Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Stimulus control

Stimulus control is a fundamental concept in behavioral psychology referring to the phenomenon in which the occurrence of a specific behavior is influenced by the presence or absence of a particular environmental stimulus, typically due to prior associations with reinforcement or punishment.^[1] In operant conditioning, this control is established when a discriminative stimulus (S^d) signals the availability of a reinforcer, making the behavior more probable in its presence than in its absence, as opposed to an SΔ stimulus where reinforcement is withheld.^[2] The process relies on the three-term contingency—antecedent stimulus, behavior, and consequence—to shape adaptive responses across contexts.^[3] Developed primarily through the work of B.F. Skinner in the mid-20th century, stimulus control extends operant principles beyond simple reinforcement schedules to explain how organisms discriminate between environmental cues, refining behaviors for efficiency and survival.^[1] In Skinner's framework, operants—voluntary behaviors emitted by the organism—come under stimulus control via differential reinforcement, where responses are consistently strengthened in the presence of a specific stimulus (e.g., a rat pressing a lever only when a light is illuminated) and extinguished otherwise.^[1] This discrimination training prevents overgeneralization, allowing behaviors to become context-specific, as seen in everyday examples like stopping at a red traffic light but proceeding at green.^[2] Key mechanisms include prompting and fading, where initial guidance (e.g., physical assistance) is gradually removed to transfer control to the natural S^d, and generalization, where the behavior extends to similar stimuli while maintaining specificity.^[4] In applied behavior analysis (ABA), stimulus control is crucial for teaching skills to individuals with autism or developmental disabilities, such as responding to social cues or academic prompts, by systematically establishing and transferring control to reduce reliance on artificial aids.^[4] Applications extend to clinical settings like cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), where bed cues are reassociated solely with sleep to break maladaptive patterns, and to education, where teachers use verbal prompts to evoke correct student responses under specific instructional stimuli.^[3] Challenges, such as stimulus overselectivity in autism—where learners focus on irrelevant features—highlight the need for careful training to ensure broad, functional control.^[5] Overall, stimulus control underscores the environment's role in predicting and modifying behavior, with ongoing research emphasizing its quantitative measurement and ethical application in diverse fields.^[6]^[7]

Fundamentals

Definition

Stimulus control is a fundamental concept in operant conditioning, a learning process in which behaviors are shaped by their consequences, such as reinforcement or punishment, rather than by stimuli directly eliciting responses.^[1] In this framework, behaviors are emitted voluntarily and modified based on the outcomes they produce, establishing a contingency between actions and environmental feedback.^[1] Stimulus control specifically occurs when the presence or absence of a particular stimulus reliably alters the probability of a behavior occurring, making the response more likely when the stimulus is present due to its prior association with reinforcement.^[1] This phenomenon originated in the mid-20th century through B.F. Skinner's experimental analysis of behavior, where it was distinguished from respondent (classical) conditioning by emphasizing consequence-driven learning over reflexive stimulus-response pairings.^[1] The core mechanism involves a discriminative stimulus, denoted as S^D, which serves as a cue signaling that reinforcement is available contingent on the behavior, thereby increasing its emission rate.^[8] In contrast, an S^Δ (S delta) is a stimulus correlated with the absence of reinforcement, suppressing the behavior by indicating that the response will not be followed by a positive outcome.^[8] This differential control establishes stimulus control through a history of consistent contingencies, allowing organisms to discriminate environmental signals and adapt their actions accordingly.^[1]

Characteristics

Stimulus control is characterized by distinct observable traits in behavior, where the rate of a target response reliably increases in the presence of the discriminative stimulus (S^D) that signals reinforcement availability, while remaining unchanged or decreasing in its absence (SΔ), thereby demonstrating precise contingency dependence. This differential responding highlights the stimulus's role in evoking the behavior selectively, as opposed to generalized or context-independent emission, ensuring the response is under the specific control of the antecedent stimulus rather than adventitious correlations. To identify and quantify stimulus control empirically, researchers employ several measurement methods, including comparisons to baseline response rates established prior to discrimination training, transfer tests that probe generalization across stimulus variations, and contingency reversals where reinforcement conditions are inverted to verify the stimulus's causal influence on behavior.^[9] Quantitative assessment often involves plotting response gradients, which map response rates as a function of stimulus similarity to the S^D; steeper gradients, indicating rapid decline in responding away from the S^D, signify stronger control, while shallower ones suggest weaker or broader influence. Stimulus control manifests in distinct types, primarily excitatory control, where the S^D signals reinforcement and elevates response rates for the target behavior, and inhibitory control, where an SΔ signals non-reinforcement and suppresses the response, often redirecting behavior to alternative activities.^[10] In complex environments, bidirectional control can emerge, with stimuli exerting both excitatory and inhibitory effects simultaneously, leading to nuanced interactions such as behavioral contrast where response rates in one stimulus context are inversely affected by conditions in another. The strength of stimulus control is modulated by several factors, including stimulus salience, which determines how readily the S^D stands out from background elements and facilitates discrimination, as higher discriminability yields tighter control.^[10] Reinforcement history also plays a critical role, with denser or more consistent pairings between the S^D and outcomes strengthening the association and gradient steepness over time. Additionally, contextual cues, such as the temporal or spatial arrangement of stimuli, can enhance or dilute control by influencing attentional allocation and competitive interactions among responses.

Establishment in Operant Conditioning

Discrimination Training

Discrimination training is a foundational procedure in operant conditioning used to establish stimulus control by teaching organisms to differentiate between a discriminative stimulus (S^D), which signals that a response will be reinforced, and an S^Δ (S-delta), which signals that reinforcement will be withheld.^[11] The process involves presenting multiple stimuli in a controlled environment, such as a Skinner box, where responses (e.g., key pecking in pigeons) are reinforced exclusively in the presence of the S^D to build an association, while responses during the S^Δ are extinguished through non-reinforcement.^[11] This differential reinforcement gradually strengthens the correlation between the specific stimulus and the behavioral outcome, aiming for strong stimulus control characterized by high response rates to the S^D and near-zero responding to the S^Δ.^[12] The training typically progresses through distinct phases. In the initial acquisition phase, responses are shaped to the S^D alone, often using continuous reinforcement to rapidly establish the behavior without introducing the S^Δ, ensuring early success and motivation.^[8] The fading phase follows, where the S^Δ is gradually introduced, starting with brief or less salient presentations to minimize errors, allowing the organism to learn the distinction without frustration.^[12] Finally, the maintenance phase involves testing the discrimination across multiple sessions, often under intermittent reinforcement schedules to promote durability, with periodic probes to assess response specificity.^[8] A classic example is the two-stimulus setup with pigeons, where a light-on condition (S^D) signals food availability for key pecking, while light-off (S^Δ) indicates no reinforcement, leading to pecking only when the light is illuminated after repeated trials.^[8] This simple discrimination illustrates how basic visual cues can control complex operant behaviors through consistent contingency arrangements. Two primary techniques are employed: trial-and-error learning, where the organism experiences reinforcement and extinction naturally through repeated exposure, which can be efficient but risks emotional responses like aggression; and errorless learning, which uses prompting and fading to prevent errors entirely, starting with highly discriminable stimuli (e.g., differing in brightness) and gradually equalizing them.^[12] Errorless procedures, pioneered in studies with pigeons, yield faster acquisition and better retention compared to error-prone methods, as they avoid the inhibitory effects of unreinforced responses.^[12] Reinforcement schedules play a crucial role, beginning with continuous reinforcement during acquisition to build the response, then shifting to intermittent schedules (e.g., variable interval) in maintenance to enhance resistance to extinction while sustaining discrimination.^[8] Challenges in discrimination training include overselectivity, where learners, particularly those with autism, attend to only one irrelevant feature of a compound stimulus, impairing comprehensive control.^[13] Additionally, poor transfer of control can occur if stimuli lack salience, resulting in weak or inconsistent responding across contexts due to insufficient initial differentiation.^[12]

Generalization

In the context of stimulus control within operant conditioning, stimulus generalization refers to the tendency for a reinforced response to occur in the presence of stimuli that are similar but not identical to the original discriminative stimulus (S^D). This process allows the control exerted by the S^D to extend to novel stimuli based on shared features, enabling behavioral flexibility beyond the exact training conditions. Generalization is quantified through generalization gradients, which plot response strength (e.g., response rate) against the degree of similarity between test stimuli and the S^D, typically showing a peak at the S^D and a gradual decline as similarity decreases.^[14]^[15]^[16] The mechanisms underlying stimulus generalization rely on physical or functional similarity between stimuli, such as variations in wavelength for visual cues or intensity for auditory ones, where responses are more likely for closer matches along these dimensions. Reinforcement history plays a critical role, as the pattern and contingency of reinforcement during training shape the breadth of the gradient; for instance, consistent reinforcement to a specific stimulus can broaden generalization to physically resembling variants by strengthening associative links. Classic experimental evidence comes from studies with pigeons, where birds trained to peck for food in the presence of a 550 nm light showed robust generalization gradients under extinction testing, with response rates highest near the training wavelength (e.g., 550 nm) and tapering off for distant hues like 450 nm or 650 nm, demonstrating steeper slopes for more discriminable stimuli.^[14]^[15]^[16] Stimulus generalization is distinct from response generalization, the latter involving variations in the topography or form of the behavior itself (e.g., different pecking motions eliciting the same reinforcer) rather than spread across stimuli. A related phenomenon is the peak shift, observed after discrimination training, where the maximum response during generalization testing occurs not at the S^D but shifted toward values farther from the SΔ (non-reinforced stimulus), reflecting inhibitory influences that sharpen control. For example, pigeons trained to discriminate 550 nm (reinforced) from 555 nm (non-reinforced) exhibited peak responding at wavelengths below 550 nm, such as 540 nm, illustrating how prior reinforcement contrasts alter gradient shapes.^[17]^[18] This extension of stimulus control promotes adaptive behavior by allowing learned responses to apply to real-world variations, such as generalizing a "stop" signal from one traffic light to similar ones, enhancing efficiency in dynamic environments. However, excessive generalization can be maladaptive, leading to erroneous responses to inappropriate stimuli (e.g., reacting to a similar but irrelevant cue), which may interfere with precise discrimination and contribute to behavioral inflexibility in complex settings.^[19]^[20]

Experimental Paradigms

Matching to Sample

The matching-to-sample (MTS) paradigm is a key experimental method used to investigate stimulus control in operant conditioning, particularly in conditional discrimination tasks. In this procedure, a sample stimulus is first presented to the subject, which is then removed or occluded, followed by the presentation of two or more comparison stimuli arrayed across response alternatives. Reinforcement is delivered contingent on the selection of the comparison stimulus that corresponds to the sample according to a predefined relation, such as physical identity or an arbitrary conditional rule. This setup allows researchers to evaluate how effectively the sample stimulus directs or controls the subject's choice behavior under controlled reinforcement contingencies.^[21] There are two main types of MTS procedures: simple identity matching and conditional matching. In simple identity matching, reinforcement is provided for selecting the comparison that is physically identical to the sample, such as pecking the same color key after a red sample in pigeons. In contrast, conditional matching involves arbitrary stimulus relations, where the sample stimulus signals which of the comparisons is correct, for example, a sample form A might occasion selection of a colored comparison X rather than a physically similar one. These types differ in complexity, with conditional matching requiring the establishment of higher-order discriminations to demonstrate robust stimulus control.^[22] The MTS paradigm plays a central role in assessing stimulus control by measuring the extent to which the sample governs selection responses over potential distractors. Accurate performance reflects strong conditional control, where the probability of selecting the correct comparison approaches 100% under consistent reinforcement, indicating the sample functions as a discriminative stimulus (S^D). Errors in selection, such as consistent choices of non-matching comparisons, signal weak or incomplete stimulus control, often due to overshadowing by contextual cues or incomplete discrimination training. Matching accuracy can also be influenced by generalization when sample stimuli share similar features, leading to probabilistic responding along a gradient of similarity.^[23] Historically, the MTS paradigm emerged in animal research during the early 1960s, with pioneering studies using pigeons to explore matching under various reinforcement schedules. Charles B. Ferster's 1960 experiments demonstrated that pigeons could reliably match sample key lights to comparisons on intermittent schedules, laying the groundwork for its use in probing visual discrimination and control. By the mid-1960s, the procedure extended to human cognition studies, particularly in investigations of language and symbolic relations, influencing fields like developmental psychology and special education.^[21] Variations of the basic MTS procedure include delayed matching and oddity matching to address specific aspects of control and memory. Delayed matching to sample (DMTS) introduces a temporal gap between the sample's offset and the comparisons' onset, typically ranging from seconds to minutes, to test the persistence of sample control and involvement of short-term memory processes; performance typically declines with increasing delay, revealing the limits of behavioral retention. Oddity matching, conversely, reinforces selection of the comparison that differs from the sample, promoting control by sameness versus difference relations and often yielding faster acquisition in some species due to its reversal of identity rules.^[24]^[25] In behavioral research, the MTS paradigm is instrumental for probing emergent relations in stimulus equivalence class formation. After baseline training on conditional discriminations (e.g., A-B and A-C matching), unreinforced probe trials test for untrained symmetries (B-A, C-A) and transivities (B-C), revealing equivalence if novel relations emerge without direct reinforcement; this was foundational in Murray Sidman's work showing how such classes underpin complex human behaviors like reading comprehension.^[26]

Stimulus Control Transfer

Stimulus control transfer refers to the systematic process of shifting behavioral control from contrived or artificial prompts to naturally occurring environmental stimuli in operant conditioning, enabling learners to respond appropriately without ongoing assistance. This procedure is essential following initial discrimination training, where prompts such as verbal instructions or physical guidance are used to evoke responses, and involves gradually fading these prompts to establish control by the target discriminative stimulus (S^D). For instance, in teaching a child to identify objects, control might initially rely on a therapist's verbal prompt ("What is this?"), but transfer ensures the object's presence alone elicits the response.^[27] The steps in stimulus control transfer typically begin with identifying a hierarchy of prompts, ranging from most intrusive (e.g., full physical guidance) to least intrusive (e.g., gestural cues), and reinforcing correct responses under these conditions. Prompts are then faded progressively—using techniques like most-to-least prompting, where the intensity decreases session by session—until the learner responds independently to the natural S^D, as measured by criteria such as three consecutive unprompted correct responses. This process prevents prompt dependency by ensuring the behavior generalizes to real-world settings without artificial cues.^[28]^[29] Key techniques include time delay procedures, where a brief interval (e.g., 0 to 4 seconds) is inserted between the S^D presentation and the prompt, allowing the learner opportunities to respond independently before assistance is provided, and backward chaining, which starts training from the final step of the response chain under natural cue control and works backward to earlier steps. These methods promote efficient transfer by building on existing repertoires, such as transferring from echoic prompts (repeating a model) to tact responses (labeling stimuli). The importance of explicit transfer lies in fostering skill independence, as failure to fade prompts can result in persistent reliance on therapist cues, hindering functional application.^[27]^[30] Empirical evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of these procedures in skill acquisition, particularly for individuals with developmental disabilities. In a study evaluating receptive-echoic-tact and echoic-tact transfers, four out of five participants with autism acquired all targeted tacts (e.g., naming 36 pictures) with high efficiency, achieving mastery without prompt dependency through progressive fading.^[27] Similarly, research on intraverbal training showed that increased exposure to faded prompts reduced the number of trials needed for acquisition, with all four typically developing children meeting criteria for answering questions independently.^[31] These outcomes underscore transfer's role in enhancing verbal and adaptive behaviors while minimizing problem behaviors through differential reinforcement.

Applications

In Applied Behavior Analysis

In applied behavior analysis (ABA), stimulus control is fundamental for teaching discrimination skills to individuals with developmental disabilities, such as those with autism spectrum disorder, by establishing responses to specific environmental cues through discrete trial training (DTT).^[32] DTT structures learning into distinct trials involving a discriminative stimulus (e.g., presenting a red card to teach color identification), a prompted response, and immediate reinforcement for correct discriminations, while withholding reinforcement for errors to build precise stimulus-response associations.^[4] This approach extends to social cues, where learners are trained to respond to facial expressions or contextual signals, enhancing functional independence.^[33] Stimulus control transfer, a key procedure in ABA, systematically shifts response control from instructional prompts to natural environmental stimuli, ensuring skills generalize beyond therapy sessions.^[34] Central techniques leveraging stimulus control include manding and tacting, which target verbal behavior development. Manding occurs under the control of motivating operations, such as deprivation or aversion, prompting requests like asking for water when thirsty, with reinforcement satisfying the motivation to strengthen the association.^[35] Tacting, in contrast, is evoked by nonverbal discriminative stimuli, enabling learners to label objects, actions, or events (e.g., saying "ball" when seeing one), reinforced by generalized conditioned reinforcers like social praise to maintain environmental control over the response.^[36] These operants, derived from Skinner's verbal behavior framework, are taught sequentially in ABA programs to build communication repertoires, with tact training often facilitating mand emergence through shared stimulus relations.^[37] A prevalent challenge in ABA applications, particularly for autistic individuals, is stimulus overselectivity, where learners disproportionately attend to irrelevant stimulus features (e.g., a picture's border instead of its content), impeding accurate discriminations and generalization.^[38] Multiple exemplar training addresses this by presenting diverse examples of target stimuli across varied contexts, systematically varying irrelevant features while reinforcing responses to critical cues, thereby broadening attentional scope and reducing overselectivity.^[39] For instance, teaching shape identification might involve multiple triangles in different colors and orientations to ensure control by shape rather than color.^[40] Outcomes of stimulus control interventions in ABA demonstrate significant improvements in adaptive behaviors, including enhanced daily living skills and social interactions.^[41] In the 2020s, research has highlighted the efficacy of ABA interventions to reduce automatically maintained self-injurious behaviors, with tailored intensive approaches yielding 40-70% decreases in such occurrences when combined with functional analyses and reinforcement schedules.^[42] A 2024 study demonstrated the establishment of inhibitory stimulus control to further reduce such behaviors through response blocking in a multiple schedule arrangement.^[43] Recent developments as of 2024-2025 integrate technology to support ABA procedures, such as mobile apps and digital platforms for progress tracking and remote therapy, enhancing accessibility for home-based training.^[44]

In Pharmacology and Drug Discrimination

In pharmacology, stimulus control is prominently utilized in drug discrimination paradigms to assess the interoceptive effects of psychoactive substances. Animals, typically rats or nonhuman primates, are trained under operant conditioning to differentiate between the presence of a training drug, serving as the discriminative stimulus (S^D), and its absence (e.g., saline vehicle). For instance, subjects learn to press one lever (e.g., left) following drug administration and another (e.g., right) after saline, with correct responses reinforced by food or water; this establishes the drug's internal cues as controlling behavior with high accuracy, often exceeding 80% after extensive training sessions spanning weeks to months.^[45] Cannabinoids exemplify this application, where Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) and synthetic analogs function as discriminative stimuli primarily through activation of CB1 receptors in the central nervous system. Studies from the 1990s onward, such as those demonstrating THC discrimination in rats as a model for cannabis intoxication, have shown full substitution by synthetic cannabinoids like AM4054, which exhibit high affinity for CB1 (Ki ≈ 4.9 nM) and agonist properties, allowing researchers to evaluate novel compounds' potential to mimic THC's subjective effects. These paradigms enable preclinical screening for abuse liability, as drugs that fully generalize to the THC cue indicate shared psychoactive profiles and elevated risk for dependence. Cross-generalization tests further reveal overlaps, such as between cannabinoids and certain opioids or hallucinogens, informing mechanisms of action without direct human exposure.^[46]^[47] Recent investigations continue to refine these applications, including a 2024 study in rats trained to discriminate 3.2 mg/kg Δ9-THC, which tested terpenes (e.g., linalool, limonene) for substitution or modulation; while terpenes alone did not produce THC-like discriminative effects or activate CB1-mediated responses in a tetrad assay (assessing catalepsy, locomotion, antinociception, and hypothermia), α-humulene unexpectedly reduced THC potency, suggesting potential antagonistic interactions rather than enhancement. Such findings underscore the paradigm's utility in dissecting entourage effects in cannabis constituents for therapeutic development.^[48] Despite its strengths, the approach faces limitations, including species differences in stimulus control strength—rats may show robust discrimination for THC at doses ineffective in primates—potentially complicating translation to humans. Ethical considerations also arise from chronic dosing protocols, which require repeated administrations over months and can induce stress; welfare guidelines emphasize minimizing restraint and using non-invasive routes to reduce animal distress while adhering to principles like the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, refinement).^[45]^[49]

In Clinical Interventions

Stimulus control therapy (SCT) is a key component of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), designed to reestablish the bed and bedtime as reliable cues for sleep by associating them exclusively with sleep onset and minimizing arousal-related activities.^[50] Developed in the 1970s by Richard Bootzin, SCT instructs patients to use the bed only for sleep and intimacy, leave the bedroom if unable to sleep within 10-20 minutes, and avoid napping during the day to break conditioned arousal patterns.^[51] A 2024 network meta-analysis of CBT-I components, including SCT combined with sleep restriction, confirmed significant improvements in sleep onset latency, total sleep time, and sleep efficiency among chronic insomnia patients. Recent RCTs as of 2025, such as those on digitally delivered CBT-I, have further validated efficacy in improving sleep quality and related outcomes.^[52]^[53]^[54] In habit formation, stimulus control leverages environmental cues as discriminative stimuli (S^D) to prompt desired behaviors automatically, reducing dependence on effortful goal-directed processes.^[55] For instance, placing fruit visibly near a kitchen sink can serve as an S^D to encourage healthy snacking upon encountering that cue, fostering habitual healthy eating over time through repeated pairing.^[56] This approach contrasts with deliberate, model-free control, where behaviors rely on conscious evaluation of outcomes, as 2024 research highlights how stimulus-driven habits emerge faster in cue-rich contexts but can be disrupted by altering environmental triggers.^[57] Stimulus control also extends to inhibitory applications, such as establishing S^Δ (discriminative stimuli signaling non-reinforcement) to reduce self-injurious behaviors through response blocking. A 2024 study demonstrated that pairing blocking interventions with specific S^Δ cues, like visual signals during non-response periods, effectively suppressed automatically maintained self-injury in clinical settings by building inhibitory associations.^[43] In addiction treatment, contingency management incorporates stimulus control by using verifiable cues (e.g., negative drug test results) as S^D for reinforcement delivery, promoting abstinence through consistent environmental signaling of rewarded behaviors.^[58] Meta-analyses confirm SCT's integral role within CBT-I, showing moderate to large effect sizes for reducing insomnia severity compared to control conditions, with stimulus control contributing uniquely to sleep continuity improvements.^[59]^[52] Recent 2024 findings further elucidate how habitual stimulus control outperforms deliberate strategies in sustaining long-term behavioral changes, particularly when cues are contextually embedded to bypass cognitive overload.^[60] Implementation emphasizes patient education on cue management, teaching individuals to identify and modify environmental triggers to support automatic responding rather than relying on willpower alone.^[61] This involves practical strategies like rearranging spaces to highlight positive S^D or introduce inhibitory S^Δ, integrated into therapy sessions to enhance adherence and therapeutic outcomes.^[62]

References

[1]
[PDF] SCIENCE AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR - B. F. Skinner Foundation
The "interpreted" stimulus. Another problem in stimulus control has attracted more attention than it deserves because of metaphysical speculations on what ...
[2]
Module 6: Operant Conditioning – Principles of Learning and Behavior
When an antecedent (i.e. stimulus) has been consistently linked to a behavior in the past, it gains stimulus control over the behavior. It is now more likely to ...
[3]
Stimulus Control - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Stimulus control is defined as the phenomenon where an organism consistently exhibits specific behaviors in the presence of a discriminative stimulus, ...
[4]
Stimulus Control Research and Practice: Considerations of ... - NIH
Jan 29, 2021 · The purpose of the present article is to provide an overview of stimulus control and discrimination training as they relate to the disparity and salience of ...
[5]
Stimulus control: What is it and why should we care? - APA PsycNet
Stimulus control allows organisms to adapt to the ever-changing world around us; our past experience with a response producing consequences in one context ...
[6]
Reflections on Stimulus Control - PMC - PubMed Central
Studies of listening and other kinds of observing responses have, of course, revealed important stimulus control variables (e.g., Dinsmoor, 1983; Wykoff, 1952), ...
[7]
[PDF] SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT | BF Skinner Foundation
ONE OF B.F. SKINNER'S most important contributions to the experimental analysis of behavior was his discovery of schedules of reinforcement.
[8]
Measurement of stimulus control during discriminative operant ...
Procedures in common use in discriminative operant conditioning are examined. It is concluded that they do not provide useful measures of stimulus control ...
[9]
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1966-01036-001
[10]
[PDF] THE BEHAVIOR OF ORGANISMS An Experimental Analysis
discriminative stimuli. For example, given the conditioned reflex S : tone . R : salivation, we may establish a discrimination between S and. SSl (where Sl ...
[11]
DISCRIMINATION LEARNING WITH AND WITHOUT “ERRORS”1
January 1963 ... Performance following discrimination learning without errors lacks three characteristics that are found following learning with errors.
[12]
Stimulus overselectivity in autism: a review of research - PubMed
Stimulus overselectivity in autism: a review of research. Psychol Bull. 1979 Nov;86(6):1236-54. Authors. O I Lovaas, R L Koegel, L Schreibman. PMID: 515280.Missing: seminal | Show results with:seminal
[13]
Stimulus Generalization - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Stimulus generalization is defined as a primitive basic function of organized nervous tissue, where behavior is determined by masses of excitation rather ...Systems Theories And A... · Principles Behind The... · Ii. B. Antecedent Influences...<|control11|><|separator|>
[14]
What is Stimulus Generalization Gradient in ABA? - BehaviorPREP
A stimulus generalization gradient shows how similar stimuli elicit a response, declining as stimuli become less similar to the original.
[15]
A history of alternative reinforcement reduces stimulus ... - NIH
Oct 31, 2012 · Thus, reinforcement contingencies present during the stimulus generalization test session can influence the stimulus generalization function.<|control11|><|separator|>
[16]
Discriminability and stimulus generalization. - APA PsycNet
Utilizing pigeons tested the hypothesis that a relationship exists between the discriminability of spectrum colors and stimulus generalization along the wave- ...
[17]
Stimulus Generalization and Response Generalization
Stimulus generalization occurs when untrained or new stimuli evoke the same response as a trained or known stimuli. Multiple stimuli evoke the same response.
[18]
Effects of discrimination training on stimulus generalization.
Effects of discrimination training on stimulus generalization. Citation. Hanson, H. M. (1959). Effects of discrimination training on stimulus generalization.
[19]
Dopamine regulates stimulus generalization in the human ... - eLife
Feb 2, 2016 · The ability to generalize previously learned information to novel situations is fundamental for adaptive behavior.
[20]
Effects of Undesirable, Competing Behaviors on the Generalization ...
This study provides a systematic demonstration of generalization failures in which irrelevant stimulus control of competing responses interferes with, ...
[21]
INTERMITTENT REINFORCEMENT OF MATCHING TO SAMPLE IN ...
INTERMITTENT REINFORCEMENT OF MATCHING TO SAMPLE IN THE PIGEON ... This research was carried out under Grant Number G-7617 from the National Science Foundation.
[22]
MATCHING-TO-SAMPLE PERFORMANCE IS BETTER ANALYZED ...
This theory asserts that MTS tasks involve four-term contingencies of reinforcement and that any tendency to select one comparison more often than the other ...Missing: seminal | Show results with:seminal
[23]
(PDF) Matching to Sample Experimental Paradigm - ResearchGate
Sep 19, 2016 · Davison, M., & Nevin, J. A. (1999). Stimuli, reinforcers, and behavior: An integration. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,. 71, ...
[24]
It's hard to forget: resetting memory in delay-match-to-multiple-image ...
Nov 13, 2013 · The Delay-Match-to-Sample (DMS) task has been used in countless studies of human and animal memory (Ferster, 1960). The task has gone though a ...
[25]
MATCHING‐TO‐SAMPLE AND ODDITY ... - Wiley Online Library
Acquisition was similar for oddity and matching. Correct responding started at about chance level and slowly increased to about 75%, with some animals ...
[26]
Matching-to-sample procedures and the development of ...
All subjects showed that conditionally related sample and comparison stimuli had become equivalent; the conditional discriminations generated two sets of three- ...
[27]
Assessing Transfer of Stimulus Control Procedures Across Learners ...
Transfer of stimulus control occurs when behavior initially evoked (controlled) by one SD comes under the control of a different SD. For instance, suppose ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[28]
Using Transfer Procedures to Teach Tacts to a Child with Autism - NIH
This applied study attempted to evaluate a combination of transfer procedures commonly used to teach tacts to children with autism.
[29]
THE ROLE OF INCREASED EXPOSURE TO TRANSFER-OF ... - NIH
The purpose of this study was to test whether programmed increases in exposure to specific prompt types would produce concomitant increases in the acquisition ...
[30]
Stimulus Fading and Response Elaboration in Differential ... - NIH
In the introduction, we described three characteristics of fading programs with relevance for the elaboration of DRA responses via transfer of stimulus control: ...
[31]
https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-657
[32]
[PDF] Discrete Trial Training (DTT) - ---EBP Brief Packet - ERIC
Based on the principles of applied behavior analysis (ABA), discrete trial training (DTT) is used to develop a new response to a stimulus. DTT is based upon ...
[33]
CREATING STIMULUS CONTROL TO INCREASE ... - ScholarWorks
The field of Applied Behavior Analysis uses the term “stimulus control” to describe the situation when a response or behavior occurs in the presence of some ...
[34]
Stimulus Control Transfer ABA: What it is and How it Works
Sep 17, 2024 · Through systematic prompt fading techniques, individuals build confidence and self-reliance, leading to increased autonomy.
[35]
Transferring Control of the Mand to the Motivating Operation in ... - NIH
The purpose of this study was to develop procedures to bring the mand response under the control of the relevant MO and therefore free it from the multiple ...
[36]
Establishment of Mands Following Tact Training as a Function ... - NIH
Results of the present study identified conditions under which responses taught as tacts facilitate the establishment of mands (HP responses).
[37]
“Spontaneous” transfer of stimulus control from tact to mand ...
Abstract. An important issue in teaching verbal behavior to persons with severe handicaps is the transfer of stimulus control from tact (e.g., naming) to mand ...
[38]
What is stimulus overselectivity and how does ABA address it?
Sep 22, 2025 · This article explores the nature of stimulus overselectivity, how it is assessed, its implications, and the ways ABA techniques can mitigate its ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[39]
Stimulus Control in ABA | Links
The key lies in systematic application of discriminative stimuli, consistent differential reinforcement, and careful attention to generalization across settings ...
[40]
Stimulus Control Transfer In ABA | Level Ahead ABA
3. Multiple Exemplar Training: Training with varied examples of stimuli fosters generalization. For example, presenting different shades of red when teaching ...
[41]
The Role of Stimulus Control in ABA Therapy
Jan 5, 2025 · Stimulus control is a cornerstone of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapy, crucial for shaping behaviors and teaching new skills.
[42]
The Role of ABA Therapy in Reducing Self-Injurious Behaviors in ...
Oct 15, 2025 · Studies included in recent reviews show that ABA interventions reduce self-injurious behaviors by approximately 40% to 70%, particularly when ...Missing: stimulus 2020-2025
[43]
Establishing Inhibitory Stimulus Control of Automatically Maintained ...
Oct 9, 2025 · Automatically maintained self-injurious behavior (SIB) is one of the most challenging maladaptive behaviors to treat and often requires ...
[44]
Innovations That Transform Lives - Yellow Bus ABA
Mar 28, 2025 · With advancements in technology, ABA therapy has become more accessible and efficient. The use of digital platforms and mobile applications ...
[45]
How Technology is Enhancing ABA Therapy Techniques
Jul 24, 2025 · Technology greatly enhances ABA therapy by offering a variety of innovative tools that support detailed data collection, analysis, and ...Enhancing Data Collection... · Engagement Tools And... · The Role Of Ai And Virtual...<|control11|><|separator|>
[46]
Drug discrimination: 30 years of progress | Psychopharmacology
Feb 19, 2009 · The drug discrimination paradigm can also be used to assess the role of environmental variables in the modulation of drug actions. For example, ...
[47]
The rise (and fall?) of drug discrimination research - PubMed Central
History and applications. Drug discrimination emerged as an experimental approach in the late 1960s and early 1970s. In the earliest experiments conducted by ...
[48]
Cannabinoid Discrimination and Antagonism by CB1 Neutral and ...
Taken together, the present and previous drug discrimination studies of Δ9-THC and other CB1 agonists are consistent with the idea that, as reported for many ...
[49]
Discriminative stimulus properties of Cannabis Sativa terpenes in rats
This study aimed to investigate whether several terpenes present in cannabis produce discriminative stimulus effects similar to or enhance the effects of Δ 9 - ...
[50]
[PDF] Methods and Welfare Considerations in Behavioral Research with ...
In drug discrimination studies, animals are trained to make one response after receiving a dose of a drug and to make a different response after receiving ...
[51]
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia Part 2: Stimulus Control
May 26, 2009 · Stimulus control is designed to overcome the conditioning that occurs with repeated and unsuccessful attempts to sleep that result in negative associations ...
[52]
[PDF] STIMULUS CONTROL TREATMENT FOR INSOMNIA
The purpose of the present paper is to describe a treatment derived from an operant analysis of sleep and insomnia. In this analysis, falling asleep is ...
[53]
Network meta-analysis examining efficacy of components of ...
Overall, the results suggest that sleep restriction therapy improves self-reported sleep continuity and sleep quality, and stimulus control therapy improves ...
[54]
Effects of Sleep Restriction and Stimulus Control in Chronic ...
May 4, 2025 · The study aims to validate the effect of sleep restriction and stimulus control on improving chronic insomnia patients' sleep habits and maladaptive sleep ...Missing: RCTs | Show results with:RCTs
[55]
Applying the Science of Habit Formation to Evidence-Based ...
Another related approach to altering the cues in the environment is stimulus control in which a behavior is triggered by the presence or absence of a specific ...
[56]
Developing habit-based health behaviour change interventions
For example, consistently substituting habitual unhealthy snacking at 2 pm with eating fruit at 2 pm should develop a new, competing association that will ...
[57]
Leveraging cognitive neuroscience for making and breaking real ...
If behavior persists despite these changes, it is deemed to be habitual, indicating stimulus-driven control (Box 1 discusses the role of goal-directed processes ...Habits And Cognitive... · The Dual System Framework · Repetition
[58]
Contingency Management and Deliberative Decision ... - Frontiers
Contingency management is an effective treatment for drug addiction. The current explanation for its success is rooted in alternative reinforcement theory.
[59]
The effectiveness of stimulus control in cognitive behavioural ...
Aug 16, 2023 · Results indicate that stimulus control is an effective intervention to improve insomnia compared with control conditions.
[60]
Leveraging cognitive neuroscience for making and breaking real ...
Nov 4, 2024 · The stimulus-driven control system engages quickly, making habit expression more pronounced at shorter response-preparation times. By contrast, ...
[61]
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I): A Primer - PMC
CBT-I is a multi-component treatment for insomnia that targets difficulties with initiating and/or maintaining sleep and is delivered over the course of six to ...
[62]
[PDF] Stimulus control for insomnia: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Jun 29, 2023 · During the 1970s and 1980s, stimulus control was further ... Stimulus control treatment for insomnia. Proceedings of the American ...