Behavior in School Psychology

In the vast landscape of school psychology, understanding and addressing behavior stands as a cornerstone for effective educational interventions. This article delves into the pivotal behavioral concepts and their applications in school settings, ranging from foundational principles such as classical and operant conditioning to more nuanced constructs like behavioral momentum and keystone behaviors. Recognizing the crucial role of reinforcement schedules in shaping behavior, the discussion also touches upon the challenges and ethical considerations inherent in behavioral interventions. Through a comprehensive exploration, the article underscores the enduring relevance and multifaceted nature of behavioral approaches in optimizing the educational experiences of students.

Introduction

Behavior, an observable and measurable act or reaction, plays a central role in the realm of school psychology. At its essence, school psychology is not just about understanding the cognitive and emotional aspects of a student’s life but also about addressing their behaviors, both disruptive and positive, that manifest within educational environments. After all, it’s these behaviors that often serve as the most apparent indicators of underlying psychological processes or challenges (Merrell & Walker, 2004).

Historically, psychological theories emphasizing the significance of behavior have underscored its importance in educational settings. B.F. Skinner, a pioneering figure in the field of behaviorism, for instance, believed that all behavior is learned and that inappropriate behaviors can be ‘unlearned’ through effective interventions. This perspective paved the way for numerous strategies that educators and school psychologists employ today, focusing on altering the environmental factors or consequences to change behavior. By adopting behavioral interventions, many schools have witnessed transformative changes, enhancing not only individual student experiences but also the overall educational environment (Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1991).

Furthermore, behavior in school psychology isn’t a standalone domain. It intertwines with academic achievement, social interactions, and emotional well-being. Students who exhibit behavioral challenges often face academic struggles, peer relationship issues, and emotional disturbances. Conversely, those with academic challenges might display behavioral symptoms as a result. This intricate interplay makes the domain of behavior not only crucial for immediate classroom management but also for the broader well-being and future trajectories of students (Walker et al., 1996).

In essence, the study of behavior within the context of school psychology provides a vital lens through which we can understand, address, and support the holistic development of students. It’s a journey that goes beyond mere classroom management, diving deep into the realms of cognition, emotion, and the myriad factors that shape the educational journey of a child.

Historical Perspective of Behavior in School Psychology

The history of behavior in school psychology can be traced back to the early 20th century, rooted in the broader behavioral movement in psychology at large. It’s a journey marked by groundbreaking theories, innovative applications, and evolving perspectives on student behavior.

Origins and Influences

At the turn of the 20th century, John B. Watson heralded the era of behaviorism, positing that human behavior, like that of animals, was primarily a product of learned associations and reactions to stimuli (Watson, 1913). This philosophy ran counter to the introspective methods dominant at the time, shifting the focus from internal mental states to observable behaviors. Watson’s work laid the groundwork for subsequent behavioral theories that would significantly influence school psychology.

Skinner and Operant Conditioning

One of the most influential figures to emerge in this domain was B.F. Skinner. His work on operant conditioning highlighted how behavior is shaped by its consequences, introducing concepts like reinforcement and punishment. Skinner’s principles presented educators with a tangible framework to understand and modify student behavior in classroom settings. Through structured reinforcement strategies, educators could encourage desired behaviors and reduce or eliminate undesired ones (Skinner, 1953).

Application in Schools

As the field of school psychology evolved during the mid-20th century, there was a pronounced shift towards applying behavioral theories to address challenges in educational settings. Techniques rooted in operant conditioning, like token economies and behavior modification programs, became popularized in schools. These approaches aimed to provide immediate feedback and reinforcement to students, fostering positive behavioral changes (Kazdin, 1977).

Expansion and Integration

The latter half of the 20th century witnessed a broadening of behavioral approaches in school psychology. While the core principles remained influential, there was a growing recognition of the need to integrate cognitive and socio-emotional factors into behavioral interventions. This era saw the rise of cognitive-behavioral approaches, emphasizing the interconnectedness of thought processes, emotions, and behaviors. Such integrative methods provided a more holistic approach to addressing student challenges, ensuring that interventions were not only behaviorally effective but also cognitively and emotionally supportive (Kendall & Braswell, 1985).

Contemporary Relevance

Today, while school psychology embraces a plethora of theories and methodologies, the foundational principles of behavior remain deeply embedded. The historical journey of behavior in school psychology underscores its enduring relevance, illustrating how time-tested strategies, when adapted and integrated with newer insights, can offer invaluable support to students in their educational journeys (Fagan & Wise, 2007).

Behavioral Concepts and Applications

Behavioral concepts have, for decades, provided the backbone for understanding human actions and reactions, particularly in structured environments like schools. These foundational principles have been instrumental in guiding interventions and strategies aimed at shaping and modifying student behavior for optimal educational outcomes.

Classical and Operant Conditioning

At the heart of behavioral concepts lies the distinction between classical and operant conditioning. While classical conditioning, rooted in the work of Ivan Pavlov, deals with the pairing of stimuli to elicit involuntary responses, operant conditioning, as pioneered by B.F. Skinner, is concerned with the consequences of voluntary behaviors (Pavlov, 1927; Skinner, 1953). Within the classroom, understanding these mechanisms can illuminate why a student may respond negatively to a particular trigger or how rewarding specific actions can encourage repeat behaviors.

Generalization and Discrimination

Generalization refers to the phenomenon where conditioned behaviors are elicited in situations similar to the original conditioning environment. In contrast, discrimination involves the ability to distinguish between situations that require a conditioned response and those that do not (Staats, 1975). For educators, these concepts are pivotal. For instance, a student who is praised for good behavior in one setting might continue such behavior in other settings due to generalization. Conversely, understanding discrimination can help in tailoring interventions that are context-specific.

Behavioral Momentum

This refers to the tendency of a behavior to persist following a change in conditions (Nevin, 1992). In educational settings, it underscores the importance of consistency. Once a positive behavioral trend begins, it can gain “momentum,” making it more resistant to disruption. On the flip side, this also means that negative behaviors, once entrenched, can be challenging to alter.

Keystone Behaviors

These are behaviors that, once changed, can lead to positive shifts in other related behaviors (Rosales-Ruiz & Baer, 1997). Identifying and addressing keystone behaviors can be particularly effective in school settings. For instance, improving a student’s organizational skills, a potential keystone behavior, might also lead to better homework completion and time management.

Schedule of Reinforcement

This pertains to how often and under what conditions a behavior is reinforced. Different schedules, be it fixed or variable, can have profound effects on the acquisition and maintenance of behaviors (Ferster & Skinner, 1957). Educators equipped with this knowledge can optimize reinforcement strategies, ensuring that desired behaviors are not only encouraged but also sustained over time.

In summary, foundational behavioral concepts offer a robust framework to decipher the intricacies of student behavior. By understanding and effectively leveraging these principles, educators and school psychologists can craft interventions that are both targeted and transformative, ensuring that students are equipped with the behavioral tools they need for academic and personal success.

Conditioning in School Settings

Understanding the mechanics of conditioning is paramount for educators and school psychologists as they navigate the intricacies of student behavior. Both classical and operant conditioning offer valuable insights into why students behave the way they do and how their behaviors can be modified for optimal learning outcomes.

Classical Conditioning

Definition and Foundational Theories

Classical conditioning, often referred to as respondent conditioning or Pavlovian conditioning, is a learning process wherein a neutral stimulus comes to evoke a specific response after being paired with another stimulus that naturally evokes that response. Pioneered by Ivan Pavlov in the early 20th century, this concept emerged from his experiments with dogs, where he observed that they could be conditioned to salivate at the sound of a bell if it was consistently paired with food (Pavlov, 1927).

Real-world Examples and Its Relevance in Schools

In school settings, classical conditioning is evident in myriad ways. For instance, if a student is consistently reprimanded by a teacher in a particular classroom, they might start to feel anxious upon entering that room, even if the teacher isn’t present. Over time, the classroom itself becomes a conditioned stimulus evoking feelings of anxiety. Recognizing such associations can enable educators to address potential learning barriers. Moreover, positive associations can be cultivated intentionally. For example, playing a specific tune before a fun activity can condition students to feel excited upon hearing that tune, potentially facilitating smoother transitions between tasks (Ormrod, 2011).

Operant Conditioning

Definition and Key Principles

Coined by B.F. Skinner, operant conditioning revolves around the idea that behaviors are influenced by their consequences. In this paradigm, behaviors that are followed by reinforcing outcomes are more likely to be repeated, whereas those followed by punishing outcomes are less likely to occur in the future (Skinner, 1953).

Application in Classrooms

Reinforcement: Positive reinforcement involves adding a favorable stimulus following a desired behavior, thereby increasing the likelihood of that behavior recurring. For example, giving a student praise or a small reward after they complete their homework reinforces the behavior of homework completion. Negative reinforcement, on the other hand, entails removing an unfavorable stimulus to bolster a particular behavior. An example might be exempting a consistently well-performing student from a preliminary quiz, encouraging continued diligence (Staddon & Cerutti, 2003).
Punishment: Punishment aims to decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment introduces an unfavorable stimulus post an undesired behavior, like assigning extra homework after a student disrupts class. Conversely, negative punishment involves removing a favorable stimulus, such as revoking recess time due to misbehavior (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007).
Shaping Behaviors: This technique involves reinforcing successive approximations of a target behavior. For instance, if the goal is for a student to write a full paragraph, one might first praise them for writing a single sentence, then two, and so on, until the entire paragraph is achieved (Skinner, 1958).

In essence, the principles of conditioning, both classical and operant, play a pivotal role in shaping the behavioral landscape of educational settings. When harnessed effectively, they offer educators powerful tools to foster positive learning environments and support student growth.

Behavioral Momentum

The concept of behavioral momentum offers a compelling lens through which educators can better understand the persistence of behavior. This principle, borrowed from physics, suggests that once a behavior is set in motion, it tends to continue until acted upon by another force (Nevin & Grace, 2000). In the realm of educational psychology, it provides insight into why some behaviors in students remain persistent and how interventions can be designed to either leverage or interrupt these behaviors for optimal learning experiences.

Explanation of the Concept

Behavioral momentum, in the context of applied behavior analysis, refers to the effect of a reinforcement history on the resistance of a behavior to change in the face of disruptive forces. When a behavior has built up ‘momentum’ due to consistent reinforcement, it is less likely to be disrupted by changes in the environment or interventions, much like how an object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an external force (Mace et al., 1988).

Implications for Maintaining and Changing Student Behaviors

The understanding of behavioral momentum has profound implications in educational settings. Behaviors that have been consistently reinforced over time can become entrenched, resisting even well-intentioned intervention strategies. This can be observed in both positive behaviors, such as consistent study habits, and negative behaviors, like frequent classroom disruptions. Knowing that a student’s behavior has momentum can help educators predict its trajectory and design interventions accordingly (Vollmer et al., 1992).

Strategies for Harnessing Behavioral Momentum in Educational Interventions

High-Probability (Hi-P) Request Sequence: This involves starting with several easy-to-follow requests with a high likelihood of compliance (high-probability requests), followed by a request that the student might be less inclined to follow (low-probability request). The idea is to capitalize on the momentum built by compliance with the high-probability requests to increase the likelihood of compliance with the low-probability request (Mace & Belfiore, 1990).
Reinforcement Diversification: Providing a varied mix of reinforcements can maintain high levels of engagement and prevent satiation. This approach recognizes that if one type of reinforcement loses its effectiveness, another can take its place to maintain behavioral momentum (Nevin et al., 1990).
Consistency and Predictability: One way to prevent negative behavioral momentum is to ensure that undesired behaviors are not inadvertently reinforced. Consistent responses to behaviors, both desired and undesired, can help establish clear expectations for students and reduce the likelihood of behaviors building negative momentum (Nevin & Grace, 2000).

Harnessing the power of behavioral momentum can be an invaluable tool for educators. By understanding the forces that propel student behavior, they can design strategies that not only address challenges but also build upon existing positive behavioral trends for improved classroom dynamics.

Generalization

In the realm of school psychology and behavioral interventions, the concept of generalization is paramount. Generalization refers to the extension of learned behavior or knowledge from one setting or scenario to another (Stokes & Baer, 1977). It is the bridge that connects classroom learning with real-world application, ensuring that skills, behaviors, and knowledge acquired in one context are effectively applied in diverse settings. In essence, it is the hallmark of true mastery and comprehension.

Definition and Importance in School Settings

At its core, generalization ensures that learning is not confined to the walls of the classroom. For instance, a student may be taught conflict resolution skills in a specific classroom setting, but the true test of learning lies in whether the student can employ these skills on the playground, at home, or even later in life in the workplace (Heward, 2003). Hence, generalization underscores the relevance and applicability of what is taught in schools.

Strategies for Promoting Generalization of Learned Behaviors

Train in diverse settings: By practicing a skill or behavior in various settings, students are better prepared to generalize that behavior (Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968). For instance, social skills can be taught in both classroom settings and during extracurricular activities.
Vary the stimuli: Introducing variations in the teaching materials or scenarios can assist students in responding to different cues or triggers, facilitating the generalization process (Stokes & Osnes, 1989).
Reinforce instances of generalization: Positive reinforcement, when a student successfully generalizes a behavior or skill, can be a powerful motivator, encouraging further generalization (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007).
Sequential modification: Gradually altering the teaching context to more closely resemble the target context where generalization is desired can help in transitioning the student’s learned behavior or skills (Hall & Lund, 1974).

Challenges and Considerations in Ensuring Behavioral Generalization

Over-specificity: Teaching a behavior or skill in an overly specific manner can hinder generalization, as students may struggle to apply the behavior in slightly altered contexts (Heward, 2003).
Lack of reinforcement in new settings: If students do not receive reinforcement for displaying a learned behavior in a new context, they may be less inclined to continue exhibiting that behavior (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007).
Differences in environmental cues: Discrepancies between the teaching environment and the target environment can pose challenges to generalization, necessitating more intensive training or support (Stokes & Baer, 1977).

Generalization is a testament to the effectiveness and utility of school-based behavioral interventions. Ensuring that students can apply what they learn across multiple contexts and over time is central to the overarching goals of education.

Keystone Behaviors

Keystone behaviors, also frequently termed “pivot behaviors,” represent critical actions or habits that, when changed or cultivated, can precipitate a cascade of other positive behaviors (McGill, 1999). They are akin to a domino effect; adjusting one critical behavior can influence several others. Recognizing and addressing keystone behaviors is particularly pivotal in school psychology because it allows educators and psychologists to achieve more substantial, widespread changes by targeting a minimal set of behaviors.

Explanation of the Concept and Its Significance

The name “keystone” is derived from architecture, where the keystone is the central stone in an arch that holds all other stones in place. Similarly, keystone behaviors serve as foundational actions that hold or influence a range of other behaviors (Gresham, Watson, & Skinner, 2001). In school settings, identifying keystone behaviors can be exceptionally strategic, as it permits focused interventions that yield expansive outcomes. For instance, instilling the habit of daily study in a student might improve not just academic performance, but also time management, responsibility, and self-discipline.

Identifying and Leveraging Keystone Behaviors in School Settings

Observation: Continuous monitoring of students can help in identifying which behaviors, when changed, might have a ripple effect on other areas of a student’s life (Hawkins, 2000).
Feedback from Teachers and Parents: Both groups can offer invaluable insights into the student’s behaviors, identifying which actions might serve as potential keystones (Watson & Skinner, 2001).
Trialing Interventions: Experimenting with various interventions can aid in discerning which behaviors, when addressed, lead to the most noticeable positive changes in students (McGill, 1999).

Case Studies Illustrating the Impact of Addressing Keystone Behaviors

Daily Planning: A student frequently struggled with completing assignments and participating in class. Upon intervention, it was determined that the lack of a daily planning routine was the keystone behavior. Once this was addressed, the student not only started completing assignments but also demonstrated better organization, time management, and proactive participation in class (Hawkins, 2000).
Social Skills Training: Another student exhibited disruptive behavior in class. However, instead of directly addressing this behavior, social skills training was provided, targeting the keystone behavior of social interaction. Improved social skills indirectly led to decreased disruptive behavior, better peer relations, and enhanced classroom engagement (Gresham et al., 2001).
Mindfulness Practices: A group of students showed heightened levels of anxiety and reduced concentration. Introducing a short, daily mindfulness exercise as a keystone behavior resulted in increased attention spans, decreased anxiety levels, and improved academic performance (Felver, Celis-de Hoyos, Tezanos, & Singh, 2016).

In conclusion, the significance of keystone behaviors lies in their capacity to induce transformative changes in students. By identifying and addressing these pivotal behaviors, educators and psychologists can optimize their interventions, ensuring a broader, more lasting impact.

Schedule of Reinforcement

The schedule of reinforcement is a foundational concept within the field of behaviorism and has significant implications for the field of school psychology. Rooted in operant conditioning, the idea revolves around how often and under what circumstances a behavior is reinforced, which, in turn, influences the strength and persistence of that behavior. In the context of school settings, understanding and effectively employing various schedules of reinforcement can significantly impact student behavior, learning, and motivation.

Explanation of the Concept

A schedule of reinforcement outlines the frequency and pattern of reinforcement delivery following a particular behavior (Skinner, 1956). The pattern and regularity with which reinforcements are given can lead to different rates of response and resistance to extinction of the behavior. Essentially, not all reinforcements are delivered every single time a desired behavior occurs, and the timing and consistency of reinforcement have distinct outcomes.

Types of Schedules of Reinforcement

Continuous Reinforcement: This is when reinforcement is provided after every single instance of the desired behavior. While this can be effective in initially establishing a behavior, it might not be sustainable or practical in the long run (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007).
Intermittent Reinforcement: Here, reinforcement is provided after some, but not all, occurrences of the desired behavior. This type is further divided into fixed and variable schedules, as well as ratio and interval schedules. Such reinforcement patterns often lead to more robust and persistent behaviors, as the individual isn’t sure when the next reinforcement will come (Ferster & Skinner, 1957).
Differential Reinforcement: This approach reinforces only specific rates or types of behavior while withholding reinforcement for other rates or types. It’s often used to increase or decrease specific behaviors in educational settings (Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1977).

Application in Schools

Teachers and school psychologists can use schedules of reinforcement to encourage desired behaviors and decrease unwanted ones. For example, a teacher might employ a variable ratio schedule to reward students for participation, leading students to participate more frequently as they’re unsure when the next reward will come (Staddon & Cerutti, 2003). Or, in the case of reducing disruptive behaviors, a differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) schedule might be employed, where students are rewarded at specific intervals only if the disruptive behavior hasn’t occurred.

Implications for Classroom Management and Learning

Understanding the nuances of reinforcement schedules enables educators to create structured learning environments that capitalize on motivation and behavior principles. Employing these schedules strategically can help in fostering a classroom environment where positive behaviors are promoted, and students remain motivated and engaged in the learning process (Miltenberger, 2008).

In summary, schedules of reinforcement offer a structured approach to behavior management and learning in school settings. By understanding and leveraging these principles, educators and school psychologists can significantly enhance classroom dynamics, student behaviors, and overall educational outcomes.

Challenges and Controversies in Behavioral Interventions

Behavioral interventions, grounded in behaviorist principles, have been a mainstay in school psychology for years. They offer structured methods to understand, predict, and modify student behaviors. However, just like any other approach, behavioral interventions are not without their challenges and controversies. It’s essential for professionals in the field to be aware of these, in order to implement interventions more ethically and effectively.

Overreliance on Extrinsic Motivators

A cornerstone of behavioral interventions is the use of reinforcements to increase or decrease certain behaviors. While effective, there’s a concern that students may become overly reliant on external rewards, potentially undermining intrinsic motivation (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). For instance, if a student is constantly rewarded for reading with candies or tokens, they might not develop an intrinsic love for reading and may only engage in the behavior when a reward is imminent.

Ethical Concerns with Punishment

The use of aversive stimuli or punishment in behavioral interventions has been a point of contention. While some see it as a necessary tool in certain scenarios, others argue it can be psychologically harmful and may not address the underlying causes of a behavior (Axelrod & Apsche, 1983). This has led to calls for the increased use of positive reinforcement strategies and a reduction in punitive measures.

Generalization and Maintenance of Behavior Change

Behavioral interventions often result in specific behavioral changes within a particular setting (e.g., a classroom). However, there’s always the challenge of ensuring these changes generalize to other settings (home, playground) and are maintained over time. Without intentional strategies to promote generalization and maintenance, behavioral gains may be short-lived (Stokes & Baer, 1977).

Potential for Cultural Insensitivity

Implementing behavioral interventions without consideration for cultural differences can lead to interventions that are ineffective or even counterproductive. For example, behaviors considered disruptive in one culture might be seen as typical or even desirable in another. School psychologists must ensure interventions are culturally sensitive and appropriate (Rogers-Sirin, & Sirin, 2009).

Not Addressing Underlying Emotional or Cognitive Factors

Purely behaviorist approaches can sometimes be criticized for focusing too heavily on observable behaviors and not enough on underlying emotional or cognitive processes. While modifying behavior is crucial, understanding and addressing root causes can lead to more sustainable change (Mayer, 1999).

Despite these challenges and controversies, behavioral interventions remain a critical tool in the school psychologist’s toolkit. The key lies in understanding these concerns, continuously updating one’s knowledge, and employing a holistic approach that considers both the student’s behavior and well-being.

Conclusion

Behavior in school psychology stands at the confluence of decades of research, theory, and practical application, all aimed at understanding and promoting optimal student behavior for conducive learning environments. From the historical foundations laid by behavioral stalwarts such as Pavlov, Skinner, and Watson, to the nuanced and sophisticated contemporary approaches, the realm of behavioral interventions in schools has undergone significant evolution (Skinner, 1974).

At the core of this vast topic is an unwavering emphasis on the student’s well-being, development, and academic success. The behaviorist approach, which primarily considers observable and measurable behaviors, provides educators, therapists, and psychologists a tangible and structured methodology to comprehend, predict, and influence student behaviors. However, as with any method, the importance of understanding its complexities, potential pitfalls, and nuances cannot be overstated. One of the most resounding lessons from the behaviorist perspective is the interconnectedness of the environment, stimuli, and individual behaviors (Watson, 1913).

Moreover, as our comprehension of student behaviors has grown, so has our awareness of the many factors that influence it – socio-cultural backgrounds, individual differences, emotional and cognitive processes, among others (Rogers-Sirin & Sirin, 2009). Thus, while the behavioral interventions remain a cornerstone in school psychology, they are most effective when deployed as part of a multifaceted, holistic approach that seeks not just to modify behavior but to understand and address its root causes.

In the rapidly changing landscape of education, characterized by increasingly diverse student populations, technological integrations, and shifting pedagogical paradigms, the tenets of behavioral psychology provide a steady compass. They guide educators in navigating the intricate maze of student behaviors, ensuring that every student, regardless of their background or challenges, receives the support and environment necessary for optimal growth and learning.

As we look ahead, the potential for further integration of behavioral principles with cognitive, emotional, and even neuroscientific understanding beckons a promising horizon for school psychology (Bandura, 1986). The pursuit is clear: to create educational environments where every student is understood, valued, and empowered to achieve their fullest potential.

References:

Axelrod, S., & Apsche, J. (1983). The effects of punishment on human behavior. Academic Press.
Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 91-97.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill-Prentice Hall.
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627-668.
Fagan, T. K., & Wise, P. S. (2007). School psychology: Past, present, and future. National Association of School Psychologists.
Felver, J. C., Celis-de Hoyos, C. E., Tezanos, K., & Singh, N. N. (2016). A systematic review of mindfulness-based interventions for youth in school settings. Mindfulness, 7(1), 34-45.
Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Gresham, F. M., Watson, T. S., & Skinner, C. H. (2001). Functional behavioral assessment: Principles, procedures, and future directions. School Psychology Review, 30(2), 156-172.
Hall, G. A., & Lund, D. (1974). An empirical analysis of generalization across settings, responses, and behavioral categories. Mental Retardation, 12(6), 11-16.
Hawkins, R. P. (2000). The role of behavior analysis in education. The Behavior Analyst Today, 1(1), 13-20.
Heward, W. L. (2003). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Kazdin, A. E. (1977). The token economy: A review and evaluation. Plenum Publishing Corporation.
Kendall, P. C., & Braswell, L. (1985). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for impulsive children. Guilford Press.
Mace, F. C., Hock, M. L., Lalli, J. S., West, B. J., Belfiore, P., Pinter, E., & Brown, D. K. (1988). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of noncompliance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21(2), 123-141.
Mace, F. C., & Belfiore, P. (1990). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of escape-motivated stereotypy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23(4), 507-514.
Mayer, G. R. (1999). Constructive discipline for school personnel. Education and Treatment of Children, 362-375.
McGill, P. (1999). Establishing operations: Implications for the assessment, treatment, and prevention of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32(3), 393-418.
Merrell, K. W., & Walker, H. M. (2004). Deconstructing a definition: Social maladjustment versus emotional disturbance and moving the EBD field forward. Psychology in the Schools, 41(8), 899-910.
Miltenberger, R. G. (2008). Behavior modification: Principles and procedures (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Nevin, J. A., Mandell, C., & Atak, J. R. (1990). The analysis of behavioral momentum. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 54(2), 107-132.
Nevin, J. A. (1992). An integrative model for the study of behavioral momentum. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57(3), 301-316.
Nevin, J. A., & Grace, R. C. (2000). Behavioral momentum and the law of effect. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(1), 73-90.
Ormrod, J. E. (2011). Educational psychology: Developing learners. Boston: Pearson.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rogers-Sirin, L., & Sirin, S. R. (2009). Cultural competence as an ethical requirement: Introducing a new educational model. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(S), S84-S92.
Rosales-Ruiz, J., & Baer, D. M. (1997). Behavioral cusps: A developmental and pragmatic concept for behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30(3), 533-544.
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.
Skinner, B. F. (1956). A case history in scientific method. American Psychologist, 11(5), 221-233.
Skinner, B. F. (1958). Reinforcement today. American Psychologist, 13(3), 94.
Skinner, B. F. (1974). About behaviorism. Knopf.
Staats, A. W. (1975). Social behaviorism. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
Staddon, J. E. R., & Cerutti, D. T. (2003). Operant conditioning. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 115-144.
Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10(2), 349-367.
Stokes, T. F., & Osnes, P. G. (1989). An operant pursuit of generalization. Behavior Therapy, 20(3), 337-355.
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1977). Applying behavior-analysis procedures with children and youth. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1991). Behavior analysis for lasting change. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Vollmer, T. R., Iwata, B. A., Zarcone, J. R., Smith, R. G., & Mazaleski, J. L. (1992). The role of attention in the treatment of attention-maintained self-injurious behavior: Noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement of other behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 279-292.
Walker, H. M., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J. R., Bricker, D., & Kaufman, M. J. (1996). Integrated approaches to preventing antisocial behavior patterns among school-age children and youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4(4), 194-209.
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20(2), 158.
Watson, T. S., & Skinner, C. H. (2001). Functional behavioral assessment: Future directions. School Psychology Review, 30(2), 156-172.