Motivating Operations Can Exert Stimulus Control Over A Behavior By

Motivating Operations: How They Exert Stimulus Control Over Behavior

Motivating operations (MOs) are an often-overlooked yet crucial aspect of understanding behavior. They represent environmental variables that alter the reinforcing or punishing value of a stimulus, and consequently, influence the likelihood of a behavior occurring. While stimulus control refers to the probability that a specific behavior will occur in the presence of a particular discriminative stimulus (SD), MOs operate before the SD, altering the organism's sensitivity to those stimuli. Understanding this interplay between MOs and stimulus control is vital for effective behavior modification and a deeper comprehension of human and animal behavior. This article will delve into the intricacies of how motivating operations exert stimulus control over behavior, exploring their different types and providing practical examples to solidify understanding.

What are Motivating Operations?

Motivating operations (MOs) are defined as environmental variables that:

1. Alter the reinforcing or punishing effectiveness of some stimulus, object, or event: An MO doesn't directly cause a behavior; it changes the value of something else. For instance, deprivation of food increases the reinforcing value of food, making behaviors that lead to food acquisition more likely.
2. Alter the frequency of behaviors that have been reinforced or punished by that stimulus, object, or event in the past: This refers to the increased or decreased likelihood of a behavior occurring based on the altered value. If food is highly reinforcing due to deprivation (an establishing operation), behaviors that have previously led to food access will increase in frequency.

Types of Motivating Operations

There are two main types of motivating operations:

1. Establishing Operations (EOs)

EOs increase the reinforcing effectiveness of a stimulus and increase the likelihood of behaviors that have previously produced that stimulus. Think of an EO as making something more valuable. Examples include:

• Deprivation: Lack of access to a reinforcer increases its value. Deprivation of food makes food a highly reinforcing consequence.
• Aversive stimulation: Unpleasant stimuli, like pain, noise, or heat, increase the reinforcing value of stimuli that remove or alleviate that unpleasantness.
• Homeostatic imbalances: Biological needs like thirst, sleep deprivation, or illness create an imbalance that increases the reinforcing value of stimuli that restore homeostasis.

2. Abolishing Operations (AOs)

AOs decrease the reinforcing effectiveness of a stimulus and decrease the likelihood of behaviors that have previously produced that stimulus. An AO makes something less valuable. Examples include:

• Satiation: Having access to a reinforcer to the point of excess decreases its value. Eating a large meal abolishes the reinforcing value of food.
• Negative reinforcement: If a stimulus is repeatedly paired with negative reinforcement (avoidance or escape), its reinforcing value can decrease.
• Recovery from illness: Once recovered from illness, the reinforcing value of medicine or rest might decrease.

How MOs Exert Stimulus Control

The relationship between MOs and stimulus control is complex but crucial. MOs don't directly cause a behavior; instead, they alter the organism's sensitivity to stimuli that are associated with reinforcement or punishment. Here's how they influence stimulus control:

1. Altering the value of consequences: MOs change the reinforcing or punishing value of a consequence, thus impacting the likelihood of the behavior that produces that consequence. For instance, an EO of food deprivation increases the reinforcing value of food, making behaviors that obtain food (e.g., going to the kitchen, asking for food) more likely.
2. Changing the discriminative function of stimuli: MOs can alter whether a stimulus signals the availability of reinforcement or punishment. For example, if you're highly thirsty (EO), the sight of a water fountain (SD) will become a much more powerful signal that drinking is likely to be reinforcing.
3. Modifying response strength: By altering the value of the consequence, MOs indirectly affect the strength of the response. A stronger MO leads to stronger behavior. A weak MO (or an AO) leads to weaker behavior.
4. Mediating the influence of other variables: MOs can interact with other variables, such as the history of reinforcement or the presence of other stimuli, to further shape behavior.

Practical Examples

Let's illustrate the interplay between MOs and stimulus control with several examples:

Example 1: The Hungry Student

• MO: Food deprivation (EO). The student hasn't eaten in several hours.
• SD: The sight of a vending machine (discriminative stimulus).
• Behavior: The student approaches the vending machine and buys a snack.
• Reinforcement: The student consumes the snack, reducing hunger.

The food deprivation acts as an EO, increasing the reinforcing value of the food in the vending machine. The sight of the vending machine (SD) only becomes effective because of the preceding EO. Without the hunger, the vending machine might be unnoticed or simply ignored.

Example 2: The Anxious Test-Taker

• MO: Test anxiety (EO - aversive stimulation). The student feels overwhelming anxiety about an upcoming exam.
• SD: The sight of a study guide (discriminative stimulus).
• Behavior: The student avoids looking at the study guide.
• Reinforcement: Avoidance of the anxiety-provoking study materials provides temporary relief.

In this case, the anxiety acts as an EO, making avoidance of the study guide reinforcing. Even if the student knows studying would help, the immediate relief from anxiety becomes a stronger motivator.

Example 3: The Oversatiated Child

• MO: Satiation of candy (AO). The child has just eaten a large bag of candy.
• SD: The sight of more candy.
• Behavior: The child shows little interest in the candy.
• Reinforcement: There is minimal or no reinforcement from eating more candy.

Here, the satiation of candy acts as an AO, reducing the reinforcing effectiveness of additional candy. The child's response to the candy is significantly lessened.

Implications for Behavior Modification

Understanding MOs is critical for effective behavior modification. Therapists and educators can leverage MOs to:

• Increase the effectiveness of reinforcement: By manipulating MOs, such as creating a state of deprivation, practitioners can make reinforcers more powerful and increase the likelihood of desired behavior.
• Reduce the effectiveness of punishment: By reducing the aversiveness of the environment, practitioners can make punishment less necessary.
• Design effective interventions: A comprehensive understanding of MOs allows for the creation of interventions that are more sensitive to the individual’s current motivational state.
• Predict and control behavior: By recognizing and accounting for MOs, practitioners can better predict behavior and design strategies to modify it effectively.

Conclusion

Motivating operations are essential variables that significantly impact behavior. Their influence on stimulus control is profound, shaping the likelihood of behaviors occurring depending on the value of the consequences. By understanding the two main types of MOs – establishing operations (EOs) and abolishing operations (AOs) – and how they interact with discriminative stimuli, practitioners can develop more effective strategies for behavioral modification across various contexts. This enhanced understanding of MOs allows for a more nuanced and impactful approach to influencing behavior, contributing to a deeper understanding of human and animal behavior. The interplay between MOs and stimulus control highlights the dynamic and complex nature of behavior, requiring a comprehensive understanding for successful intervention and prediction. Future research continues to refine our understanding of the subtleties of MOs and their impact on behavior.