Refining the Motivating Operation Construct: Eliminating the Value-Altering Function and Specifying the Behavior-Altering Functions

Motivating operations (MOs) are held to 1) alter the value/efficacy of consequential stimuli (value-altering function) and 2) alter behavior relevant to these stimuli (behavior-altering function). These two functions are considered critically against empirical evidence to evaluate the extent to which each corresponds to actual observations of behavior-environment relations. On this basis, the following refinements are suggested. First, positing a value-altering function of MOs is unnecessary because observations that have been taken as evidence for this function are adequately and parsimoniously described in terms of MOs’ behavior-altering functions, particularly their effects on the evocative efficacy of discriminative stimuli that have been associated with certain consequential events. Second, the precision of descriptions of the behavior-altering functions of MOs may be increased by explicitly acknowledging that MOs serve multiple functions. In addition to their motivational functions, MOs affect behavior by serving eliciting, discriminative, and reinforcing or punishing functions. Interactions between the effects of different MOs and biologically-based individual differences in susceptibilities to certain MOs also play a role determining their behavior-altering functions. In surveying the existing empirical literature relevant to these issues, areas in which further investigation is needed are highlighted.

Underlying Principles of a Covid-19 Behavioral Vaccine for a Sustainable Cultural Change

Until pharmacological measures are effective at containing the COVID-19 outbreak, adopting protective behaviors is paramount. In this work, we aim at informing interventions to limit the spread of the contagion and prepare against any future outbreaks by developing a behavioral framework to interpret and prescribe both the individual and large-scale uptake of non-pharmaceutical measures. First, we analyze the barriers and facilitators to adherence to protective behaviors according to a three-term contingency by exploring potential gaps in terms of setting stimuli, motivating operations, delayed consequences, and positive or negative consequences. We explore their roles in the likelihood of individual compliance to protective behaviors, taking physical distancing as an example of functional analysis. Second, we interpret contagion control as the cumulative effect of large-scale adherence to protective behaviors. We explore the interrelations between societal problems caused or amplified by similar behaviors presented by many individuals and the coordination of agents or agencies aiming at promoting large-scale behavioral change. Then, we highlight the potential of developing a behavioral vaccine, and practical steps for applying it to promote sustainable cultural change that may protect against health, social, and economic losses in future outbreaks.

Understanding Motivating Operations and the Impact on the Function of Behavior

Special educators are often considered the experts in their school when it comes to developing functional behavior assessments (FBA) and behavior intervention plans (BIP), yet rarely are they trained much beyond basic antecedents, behaviors, and consequences (ABC). This column discusses concepts that will expand special education professionals’ knowledge to make better decisions regarding interventions for the students they serve. Specifically, the focus is on motivating operations (MO) and function-based interventions and the implications of these on behavior. Knowledge of the concept of MOs can enhance a teacher’s ability to provide evidence-based interventions and more fully developed behavioral interventions for students in their purview.