The threat of nuclear war: Some responses.
Nuclear war is behavior—treat it like any target and design interventions to replace it.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Delamater et al. (1986) wrote a position paper. They said nuclear war is a behavior problem.
The authors urged behavior analysts to treat war like any other target behavior. They asked the field to design interventions that reduce risky choices by nations.
What they found
The paper did not report new data. It argued that our science already has tools to help stop nuclear war.
The authors claimed that reinforcement, punishment, and rule-governed behavior apply to global conflict.
How this fits with other research
Fujita (1985) set the stage. That paper told behavior analysts to take charge of public messaging. Delamater et al. (1986) used the same idea but aimed it at the biggest threat.
Catania et al. (1982) showed how a new procedure moves from lab to wide use. Delamater et al. (1986) asked readers to run the same pipeline for peace.
Thompson et al. (1986) came out the same year. Both papers push behavior analysts into policy work. T et al. give a seven-step recipe for lawmakers; J et al. pick nuclear war as the case.
Why it matters
You already write behavior plans for one child or one classroom. This paper asks you to think bigger. Use the same ABC data sheet to map how nations escalate threats. Then pick a replacement behavior—maybe shared inspections—and reinforce it. Start small: add a peace-vote graph to your next staff training. If we can shape a toddler’s sharing, we can shape a country’s.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add one global-behavior example—like arms-reduction treaties—to your next reinforcement lecture.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The possibility of nuclear holocaust threatens the very existence of the world community. Biologists, earth scientists, educators, lawyers, philosophers, physicists, physicians, and social scientists have addressed the problem from their special perspectives, and have had substantial impact on the public. Behavior analysts, however, have not as a whole contributed a great deal to the goal of preventing nuclear catastrophe. We argue that the threat of nuclear war is primarily a behavioral problem, and present an analysis of that problem. In addition, we address the difficulty of implementing behavioral interventions that would contribute to the survival of the World.
The Behavior analyst, 1986 · doi:10.1007/BF03391930