Matching Theory in Natural Human Environments

Abstract

Matching theory is a mathematical account of behavior, many aspects of which have been confirmed in laboratory experiments with nonhuman and human subjects. The theory asserts that behavior is distributed across concurrently available response alternatives in the same proportion that reinforcement is distributed across those alternatives. The theory also asserts that behavior on a single response alternative is a function not only of reinforcement contingent on that behavior, but also of reinforcement contingent on other behaviors and of reinforcement delivered independently of behavior. These assertions constitute important advances in our understanding of the effects of reinforcement on behavior. Evidence from the applied literature suggests that matching theory holds not only in laboratory environments, but also in natural human environments. In addition, the theory has important therapeutic implications. For example, it suggests four new intervention strategies, and it can be used to improve treatment planning and management. Research on matching theory illustrates the progression from laboratory experimentation with nonhuman subjects to therapeutic applications in natural human environments.Matching theory (Herrnstein, 1970) is a mathematical account of behavior. It has been a part ofbasic behavior analysis for over a quarter of a century, and it has been a topic of considerable interest for at least the last 18 years. Most basic scientists would agree that matching theory has advanced significantly our understanding of how the environment governs behavior.

The Matching Law: A Tutorial for Practitioners

“…Both the "real world" and tightly controlled experimental settings consist of countless reinforcement alternatives for any organism at any given time (McDowell, 1988). Put another way, it may be shortsighted to simply assume that choice is limited to two options, as is dictated by Equations 1 and 2, and in cases where only one target behavior is concerned, a single-alternative matching theory is necessary.…”

“…The single-alternative matching equation has been used to document numerous instances of matching in the natural environment (see McDowell, 1988). In one example, McDowell (1988) demonstrated that Equation 5 accounted for a young boy's rate of self-injurious behavior, with reprimands serving as the presumed maintaining consequence.…”

Sensitivity and Strength: Effects Of Instructions on Resistance to Change

“…Responding to the schedule of reinforcement and the video disrupter will reflect the amount of reinforcement from these sources. If there is an alternative source of reinforcement available, responding should match the two available alternatives for responding based on the amount of reinforcement of those two alternatives (McDowell, 1988). This could be achieved in future research by having all subjects answer questions about the television shows they have watched and to award points exchangeable for money for the answers.…”

An Application of the Matching Law to Severe Problem Behavior

“…The matching law may also be expressed mathematically as follows: where R 1 represents the rate of Response 1, R 2 represents the rate of Response 2, r 1 represents the reinforcement rate for R 1 , and r 2 represents the reinforcement rate for R 2 . A number of basic and applied studies on choice have shown that both nonhuman and human behavior generally conform to the relation described by the matching equation when reinforcement schedules are precisely controlled (Baum, 1979;Davison & McCarthy, 1988;Mace, Neef, Shade, & Mauro, 1994;McDowell, 1988;Neef & Lutz, 2001;Neef, Mace, & Shade, 1993). In addition, transformations of Equation 1 allow the incorporation of additional variables known to influence response allocation, such as mag-nitude of reinforcement, quality of reinforcement, delay to reinforcement, and duration of reinforcement (Baum, 1974b).…”