Behavior Analysis In Psychology

Behavior analysis is a scientific approach to understanding why we do what we do. It focuses on how environmental factors, like consequences and context, influence and shape human and animal behavior. It has two main branches: a basic science called the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (EAB) and an applied field called Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), which is used to create positive, meaningful behavior change in the real world.

Key Takeaways

Definition: Behavior analysis is a natural science focused on the relationship between behavior and the environment, emphasizing that actions are learned primarily through their consequences.
Methodology: Its foundation is the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (EAB), which uses precise observation and measurement to identify the functional relationship between an environmental event and a specific behavior.
Applications: The applied side, Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), systematically uses these principles—like reinforcement—to produce socially significant, positive change in areas such as education, clinical therapy, and organizational management.
Learning: The field heavily relies on operant conditioning, which explains that a behavior is more likely to be repeated if it is followed by a favorable consequence (a reinforcer).
Framework: Behavior analysts use the ABC model (Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence) as a fundamental tool to understand and analyze what triggers a behavior and what sustains it.

Experimental Analysis of Behavior (EAB)

The Experimental Analysis of Behavior (EAB) is the basic scientific branch of behavior analysis that aims to discover the fundamental laws of learning.

Its goal is to understand how behavior changes as a function of the environment.

EAB does this through tightly controlled laboratory experiments, usually with nonhuman organisms, so that researchers can isolate cause-and-effect relationships with precision.

EAB is different from both behaviorism and Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)

Behaviorism is the philosophy: the idea that psychology should study observable behavior and its environmental determinants.

EAB is the scientific research based on that philosophy, focused on discovering basic principles.

ABA, in turn, is the applied branch, which takes the principles discovered in EAB and uses them to solve real-world problems such as communication training, behavior reduction, skill teaching, and workplace interventions.

Core Tenets and Historical Foundations

The fundamental assumptions of the behaviorist approach include:

Focus on Observable Behavior: Behaviorists, particularly early proponents like John B. Watson, rejected the study of internal mental processes (such as consciousness, feelings, or cognition) as unscientific because they cannot be directly seen or measured. Watson argued that for psychology to become a legitimate science, it must focus on outward observable behavior.
Learning is Central: Behaviorists maintain that all behavior is learned through building associations between stimuli, responses, and outcomes. Early behaviourists believed that people behave consistently based on prior learning.
Continuity Across Species: The approach often uses animals in experiments under the assumption that principles learned from animal models, such as rats and dogs, can be applied to human behavior.

Key figures established the foundations for modern behavior analysis through the study of two fundamental forms of learning: classical conditioning and operant conditioning.

Classical Conditioning: This form of associative learning involves linking two types of stimuli. Ivan Pavlov studied the conditioned reflex, where a natural, involuntary (reflexive) response to a stimulus (unconditioned stimulus) becomes associated with a new stimulus (conditioned stimulus) after repeated pairing.
Operant Conditioning: Also known as instrumental conditioning, this process focuses on the relationship between behaviours and their consequences. B. F. Skinner concentrated on how reinforcement (which increases the probability of a behavior) and punishment (which decreases the probability of a behavior) drive behavior.

Criticisms of EAB

1. EAB relies too heavily on animal research

A major criticism is that EAB depends heavily on animal studies, which may not generalise to complex human behaviour.

Much of the classic EAB research uses rats and pigeons in highly controlled conditions.

Although this allows tight experimental control, human behaviour is influenced by language, culture, cognition, emotion, and social interaction—factors that are absent in most EAB paradigms.

As a result, many of EAB’s findings apply only to simple, low-level behaviours and do not capture the richness of real-life human functioning.

Because of this limited generalisability, EAB often struggles to explain or predict behaviour in natural environments, reducing its usefulness for understanding relationships, decision-making, or mental health.

This weakens the external validity of the approach and limits its real-world impact.

2. EAB oversimplifies behaviour by ignoring internal states

A strong criticism is that EAB often dismisses internal mental states such as emotions, motivations, beliefs, and goals.

Traditional behaviourism avoided discussing internal processes, arguing that only observable behaviour should be studied.

However, modern research shows that internal states play a crucial role in decision-making, self-control, and social behaviour.

By excluding these processes, EAB provides an incomplete account of why behaviour occurs, offering only environmental explanations.

This creates a theory that is too reductionist for many real-world problems, especially those involving emotion or cognition (e.g., anxiety, addiction, trauma).

As a result, EAB struggles to address human behaviour in applied settings, reducing both its explanatory power and its clinical relevance.

3. EAB’s focus on lab-based control reduces ecological validity

EAB’s strict experimental control means that behaviour is often studied in artificial environments that do not represent real-life contexts.

Many EAB experiments occur in controlled chambers where only one variable is changed at a time.

While this allows for clean cause-and-effect conclusions, real life involves multiple interacting influences—social pressures, emotions, goals, cultural norms, and unpredictable events. EAB’s methods struggle to capture this complexity.

This makes the findings less applicable outside the laboratory.

Behaviour that appears orderly and predictable in controlled settings often becomes far less consistent in natural environments, limiting the approach’s usefulness for predicting human behaviour in schools, workplaces, or families.

4. EAB produces large quantities of data but weak theoretical explanations

EAB has been criticised for generating vast amounts of data without producing high-level theories that integrate or explain these findings.

The field traditionally prioritises empirical demonstrations—for example, showing how reinforcement schedules influence behaviour.

However, these demonstrations often remain isolated, and EAB has been slow to develop overarching theories of behaviour that connect findings across different studies.

Without strong theory, the field lacks a framework for understanding complex behavioural patterns.

This limits scientific progress, leaving EAB vulnerable to becoming outdated as other fields (e.g., cognitive science, neuroscience, computational modelling) develop richer theoretical accounts of behaviour.

Without conceptual advancement, EAB risks stagnation and becoming less relevant within psychology.

5. EAB struggles to predict behaviour in new or complex situations

A further criticism is that EAB rarely engages in genuine prediction of behaviour beyond the specific conditions of an experiment.

EAB excels at showing that behaviour can be controlled under known reinforcement conditions, but it rarely predicts how behaviour will unfold in novel, uncertain, or socially complex environments.

As Killeen notes, replicating a known effect is not the same as forecasting behaviour in new scenarios.

This limited predictive power weakens EAB’s claim to be a complete science of behaviour.

If a theory cannot anticipate future behaviour, its real-world utility is limited—especially in fields like education, mental health, or public policy, where prediction guides intervention.

6. EAB often ignores the social and cultural contexts that shape behaviour

Another criticism is that EAB tends to focus on individual behaviour in isolation, neglecting how social and cultural factors influence actions.

Many EAB experiments involve single organisms responding alone to reinforcement contingencies, but human behaviour is deeply embedded in social systems.

People respond to peer expectations, cultural norms, moral beliefs, and relationships—factors that cannot be reduced to simple reinforcement histories.

By neglecting social context, EAB fails to provide a full account of real-life human behaviour.

This limits the approach’s relevance for understanding social issues such as conformity, cooperation, prejudice, or group dynamics, and restricts its contribution to broader psychological theory.

7. EAB’s methods can be ethically limiting

Some critics argue that EAB’s methodology raises ethical concerns when applied to humans.

Behaviour modification based purely on reinforcement and punishment can be seen as manipulative, because it focuses exclusively on controlling behaviour through external consequences.

Additionally, certain procedures (e.g., deprivation, aversive stimuli) are inappropriate or harmful in human settings.

Ethical limitations restrict how far EAB can be applied in modern clinical, educational, and organisational contexts.

Many EAB techniques used with animals cannot ethically be replicated with people, which further limits the approach’s practical relevance.

Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)

Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) is a scientific discipline that applies behavioral principles to improve socially significant behaviors, most commonly in children with autism and other developmental disabilities.

It uses techniques like positive reinforcement to teach new skills and discourage unwanted behaviors, focusing on areas such as communication, social skills, and self-care.

ABA therapy is intensive, tailored to the individual, and can be delivered in various settings like home, school, or a clinic.

Mechanisms and Techniques in ABA

ABA uses the core tenets of operant conditioning, which states that an organism learns to associate a voluntary behavior with a consequence (reinforcement or punishment).

1. Reinforcement Strategies:

The key principle of ABA is the systematic use of reinforcement to encourage desired behaviours.

This process relies on identifying and delivering consequences that increase the likelihood of the behaviour being repeated in the future.

Child-Specific Reinforcers: In this treatment, child-specific reinforcers are employed to reward and motivate autistic children when they demonstrate desired behaviours.
Examples of Desired Behaviours: These desired behaviours include actions like making eye contact, verbalizing a greeting, or sitting on a chair when requested.
Examples of Reinforcers: The rewards used can be tangible or intangible, such as stickers, praise, candy, bubbles, and extra play time.

2. Punishment Strategies:

ABA also incorporates punishment techniques, which are designed to decrease the probability of an undesirable behaviour.

Discouraging Undesirable Behaviours: Punishment might be used to discourage problematic actions such as pinching, scratching, and pulling hair.
Examples of Punishment: Techniques employed include a timeout or a sharp “No!” from the therapist or parent.

III. Context within Behavior Therapy

ABA is situated within the broader context of behavior therapy, which applies learning principles to help clients modify undesirable behaviours.

The use of reinforcement in behavior modification systems, such as token economies, is highly effective and shares philosophical roots with ABA.

For example, studies have found that the use of a token economy increased appropriate social behaviours and reduced inappropriate behaviours in autistic schoolchildren, where positive behaviour resulted in receiving a “quiet hands” token, and inappropriate behaviour resulted in the loss of a token.

These tokens could then be exchanged for playtime.

The goal of these behavioral approaches is to eliminate maladaptive behaviours by utilizing the basic processes of learning, such as reinforcement and extinction.

ABA Techniques

Chaining, prompting, and shaping are foundational teaching strategies in ABA, and they come directly from the science of behavior analysis.

These techniques are used across many ABA applications, including:

autism intervention
early childhood education
disability support
communication training
independent living skills
behavioral therapy
classroom instruction
workplace skill training

They are standard tools for teaching new behaviors, increasing independence, and supporting people as they learn complex or unfamiliar skills.

Chaining

Chaining is a method used to teach multi-step tasks by breaking them down into smaller, manageable parts.

Many everyday actions—like brushing your teeth or getting dressed—are actually made up of a long sequence of smaller behaviors.

When these individual steps are linked together in the right order, they form a behavior chain.

For example, the behavior chain for putting on a coat might include:

Hearing “Put on your coat,”
Getting the coat from the closet,
Holding it correctly,
Sliding one arm into a sleeve,
Sliding the other arm in,
Adjusting the coat,
Zipping it up, and
Receiving praise for completing the task.

Behavior analysts use three main approaches to teach chains of behavior: forward chaining, total-task chaining, and backward chaining.

1. Forward Chaining

In forward chaining, the steps are taught in the same order they naturally occur. The learner masters the first step, then moves on to steps 1 and 2, and so on, gradually building toward the full task.

For example, when teaching a child to tie their shoes, an instructor might:

Reinforce correct performance of the very first step (“pinch the lace”).
Once that step is consistent, reinforce steps 1 and 2 in sequence.
Continue adding steps until the whole skill is learned.

Researchers have noted that forward chaining is easy to use and helps learners gradually build confidence as each mastered step leads into the next.

2. Total Task Chaining

Total task chaining teaches all steps of the task during every session.

The learner attempts the entire sequence from start to finish, and the instructor steps in with help only for the parts the learner cannot yet do independently.

This method works especially well when the learner already knows some of the steps.

In one study, elementary-school students with disabilities learned tasks like sharpening a pencil or using a calculator by watching a peer demonstrate the whole sequence and then practicing the full chain with help.

All students eventually learned to complete the tasks independently.

3. Backward Chaining

In backward chaining, the instructor completes all the steps except the final one, which the learner performs.

Because the last step leads straight to the reward or outcome, the learner experiences immediate success.

Once the learner masters the final step, the instructor teaches the second-to-last step, then the third-to-last, and continues working backward until the whole chain is learned.

Backward chaining has been used in both simple and highly creative ways.

For example:

In a classic study, a researcher used backward chaining to train a rat to complete a long, complex obstacle course ending with pressing a bar for food.
In another case, clinicians helped a child who struggled to swallow liquids by teaching the final steps first and gradually working backward until the full “drink” behavior emerged.

A variation called backward chaining with leap ahead skips steps the learner has already mastered.

Prompting

Prompting refers to giving extra help or cues to encourage the learner to perform the correct behavior.

Prompts can take many forms: verbal instructions, physical guidance, visual cues, demonstrations, or gestures.

Prompts are often used together with chaining or shaping.

The goal is always the same: help the learner perform the behavior successfully until they no longer need assistance.

Over time, prompts are gradually reduced—or “faded”—as independence grows.

Shaping

Shaping is a technique used to build new or difficult behaviors by reinforcing small steps that move closer and closer to the final goal.

It is especially helpful when the desired behavior is too complex to learn through instructions or imitation alone.

For example, a speech therapist may teach a child to say a word by:

Reinforcing simple lip movements,
Then reinforcing sound production,
And eventually reinforcing clear words and sentences.

The instructor carefully selects which small improvements (“approximations”) to reinforce and only rewards responses that move toward the target behavior.

One common tool used during shaping is differential reinforcement, reinforcing desired responses while no longer rewarding undesired ones.

For instance, a parent might pass food only when a child says “please,” which gradually decreases other, less polite requests.

Shaping can improve many different dimensions of behavior:

Form (topography): refining a golf swing
Frequency: increasing math problems completed per minute
Latency: reducing the delay between a request and a response
Duration: staying on task for longer periods
Amplitude/magnitude: jumping higher or speaking louder

One study showed that shaping helped children increase their speaking volume from barely audible levels to louder, more effective communication—and the improvement lasted months.

References

Ayllon, T., & Michael, J. (1959). The psychiatric nurse as a behavioral engineer 1. Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2(4), 323-334.

Baer, D. M. (1960). Escape and avoidance response of preschool children to two schedules of reinforcement withdrawal. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 3(2), 155-159.

Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1(1), 91.

Bijou, S. W. (1955). A systematic approach to an experimental analysis of young children. Child Development, 161-168.

Carrion, T. J., Miltenberger, R. G., & Quinn, M. (2019). Using auditory feedback to improve dance movements of children with disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 31(2), 151–160.

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis. Pearson UK.

Ferster, C. B., & DeMyer, M. K. (1961). The development of performances in autistic children in an automatically controlled environment. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 13(4), 312-345.

Fleece, L., Gross, A., O”Brien, T., Kistner, J., Rothblum, E., & Drabman, R. (1981). ELEVATION OF VOICE VOLUME IN YOUNG DEVELOPMENT ALLY DELAYED CHILDREN VIA AN OPERANT SHAPING PROCEDURE. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14(3), 351-355.

Fuller, P. R. (1949). Operant conditioning of a vegetative human organism. The American journal of psychology, 62(4), 587-590.

Glenn, S. S., Ellis, J., & Greenspoon, J. (1992). On the revolutionary nature of the operant as a unit of behavioral selection. American Psychologist, 47(11), 1329.

Goltz, S. M., Mayer, A. L., & Orr, B. (2020). Applied behavior analysis as a development tool: Examples from agroforestry. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 39(8), 785-799.

Hall, R. V., Lund, D., & Jackson, D. (1968). Effects of teacher attention on study behavior 1. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1(1), 1-12.

Hagopian, L. P., Farrell, D. A., & Amari, A. (1996). Treating total liquid refusal with backward chaining and fading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(4), 573-575.

Heron,T. E.,Tincani, M. J., Peterson, S. M.,& Miller, A. D. (2005). Plato’s allegory of the cave revisited. Disciples of the light appeal to the pied pipers and prisoners in the darkness. In W. L. Heward, T. E. Heron, N.A. Neef, S.M. Peterson, D. M. Sainato, G.

Cartledge, R. Gardner, III, L. D. Peterson, S. B. Hersh,&J.C. Dardig (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education: Achievements, challenges, and opportunities (pp. 267–282), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Heward, W. L., & Wood, C. L. (2003). Thursday afternoons with Don: Selections from three teleconference seminars on applied behavior analysis. A small matter of proof: The legacy of Donald M. Baer, 293-310.

Lindsley, O. R. (1956). Operant conditioning methods applied to research in chronic schizophrenia. Psychiatric research reports.

Moore, J. (1995). Radical behaviorism and the subjective-objective distinction. The Behavior Analyst, 18(1), 33-49.

Moore, J. (2003). Behavior analysis, mentalism, and the path to social justice. The Behavior Analyst, 26(2), 181-193.

O”Conner, Y. M., & Cuvo, A. J. (1989). Teaching dancercise to persons who are mentally handicapped: Programming
transfer of stimulus control to a community setting. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 4(4), 289–311.

Pierrel, R., & Sherman, J. G. (1963). Barnabus, the rat with college training. Brown Alumni Monthly, 63, 8-12.

Pontone, M., Vause, T., & Zonneveld, K. L. (2021). Benefits of recreational dance and behavior analysis for individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders: A literature review. Behavioral Interventions, 36(1), 195-210.

Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Skinner, B. F. (1948). Walden two. New York: Macmillan.

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: MacMillan.

Skinner, B. F. (1974). About behaviorism. New York: Knopf.

Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological review, 20(2), 158.

Werts, M. G., Caldwell, N. K., & Wolery, M. (1996). Peer modeling of response chains: Observational learning by students with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(1), 53-66.