1-motivating operations: an advanced analysis Flashcards
Whether an EO or an AO evokes or abates responding is determined by the type of
Consequence that a specific EO or an AO ALTERS (reinforcement or punishment).
Whether an EO or an AO evokes or abates responding is determined by the type of consequence that a specific EO or AO altars, reinforcement or punishment
One cannot tell simply by whether it is an EO or an AO
Variable determining affect of MO on behavior
MO’s are classified depending on whether their value altering affect is of
Phylogenic provenance (unlearned) or ontogenic provenance (Learned)
If the value altering affect is a phylogenic Providence, motivating operations are termed
Unconditioned, unlearned, motivating operations. UMO’s
Further classified as;
-unconditioned establishing operations(UEOs)
-unconditioned abolishing operations (UAOS)
If the value altering affect is of ontogenic Provenance, motivating Operations are termed
Conditioned or learned motivating operations. CMO
Further classify as:
Conditioned Establishing operations. CEO
Condition Abolishing operations CAO
An antecedent condition, operation, or stimulus that
1. Alters the effectiveness or value of a consequence and
- Has a momentary affect on a dimension of behavior
Motivating Operational
- . Establishing operations EOs
2. Abolishing operations AOs
Two general types of motivating operations
Increases the effectiveness of a consequence (reinforce or punisher)
That is, they have establishing effects by definition
May evoke or abate behavior depending on whether it alters the effectiveness of a reinforcer or a punisher
Establishing operations EOs
Decreases the effectiveness of a consequence
That is have abolishing affects by definition
Make abate or evoke behavior depending on whether the specific Ayo altar is the effectiveness of a reinforcer or a punisher
Abolishing operations
Evocative aEffect: When MOs evoke behavior; that is increased the momentary frequency of behavior
Abative Effect :when MOs abate behavior that is decreased the monetary frequency of behavior
Effects of MOs on Behavior
We Further classify MO’s by the type of consequence that is part of a specific operant contingency.
That is we give MO’s last names based upon the type of consequence whose value has been altered.
- MO related to reinforcement (MOSR)
3. MO related to punishment, MOSP
EO SR
EO related to reinforcement
EO SP
EO related to punishment
AOSR
AO related to reinforcement
AOSP
AO related to punishment
MO’s which increase the value of other events as forms of reinforcement.
They evoke the type of behavior which has been reinforced by those events in the past.
Establishing Operations related to reinforcement.
Reinforcer-Establishing Effect
-Their value-altering effect on reinforcement
Evocative Effect
- their effect on behavior
Effects of EO’s Related to Reinforcement
Reinforcer abolishing a fact.
- Their value altering affect on reinforcement.
- Abative effects
- Their effect on behavior
AO’s related to reinforcement
Abolishing operations related to reinforcement or MO’s which would decrease the value of other events as forms of reinforcement.
They abate the type of behavior which has been reinforced by those events in the past
MO’s which INCREASE the value of other events as forms of punishment.
They ABATE the type of behavior which has been punished by those events in the past.
Punisher ESTABLISHING effect is their VALUE altering affect on punishment.
ABATIVE effect on behavior
EO’s related to punishment
An antecedent condition, operation, or stimulus which increases the effectiveness of a stimulus as a punisher and decreases the momentary frequency of behavior which has been punished in the past by the punisher whose value has been increased by that EOSP
Two effects:
Punisher Establishing -value altering
Abative Effect on Behavior
Establishing operation for punishment
An antecedent condition, operation or stimulus which decreases the effectiveness of a stimulus as a punisher and increases the momentary frequency of behavior which has been punished in the past by the punisher whose value has been decreased by that AOSP
AO’s Related to punishment
A motivating operation who’s value altering effects depends on a learning history
Condition motivating operations
He Identified three general types of conditioned motivating operations.
Jack Michael
Surrogate CMO (CMO-S) Transitive CMO (CMO-T) Reflexive CMO, CMO-R
(conditioned establishing operations, conditioned abolishing operations)
conditioned motivating operations
- Acquire the properties of an EO through contingent pairing with UEO’s
Example: A stimulus condition is contingently paired with water deprivation
Example: the case of the Mexican music and the salty chips and salsa
- Acquire the properties of an AO through contingent pairing with UAO’s
Example stimulus condition is contingently paired with food satiation
- Surrogate CEO
2. Surrogate CAO
Acquire the properties of an EO through contingent pairing with UEO’s in much the same way that stimuli become S’s through pairing.
Ex. A stimulus condition is contingently paired with water deprivation. Such as the case of the Mexican music and the salty chips and salsa.
Surrogate CEO
Acquires the properties of an AO through contingent pairing with UAO’s owes in much the same way that stimuli become S’s through pairing
For example a stimulus condition is contingently paired with food satiation
Surrogate CAO
They may either alter the value of reinforcing consequences or punishing consequences.
All examples in the literature or about the first one
Surrogate CMOS and consequences
-surrogate CEO
Surrogate CAO
Establishes the value of a stimulus which produces a reinforcer. In other words, to get reinforcement you need us
often confused for an SD
Someone asks you if you’re free next Thursday. You immediately reach for your phone to check your calendar. Did the request mean your phone was available? Or make it more valuable? Why?
Transitive (CMO-T)
Decrease in the effectiveness of a stimulus as a reinforcer and abate behavior which is maintained by the reinforcer who is value has been lowered or decreased.
Alters POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT only
Transitive CAO-T
An event occurs that makes it important to emit a behavior.
But in order to emit the behavior you will need some other stimulus (object or person)
Verse that stimulus is value as a reinforcer will be increased.
It is the EVENT!
Transitive CEO
CEO-T
An event that establishes another stimulus as a necessary condition to complete the response that the first event evokes and thus establishes that second stimulus as a reinforcer
In Order to get from here to there you need something else.
An example is manding for information. The gameboy being off is the CEO-T. Then manding for help. Use reinforcement to engage in playing with GameBoy
Transitive CEO T
Transition. To be able to engage in a terminal behavior. Only positive reinforcement. Example I didn’t need it until this happened. The CEOT is the event
Class dismissed and your car keys.
Statement is the CEO – T
Car keys are conditioned Sr+ whose value is increased
The Guinness and the bottle opener.
Sealed bottle cap is the CEO – T. Bottle opener is the conditioned Sr+ whose value is increased
Examples of transitive CEO
Promise (Improving)
CMOp-
Threat (worsening condition)
Most commonly address: CMO – Rr-
Conditioned reflexive motivating operation for negative reinforcement.
Escape or signaled avoidance
Reflexive CMO – R
“Class dismissed” and your car keys. The statement is the ——-
The Guinness and the bottle opener. Sealed bottle cap is the——-. Bottle opener is the condition SR + Whose value is increased
The telephone number and the pan. Person saying telephone number is the——
Pen is the condition positive reinforcer whose value is increased.
Let’s play ball and the glove. The statement let’s play ball, is the ——. The glove is the conditioned positive reinforcer whose value is increased I’m gonna throw up I don’t know something
Examples of transitive CEO
CEO-T
Abolishes its own termination as an effective form of negative reinforcement or punishment
Reflexive CAO
CAO-R
Establishes its own termination as an effective form of negative reinforcement or punishment
Reflexive CEO
CEO-R
An E0 for negative reinforcement
Evokes avoidance behavior and
evokes behavior that has resulted in its own termination in the past
Threat CEO – R
Always reinforcement And a warning stimulus.
Abates avoidance behavior and abates behavior that has resulted in its own termination in the past
CAO-R Is an AO for negative reinforcement
Terminates a warning stimulus; prevents or delays the onset of the aversive stimulus
These responses are learned
(The warning stimulus is a conditioned aversive stimulus whose presence is correlated with the upcoming onset of an aversive stimulus.)
Avoidance
An EO for negative PUNISHMENT
Increases the value of Negative Punishment
Abates behavior that has resulted in its own termination in the past
Increases the value of negative reinforcement
promise if you do that I will take something away that you like
Promise CEO – R
(Promise- Punishment)
I
An AO for NEGATIVE PUNISHMENT SP-,
Decreases the value of negative punishment.
Evokes behavior that has resulted in its own termination in the past.
Alters the effectiveness of negative punishment SP-
Promise CAO – R
Promise to Punish.
SP-
The ONSET of PAINFUL stimulation Establishes the reduction or offset of this stimulation as an effective form of reinforcement
AND
Evokes behavior that achieved such reduction or offset
Negative reinforcement
A response terminates a warning stimulus
Signaled avoidance
An AO for Negative reinforcement,
Decreases the value of Negative Reinforcement.
Abates avoidance behavior and abates behavior that has resulted in its own termination in the past.
Always reinforcement and warning stimulus.
Threat CAO– R
No clear warning stimulus, but a response can still delay or prevent the occurrence of an aversive event
Unsignalled avoidance
A conditioned aversive stimulus whose presence is correlated with the upcoming onset of an unconditioned aversive stimulus
Warning stimulus
Behavior that terminates an aversive stimulus that it is maintained by negative reinforcement
The aversive conditioning is already happening when the behavior occurs
Escape behavior
Getting out of a burning building.
Terminating a boring conversation.
Shock onset - lever press- offset
Note: the aversive condition is already happening When the behavior occurs
Examples of escape
Represents the relationship between the IV and the DV
Data paths
MO’s have been shown to either widen or narrow the stimulus generalization gradient
Related affects of MO’s on Discriminative stimuli
Motivating operations are further classified by two different variables
Provenance of the value altering effect
The type of consequence whose value is altered
Deprivation UEO
Satiation UAO
The two most basic UMO’s
Jack Michael
EO - R - SR-
“Reinforcement by relief”
The irritant or aversive antecedent involved in negative reinforcement is an EO
Establishes the reduction or offset of this stimulation as an effective form of reinforcement. Michael, 2004
And evokes the behavior that achieved such reduction or offset
It is an E0 rather than an SD
Fails to qualify as a discriminative variable because it’s absence has not been a condition where an effective form of reinforcement was unavailable for a particular type of behavior. Michael
Painful Stimulation: Escape
Painful stimulation:
To have an SD, you must have differential reinforcement,
- SD - R - SR-
- S> - R - ext
Painful stimulation is an EO for negative Reinforcement and not an SD
Painful stimulation:
If behavior is maintained by negative reinforcement, in the extinction condition, the aversive stimulus is not removed.
Painful stimulation
Is pain SD an absence of S Delta?
Ask yourself, what is the extinction condition which would be needed for the absence of pain to be an S Delta?
Does the extinction condition make any logical sense if the pain is absent?
SD/S-Delta
Shock onset – lever press – shock offset
Shock absent – lever press – shock still on
Does the extinction condition make any logical sense
Painful stimulation
Extinction – logical?
The contrast between the following two conditions:
Available: consequence has followed the behavior in the past under the same or similar conditions
Unavailable: consequence has not followed the behavior in the past under the same or similar conditions.
Differential availability
Valuable = Establishing effect : if consequence follows the behavior it is likely to be effective as reinforcer or punisher
Not valuable equals abolishing effect:
If consequence follows the behavior it is not likely to be effective as reinforcer or punisher
Value altering Effects
If the behavior is kicking other person, which has been reinforced by getting away from other kids…… Under what circumstances is the behavior least likely to occur?
—-when getting away is least valuable
AND
——In situations where getting away has not been available in the past for kicking
Predicting the non-occurrence of behavior
Most antecedents have What kind of effects on behavior?
Evocative or Abative
Two Effects:
- Punisher Establishing Effect
- their value altering affect on punishment
- Abative Effect
- Their Effect on behavior
EO’s related to punishment
The warning stimulus, the sound of a buzzer, is correlated with the upcoming onset of shock.
This correlation requires experience to develop and become effective:
it is conditioned i.e. learned.
Avoidance responses - learned
The aversive stimulus often occur at regular time intervals.
That is… the passage of time may function as a warning stimulus.
Unsignaled avoidance
Pairing – one event paired with an MO becomes an How television commercials function:
Does the pizza Ad signal that pizza is available? No
So why does it make pizza valuable?
Surrogate, conditioned motivating operation – S
CMOp-
I am second in line for the iPhone 8. You see me and invite me to lunch.
I declined.
What affect does my position in line have on the consequence of leaving the line?
Promise reflexive
Conditioned motivating operations, CMO, alter the effectiveness of consequences due to…
They are defined by their….
Ontogenic Provenance
Value Altering effects which is LEARNED Therefore, there effect on consequences it due to ontogenic
Surrogate motivating operations, CMO – S, acquire the properties of an MO through:
Contingent pairing with other MO’s
A Surrogate is conditioned through pairing with a UMO or other strongly conditioned CMO.
They are learned. Surrogate motivating operations do you not acquire the property is I have an MO through pairing with consequences. Northrop pairing with unconditioned and or condition of stimuli.
Which of the following is true of a transitive condition establishing operation?
Establishes a second stimulus as a reinforcer
This reflexive CMO always establishes or abolishes something about itself rather than another stimulus.
CEO – R
Discriminated avoidance is not a good term because the antecedent conditioned aversive stimulus, which evokes the avoidance response, is actually a
EO for negative reinforcement
Question 27
2 / 2 pts
A CMO-reflexive type can have which of the following effects
Establishes its own termination as a form of positive punishment
Abolishes its own termination as a form of positive reinforcement
Establishes its own termination as a form of negative reinforcement
Establishes the termination of another stimulus as a form of negative reinforcement
Establishes its own termination as a form of negative reinforcement
A waiter brings me a hamburger and French fries. I
notice there is no ketchup on the table. I
immediately begin looking for the waiter so I can
get his attention.
In relation to the waiter, the fact that there was no
ketchup on the table functioned as a _______.
A. Discriminative Stimulus
B. CMO-S
C. CMO-R
D. CMO-T
D CMO-T
Discriminated avoidance is not a good term because the antecedent conditioned aversive stimulus, which evokes the avoidance response, is actually a(n):
EO (for negative reinforcement)
AO (for reinforcement)
SdP (for punishment)
Sd (for negative reinforcement)
EO (for negative reinforcement)
Avoidance responses are typically evoked in the presence of a warning stimulus, which establishes its own termination as a form of reinforcement (i.e., by terminating the warning stimulus condition, the unconditioned aversive is delayed or prevented). Thus the warning stimulus is NOT a discriminative stimulus for punishment (Sdp) – that type of antecedent stimulus would abate rather than evoke the target behavior. The warning stimulus is correlated with the upcoming onset of an aversive stimulus, not a reinforcing (appetitive) stimulus – so cannot be an Sd. AOs for reinforcement abate behavior. Therefore, there is no “discriminated” anything…there is an EO for negative reinforcement in the form of avoidance. Discriminated avoidance is thus an incorrect and misleading term for this functional relationship between the antecedent condition (an EO not an Sd) and the behavior it evokes.
Tom and Kathy are at Plum Island beach in New England in August. Tom has experienced biting deer flies at this beach this time of year, so he has put on insect repellent, but Kathy does not like those chemicals on her skin, so she does not use repellant. While at the beach, Tom is not bothered by flies, but Kathy is bitten several times, so soon whenever she sees one flying around, she swats it away. Later that night, Tom shows Kathy pictures of their trip to the beach, and Kathy starts to scratch her arms. In terms of Kathy’s swatting away the flies at the beach behavior, how does a hovering fly function?
UMO
CMO-T
Sd
CMO-R
CMO-R
The hovering fly is not a UMO—Kathy had to learn that it would bite. But the hovering fly is a warning stimulus that establishes its own termination as a form of reinforcement: A CMO-reflexive for negative reinforcement (threat type). In terms of shooing away the fly behavior, the fly does not establish another stimulus as a reinforcer. The fly is not an Sd, because its presence does not signal the availability of its own removal…what if Kathy were in two arm casts and could not shoo the fly away?
Kathy was bitten on the arm by the deer flies several times while at the beach, which evoked her scratching her arms where the flies bit her. She eventually began swatting flies away before they bit her. Later, looking at the pictures of the beach while she was at home evoked her scratching her arms. In terms of scratching her arms at the beach, the actual fly bites functioned as a X , while in terms of scratching her arms at home later that night, the pictures of the beach functioned as a Y .
X = UEO for escape Y = CEO-S
X = CAO-S Y = UEO for avoidance
X = CEO-R (threat) Y = CAO-S
X = UEO for escape Y = CAO-R (promise)
a.
The pain/itching of the fly bites is an unconditioned aversive, and establishes its own termination as a reinforcer (thus evoking scratching). Thus it is a UEO for escape. The scratching later that night is evoked by the pictures of the beach. The sight of the beach was paired with the fly bites (UEO), so the sight of the beach now functions as a surrogate conditioned establishing operation due to a history of pairing.
While the CEO-R (threat) is related to X as a consequence (its last name), the CEO-R (promise) is related to Y as a consequence.
You Answered
X = Negative reinforcement Y = Positive punishment
X = Positive reinforcement Y = Positive punishment
X = Positive reinforcement Y = Negative punishment
Correct Answer
X = Negative reinforcement Y = Negative punishment
X = Negative reinforcement Y = Negative punishment
The CEO-R threat establishes its own removal as a form of negative reinforcement, and so evokes behavior which has resulted in its termination in the past. The CEO-R (promise) establishes its own removal as a form of negative punishment, so abates behavior which has resulted in its termination in the past. Here is where you see the utility of using last names for antecedent stimuli, for the CEO-R (threat) is better named the CEO-R for Sr-, while the CEO-R (promise) is better named the CEO-R for Sp-.
What type of affect us in abolishing operation have only consequence either reinforcement or punishment?
It decreases the value of the consequences.
Motivating operations also have value altering effects on…
Consequences
Have DELAYED Effects on the FUTURE frequency of behavior
Consequences
They have FUNCTION altering effects on DISCRIMINATIVE STIMULI
Consequences
Reflexive CMO-R (Jack Michael)
Correlated with either a:
1. worsening condition 2. improving condition.
Thus, there are two types
- Threat CMO-R (Worsening)
- Promise CMO-R (Improving)
Most commonly addressed: CMO-R-r-
-Escape or signaled avoidance
What functions as reinforcement in Unsignaled avoidance?
Remember there is no antecedent warning stimulus whose termination can function as an Sr-.
Response contingent transition from a situation in which you are shocked every X second to one in which you are free of shock or shocked less frequently
If the behavior is kicking other person, which has been reinforced by getting away from the other kids… Under what circumstances is the behavior most likely to occur?
—-when getting away is most valuable
AND
—-In situations where getting away has been available in the past for kicking
Predicting the occurrence of behavior
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
Any stimulus condition whose presence or absence has been positively correlated with the. presence or absence of any form of worsening will function as a CMO in establishing its own. termination as effective reinforcement and in evoking any behavior that has been so reinforced.
Michael (1993) defined the CMO-R as:
