REINFORCEMENT AND RATE OF LITTER DEPOSITING¹

Abstract

A study was conducted concerning the frequency of litter deposits in a single experimental trash receptacle located in a high-use, urban park setting. There were four twoweek periods of alternating no-contingency, contingency conditions during which reinforcement and incentive were evaluated. It was found that reinforcement resulted in the highest rates of behavior and improvements in the aesthetic appearance of the area.The control of littering behavior has been the focus of two recent behavior analysis studies: Clark, Burgess, and Hendee (1971) and Burgess, Clark, and Hendee (1972). In the first of these studies, the effectiveness of several different antilitter procedures on the percentage of litter returned to trash containers by children attending a movie matinee was evaluated; offering an incentive of 10 cents for returning a litter bag was found to be the most effective. The second study assessed the effect of an incentive on the number of pieces of "planted" litter that was collected by children who were offered a variety of items.As an extension of the above research, the present study was concerned with evaluating a reinforcement procedure on the behavior of depositing litter in an appropriate trash container in a high-use urban park setting. This research was focused on the effects of a contingency delivered analogous to a variable-ratio reinforcement schedule. To facilitate application of behavior-analysis procedures, the present study spanned a longer period of time than previous work and involved indigenous litter. In addition to frequency measures of litter depositing, an 1The authors wish to thank the student volunteers who contributed so much to the conduct of this research and to Mr.

An examination of the relative roles played by consumer behaviour settings and levels of involvement in determining environmental behaviour

“…The application of behaviour technology in the context of environmental issues has primarily involved two approaches: one is associated with the antecedent-stimulus change concerned with 'operant behaviour' and the other with consequence-stimulus change concerned with 'respondent behaviour' (Cone and Hayes, 1980). Past investigations have induced operant or respondent behavioural changes by manipulating the behavioural setting either by providing 'reinforcement' or 'prompt' cues to participants in their studies (Geller et al, 1973;Burgess et al, 1971;Kohlenberg and Phillips, 1973;Reid et al, 1976;Guerts, 1986;Geller et al, 1971). Foxall's (1990) (see also Sharwtz and Lacey's, 1982) proposition of the 'Behavioural Perspective Model (BPM)' is of particular relevance in the context of the above discussion.…”

Behavioral Community Psychology: Training a Community Board to Problem Solve1

“…1972; Kohlenberg and Phillips, 1973;Powers, Osborne, and Anderson, 1973), prompting the purchase of soft drinks in returnable bottles (Geller, Farris, and Post, 1973), and increasing bus ridership through token reinforcement (Everett, Hayward, and Meyers, 1974) are all applications of behavior principles to solve community problems. Motivating delinquents to participate in self-government (Fixen, Phillips, and Wolf, 1973), and using access to a recreation center as a reinforcer for increasing membership and reducing disruptions (Pierce and Risley, 1974) also represent promising new applications to longstanding community problems.…”

Comportamento e cultura na perspectiva da análise do comportamento

“…Também, mais uma vez especialmente desde os anos 1960, publicaram-se inúmeros relatos de intervenção na perspectiva da análise do comportamento nos quais se destacam o esforço prá-tico de solução de problemas aplicados que envolvem questões sociais amplas e complexas (e.g., Agras, Jacob & Lebedeck, 1980;Burgess, Clark & Hendee, 1971;Chapman & Risley, 1974;Clark, Burgess & Hendee, 1972;Cohen & Filipczak, 1971;Everett, Hayward & Meyers, 1974;Geller, Farris & Post, 1973;Greene, Rouse, Green & Clay, 1984;Kohlenberg & Phillips, 1973;McSweeny, 1978;Powers, Osborne & Anderson, 1973;Schnelle & Lee, 1974;Schnelle, Kirchner, McNees & Lawler, 1975;Seekins et al, 1988;Weisberg & Waldrop, 1972). Todos esses trabalhos reflexivos, metodológicos e aplicados adiantaram interpretações e análises que contribuíram para a compreensão do comportamento social e verbal e, em certa medida, demonstraram o potencial explanatório e tecnoló-gico da análise do comportamento (Otero, 2002).…”