AbstractAddictive behavior has never seemed rational because it persists in spite of drastic aversive consequences. This is a particular problem for models of addiction such as operant psychology which hold that behavior is controlled by its consequences. Inspite of claims to the contrary, Heymans target article illustrates how operant psychology resolves this contradiction. By using the matching law, Heyman suggests a mechanism that explains why delayed aversive events may not control behavior, and a conceptual framework in which we can understand successful therapies.
The idea that similar selective processes operate in gene-based evolution, immunology, and operant psychology provides an intuitively appealing metaphor. This idea also isolates questions that operant psychologists should ask and makes some empirical predictions. However, the idea currently lacks the detail needed to precisely separate it from some plausible alternatives. This sort of thinking is the kind that operant psychologists should do if operant theorizing is to survive the competition among ideas.
Operant psychology goes to the fair: Marian and Keller Breland in the popular press, 1947–1966
