Verbal conditioning and therapeutic change.

Abstract

The present study was undertaken to investigate the generalization of verbal conditioning effects to postconditioning personality and behavioral measures. Psychiatric 5s were given social reinforcement following positive self-references during eight 30-minute weekly therapy-type sessions. A Yoked-Control group received exactly the same reinforcement delivered noncontingently. Generalization was evaluated by change on semantic differential concepts, Taylor Manifest Anxiety scale score, and ward behavior ratings. These measures were administered before, during, immediately after, and 48 hours after conditioning. Results demonstrated conditioning and generalization to some of the personality measures. There was, however, rapid extinction of the generalization effect. The behavioral ratings and a number of the personality measures showed no generalization effect. The implications of these results to psychotherapy research were discussed.

Spatial environments and verbal conditioning in a quasi-counseling interview.

“…It has been repeatedly pointed out that the validity of verbally oriented conditioning in counseling can be considerably strengthened if it can be shown to generalize to other response classes-both within the interview and beyond the consulting room (Krasner, 1965;Williams, 1964). Support for this notion has been found through experimental test by Lapuc and Harmantz (1970) and Hoffnung (1969). For the present studies, it was hypothesized that selected nonlinguistic behaviorstotal length of utterance and the duration of utterance-would be influenced by the experimental variables.…”

Behavior therapy and critical speculation.

“…2 This and the original paper have not innovated by pointing to the close link between self-processes and the dynamics and outcomes of therapy. That the self remains a dominant object of concern and research in clinical psychology is demonstrated by the very recent studies by Braucht (1970), Carlson (1970), Long, Ziller, andBankes (1970), Truax, Schuldt, andWargo (1968), and Lapuc and Harmatz (1970), among others. How can this body of scientific work be thrown out of the window with the nonchalant assertion that it is "philosophical?"…”

Client verbal and nonverbal reinforcement of counselor behavior: Its impact on interviewing behavior and postinterview evaluation.

“…Within the context of these verbal operant studies it has been noted that in order for the paradigm to be considered viable not only should conditioning be detectable, but also that there should be some noticeable generalization, namely (a) to situations outside the conditioning setting and (b) to other related behaviors within the setting (Williams, 1964). Previous research has shown that both of these conditions tend to obtain from conditioning studies (Lapuc & Harmatz, 1970).…”