A Revision of the Fundamental Law of Habit Formation

Dunlap, Knight

doi:10.1126/science.67.1736.360

Cited by 73 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Positive practice should not be confused with negative practice (Dunlap, 1928;Dunlap, 1930), to which it is conceptually antithetical (Foxx & Azrin, 1972). Negative practice suggests that by making a particular response to a given stimulus pattern, you do not increase the probability that you will respond the same way another time to the same stimulus pattern.…”

Section: Common Misinterpretationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Negative practice suggests that by making a particular response to a given stimulus pattern, you do not increase the probability that you will respond the same way another time to the same stimulus pattern. For example, Dunlap (1928) presented anecdotal evidence to suggest that he corrected his continual transposition of the word "the" into the form "hte" by training himself to type the misprint of the error on "about a half page, single spaced" of paper. In contrast to positive practice, where the subject is required to practice appropriate modes of behavior, the negative practice technique requires continual practice of the inappropriate behavior.…”

Section: Common Misinterpretationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Overcorrection: A Procedural Evaluation

Rusch

1976

AAESPH Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently overcorrection has been used to discourage inappropriate behaviors and encourage appropriate behaviors of severely and profoundly handicapped people. This procedure has combined verbal reprimands, verbal instructions, and manual guidance (if necessary) and dictates that an offender “overcorrect” his misbehavior. Two types of overcorrection training have been reported – restitutional overcorrection, in which the individual restores a disturbed setting or situation to a state vastly improved from that existing prior to the disruption, and positive practice overcorrection, requiring that the individual practice appropriate modes of responding several times following inappropriate behavior. This paper reviews the components of overcorrection, the rationale for its use, the two types of overcorrection training reported, the levels of instructional assistance, and some common misinterpretations. And it suggests extensions to the vocational and social development of the severely/profoundly handicapped.

show abstract

Section: Common Misinterpretationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Common Misinterpretationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overcorrection: A Procedural Evaluation

Rusch

1976

AAESPH Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Preliminary studies were mad e in one f,i fthgrade class in the Lee School , Robbinsdale (November 23, 1948 to January 3, 1949), and in f i v e fifth-grade and four sixth-grade c I ass e s in the same school (June [3][4][5]1952) to determine the kinds and frequencies of errors made by sixth-grade children in the course of learning how to add and subtract unlike fractions. These studies were made to supplement and verify earlier error a Brueckner and his students.…”

Section: The Preliminary Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of the Systematic Analysis of Errors in the Study of Fractions at the Sixth Grade Level

Aftreth¹

1958

The Journal of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The paradoxical double bind is a therapeutic process that needs validation and seems effective in moving trainees past the difficult stage of resistance with much less pain and frustration. This procedure is known by many names: paradoxical intention (Frankl 1960), paradoxical injunction or scheduling the symptom (Haley 1963(Haley , 1973, paradoxical injunction or instructions (Watzlawick, Beavin & Jackson 1967;Watzlaw-ick, Weakland & Fish 1974), negative practice (Dunlap 1928(Dunlap , 1946, and implosion (Stampfl & Levis H)67; Wolpe 1958). As described by Dunlap (1928), the procedure "is that of making an effort to do the thing that one has been making an effort not to do" (p. 194).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%