Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Recent applications of operant technology, including the manipulation of environmental conditions and response consequences, have been directed toward the improvement of man‐environment relations. This document summarizes the research designs, procedures, results, and conclusions of these recent behavioral interventions for ecological rebalance. Each of the 32 studies reviewed was undertaken since 1970; all studies were relatively successful in changing the probability of an ecology‐related response; all studies incorporated basic methodologies applicable for large‐scale, community programs; most of the investigations were conducted in field settings ( e.g ., college campuses, grocery stores, mobile‐trailer parks, homes, movie theaters, public campgrounds, and a football stadium). Several of the studies are as yet unpublished. Sources for receiving documentation of the unpublished research are provided in this document. About 50% of the investigations reviewed were designed to influence behaviors related to environmental litter; the others were of behavior‐modification programs that substantially increased bus‐ridership, decreased lawn‐trampling, promoted the purchase of drinks in returnable rather than throwaway containers, initiated a recycling process, or reduced energy consumption. Essentially, the interventions were either preventive in nature ( i.e ., designed to discourage environment‐destructive behaviors before they occur), or remedial ( i.e ., designed to encourage behaviors that correct an existing environmental problem). Usually, the preventive measures emphasized responses priming (or prompting), while the corrective measures applied some form of positive reinforcement. Response priming was accomplished with modelling techniques, or with written and/or verbal prompts presented either publicly or on a personal, one‐to‐one basis. Among the positive reinforcement procedures were field applications of token economies, lottery systems, feedback programming, and intergroup contests, as well as individual contingency contracting. Some experimental designs provided for comparisons between the behavioral effects of response priming and positive reinforcement.
Tuso et al. (Wed,) studied this question.