operations. BEHAV ANALYST 24, 173–180 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392028

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392028

Key words

Search

Navigation