A three-phrase experimental design consisting of an initial baseline phase (A) until steady state responding (or countertherapeutic trend) is obtained, an intervention phase in which the treatment condition (B) is implemented until the behavior has changed and steady state responding is obtained, and a return to baseline conditions (A) by withdrawing the independent variable to see whether responding "reverses" to levels observed in the initial baseline phase.  

An experimental design consisting of (1) an initial baseline phase (A) until steady state responding (or countertherapeutic trend) is obtained, (2) an initial intervention phase in which the treatment variable (B) is implemented until the behavior has changed and steady state responding is obtained, (3) a return to baseline conditions (A) by withdrawing the independent variable to see whether responding "reverses" to levels observed in the initial baseline phase, and (4) a second intervention phase (B) to see whether initial treatment effects are replicated (also called reversal design, or withdrawal design.)

Preferred design because reintroducing the B condition enables the replication of treatment effects, which strengthens the demonstration of experimental control.

Most straightforward and generally most powerful within-subject design for demonstrating a functional relation between an environmental manipulation and a behavior.

A decrease in the current frequency of behavior that has been reinforced by the stimulus that is increased in reinforcing effectiveness by the same motivating operation.  For example, food ingestion abates (decreases the current frequency of) behavior that has been reinforced by food.

A motivating operation that decreases the reinforcing effectiveness of a stimulus, object, or event.  For example, the reinforcing effectiveness of food is abolished as a result of food ingestion.

The extent of which observed values, the data produced by measuring an event, match the true state, or true values, of te event as it exists in nature.  

Behavior that occurs as a collateral effect of a schedule of periodic reinforcement for other behavior; time-filling or interim activities (e.g., doodling, idle talking, smoking, drinking) that are induced by schedules of reinforcement during times when reinforcement is unlikely to be delivered.

Also called schedule-induced behavior.

A two-phase experimental design consisting of a pre-treatment baseline condition (A) followed by a treatment condition (B).

A three-step form of reasoning that begins with a true antecedent-consequent (if-A-then-B) statement and proceeds as follows: (1) If A is true, then B is true; (2) B is found to be true; (3) therefore, A is true.  Although other factors could be responsible for the truthfulness of A, a sound experiement affirms several if-A-then-B possibilities, each one reducing the likelihood of factors other than the independent variable being responsible for the observed changes in behavior.

EXAMPLE:

(1) If I have the flu, then I have a sore throat.

(2) I have a sore throat.

(3) Therefore, I have the flu

An experimental design in which two or more conditions (one of which may be a no-treatment control condition) are presented in rapidly alternating succession (e.g., on alternating sessions or days) independent of the level of responding; differences in responding between or among conditions are attributed to the effects of the conditions.

Also called concurrent schedule design, multielement design, and multiple schedule design.