The nervous system as a solution for implementing closed negative feedback control loops
Control theory gives BCBAs a shared language with brain scientists.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Sosa and colleagues wrote a theory paper. They ask: what if we treat behavior like a thermostat?
The brain gets signals, compares them to a goal, then sends new signals. This loop is called a closed negative feedback control loop.
They map Skinner’s ideas onto this engineering language. The goal is smoother talk between behavior science and brain science.
What they found
The paper does not give new data. It gives a new lens.
Looking through control theory, reinforcement is not a push. It is a correction signal that keeps behavior near a set point.
The authors show how this lens can fit single neurons, whole brains, and visible acts.
How this fits with other research
Sundram (2011) tried the same marriage. He linked stereotypy to dopamine loops. Sosa widens the frame to all behavior, not just repetitive moves.
Davison (1992) wrote the math for VI schedules as feedback. Sosa keeps the math spirit but swaps the goal: unite neurology and behavior under one control roof.
Malott (2018) told us to train practitioners who reach for JABA first. Sosa answers: give those same practitioners control-loop language so they can read brain papers without getting lost.
Why it matters
You do not need to solve equations. Just borrow the picture: client, goal, error, correction.
Use it in team meetings. When the neurologist says “dopamine feedback,” you can say “yes, our reinforcement loop does the same job.”
One sentence in your report can bridge two worlds. That bridge may get better funding, better meds, and better outcomes for the client.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Draw a simple loop on the whiteboard: client goal → behavior → outcome → correction. Use it to explain why you are changing reinforcement size.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Behavior can be regarded as the output of a system (action), as a function linking stimulus to response (reaction), or as an abstraction of the bidirectional relationship between the environment and the organism (interaction). When considering the latter possibility, a relevant question arises concerning how an organism can materially and continuously implement such a relationship during its lifetime in order to perpetuate itself. The feedback control approach has taken up the task of answering just that question. During the last several decades, said approach has been progressing and has started to be recognized as a paradigm shift, superseding certain canonical notions in mainstream behavior analysis, cognitive psychology, and even neuroscience. In this paper, we describe the main features of feedback control theory and its associated techniques, concentrating on its critiques of behavior analysis, as well as the commonalities they share. While some of feedback control theory's major critiques of behavior analysis arise from the fact that they focus on different levels of organization, we believe that some are legitimate and meaningful. Moreover, feedback control theory seems to blend with neurobiology more smoothly as compared to canonical behavior analysis, which only subsists in a scattered handful of fields. If this paradigm shift truly takes place, behavior analysts-whether they accept or reject this new currency-should be mindful of the basics of the feedback control approach.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2022 · doi:10.1002/jeab.736