Stimuli, reinforcers, and behavior: an integration.
You can predict response strength by multiplying stimulus control by reinforcer value.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Konstantareas et al. (1999) wrote a math model of the three-term contingency.
They linked how stimuli guide behavior with how reinforcers follow behavior.
The paper is pure theory—no kids, no pigeons, just equations.
What they found
The model shows you can predict response rate by multiplying two parts.
Part one: stimulus control strength. Part two: reinforcer value.
When both parts are high, responding is fast and steady.
How this fits with other research
Burgio et al. (1991) warned that “reinforcer” and “SD” lack clear time rules. Konstantareas et al. (1999) answered with numbers that set the time window.
Thomas et al. (1968) saw mixed response rates when two reinforcers were signaled together. The new model explains why simple addition fails.
Connell et al. (2004) later tested pigeons and found entry rate and immediacy act separately. Their data fit the same math shape M et al. drew five years earlier.
Why it matters
If your client’s behavior is shaky, check both sides of the equation. Strengthen the SD by making it stand out. Boost the reinforcer by delivering it faster and richer. The model tells you which knob to turn without guessing.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one target, time how fast the reinforcer arrives, then shave off two seconds.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
We propose that a fundamental unit of behavior is the concurrent discriminated operant, and we discuss in detail a quantitative model of the concurrent three‐term contingency that is based on the notion that an animal's behavior is controlled to differing extents by both stimulus—behavior and behavior—reinforcer relations. We show how this model can describe performance in a variety of experimental procedures: conditional discrimination and matching to sample, both with and without reinforcement for responses that are traditionally identified as errors; conditional discrimination with more than two stimuli and choice alternatives; delayed matching to sample and delayed reinforcement in matching to sample; second‐order and complex conditional discrimination; and multiple and concurrent schedules. Although the model is incomplete in its coverage, and may be incorrect, we believe that this conceptual approach will bear fruit in the development of behavior theory.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1999 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1999.71-439