Four Corners Association of Behavior Analysis First Annual Conference!!
Travis
First Annual Conference
April 4 - 5, 2008
The Broker Inn
Boulder, Colorado
Invited Speakers:
Carl Cheney (Utah State Univ.)
Experimental Analysis of Behavior: Applications Beyond Autism.
Michael Dougher (Univ. of New Mexico)
The Relevance of Basic Research on Verbal Processes for Clinical
Behavior Analysis
Christine E. Hughes & Raymond C. Pitts (Univ. of North Carolina,
Wilmington)
Behavioral Pharmacology: Identifying Behavioral Mechanisms Involved
in the Acute and Chronic Effects of Drugs
William R. Hutchison (Behavior Systems, LLC, Boulder, CO)
The Robot as Theory: Building Synthetic Animals Using Behavior
Analysis
Peter Killeen (Arizona State Univ.)
Animal Models of ADHD
Jeff Kupfer (Jeff Kupfer, PA, Erie, CO)
Missing Links: Brain, Behavior, and Cultural Evolution
Michael Mozzoni (Learning Services, Lakewood, CO)
Training Methods in Neurobehavioral Rehabilitation
Amy Odum (Utah State Univ.)
Delay Discounting: Environmental and Organismic Contributions
Carol Pilgrim (Univ. of North Carolina, Wilmington)
Consequences as Equivalence-Class Members: Implications for Theory
and Practice
For more information, contact:
Pamela Martien (pamela...@hotmail.com)
Juliet Blevins (juliet...@comcast.net)
Four Corners Association for Behavior Analysis (www.4caba.org)
For Hotel Accommodations and Conference Rates, contact www.boulderbrokerinn.com
Abstracts
Carl Cheney (Utah State Univ.)
Experimental Analysis of Behavior: Applications Beyond Autism
The principles of behavior analysis, as introduced in Skinner's first
book, The Behavior of Organisms, have been expanded and applied in a
great variety of settings and with a broad range of species.
Currently, application emphasis appears to be in the treatment of
autistic behaviors, and that is a good thing. However, since behavior
is everywhere and the principles seem universally functional, there
are many other applications in practice. These often illustrate
creative and innovative approaches to understanding and controlling
behavior. I will present a variety of examples of the applications of
an experimental analysis of behavior with a wide range of species in
treating a variety of issues.
At the close of this presentation the attentive listener will be able
to:
1. Differentiate respondent from operant paradigms and procedures
2. Explain how and why flavor aversions and preferences are developed
in non human subjects
3. Draw the mechanism by which reflexes can be modified by
consequences
4. Describe several examples of applied behavior analysis outside the
classroom with atypical subjects
Michael Dougher (Univ. of New Mexico)
The Relevance of Basic Research on Verbal Processes for Clinical
Behavior Analysis
Clinical behavior analysis can generally be defined as the application
of the assumptions, principles and methods of behavior analysis, with
a particular emphasis on modern approaches to language and cognition,
to the problems encountered by normal adults and treated in outpatient
settings. In the last 15-20 years, clinical behavior analysis has come
into its own as a therapeutic approach and many of the specific
therapies that fall under its rubric have empirically demonstrated
efficacy. In large part the development of clinical behavior analysis
has been based on advances in basic research on verbal processes,
especially stimulus equivalence, derived relational responding, and
the transformation of functions. This presentation reports some of
these research findings and explores their implications for the
clinical context.
Christine E. Hughes & Raymond C. Pitts (Univ. of North Carolina,
Wilmington)
Behavioral Pharmacology: Identifying Behavioral Mechanisms Involved
in the Acute and Chronic Effects of Drugs
It is firmly established that contingencies of reinforcement can
profoundly affect the behavioral actions of drugs. The notion of
"behavioral mechanisms" of drug action has been proposed as general
theoretical approach to characterizing these effects. In this view,
drugs change behavior by altering the way(s) in which the
contingencies control behavior. In this paper, we will discuss the
concept of behavioral mechanisms of drug action, and evaluate it in
the context of some data from our lab on the acute and chronic effects
of drugs on operant behavior.
After attending this talk, audience members should be able to:
1. Recognize behavioral pharmacological methods and data (e.g., dose-
effect curves)
2. State what is meant by a behavioral mechanism of drug action
3. Identify how the data presented relate to the concept of behavioral
mechanisms (e.g., be able to state whether or not the concept is
supported by the data presented)
William R. Hutchison (Behavior Systems, LLC, Boulder, CO)
The Robot as Theory: Building Synthetic Animals Using Behavior
Analysis
This paper describes an extension of operant behavior modeling beyond
the computer to embody the model in a robot complete with sensors and
motors. Computer models of natural systems have a well-established
place in sciences from physics (e.g., solar system movements) to
economics (econometric models), and the models serve both scientific
and applied purposes. Animal behavior models using robots are a new
example of the same strategy. Individual equations and correlations
developed in experiments are usually limited by the fact that they
must assume all other factors stay constant and within normal ranges.
Combining all the related equations into a complete system description
is a bold and challenging task, but the resulting models describe what
should happen under any combination of conditions, and equally
important, enable projecting the predictions of the model through many
time steps in a way that is intractable without using such a computer
system. When the models are embodied in robots, these synthetic
subjects are extremely valuable for researchers in that they can be
placed into the very same situations as animals to test the models'
accuracy in behaving like the animals. For engineers, they happen to
be working robots with some unique advantages. The author will
describe his work over the past 24 years (often in collaboration with
Dr. Betsy Constantine), describing the characteristics of the operant
model, the challenges of developing a complete operant model,
implications for the molar-molecular debate, issues in embodying the
model in robots, some of the results, and the level of acceptance of
behavior analytic ideas in this field.
Peter Killeen (Arizona State Univ.)
Animal Models of ADHD
Progress in biomedical research is often contingent on finding the
right "preparation'-the right animal model in which the disorder may
be aggressively studied. Although the extensive history of research
with non-human animals in EAB provides a foil for work with humans, a
lot of creative translation is necessary to apply those results. In
the case of specific disorders, such as those nominated by the DSM, it
is arguable whether there is a single good animal model. A strong
contender for one is the Spontaneously-Hyperactive Rat as a model of
ADHD. But just what makes such an analog a "good model"? This question
is addressed in the context of Aristotle's 5 causes, which are applied
to this analog. Theories of ADHD and their role in specifying
appropriate models are discussed. The participants are then divided
into quartets where they will develop and discuss the application of
the casual scheme to problems of their interest.
You will be expected to:
1. Discuss Aristotle's 5 causes of behavior
2. Identify the situation of models within this epistemological
framework
3. Apply the framework to a problem central to your work
Jeff Kupfer (Jeff Kupfer, PA, Erie, CO)
Missing Links: Brain, Behavior, and Cultural Evolution
Recent data provided by the CDC indicate traumatic brain injury (TBI)
rates continue to increase and it's likely that thousands of cases are
not treated or reported. In some cases these increase mirror those of
PDD, ASD, and ADHD. Could there be a connection?
This presentation examines the etiology of the human brain and skull,
and the selective environmental circumstances that influenced its
evolution. A brief review of cultural evolution is presented that
suggests the cultural practices over the past century may have
predisposed humans to cumulative brain injuries that are too small to
detect as single events but summate into behavioral and cognitive
problems that are often misdiagnosed. A case is presented that ASD and
related syndromes may be unrecognized TBI. Implications for diagnosis,
treatment, and funding are reviewed.
Michael Mozzoni (Learning Services, Lakewood, CO)
Training Methods in Neurobehavioral Rehabilitation
Persons with Acquired Brain Injuries (ABI) present with acquired
learning deficits. NeuroRehabilitation is essentially a relearning
environment, as clients have to re-learn nearly everything i.e., how
to walk, talk, swallow, toilet themselves, do their ADL's, how to be
social once again etc. This presentation will demonstrate the utility
of behavioral training methods used by an interdisciplinary team when
client progress "stalls."
DESCRIPTERS: Fluency training, SAFMEDS, prompting, reinforcement.
Objectives:
1. Participants will learn about fluency training and tool skills
2. Participants will learn about working within a multi-disciplinary
environment.
3. Participants will learn about standard outcome measurement.
Amy Odum and Ana A. L. Baumann (Utah State Univ.)
Delay Discounting: Environmental and Organismic Contributions
Delay discounting refers to the decrease in the value of an outcome as
the delay to its receipt increases. Steep discounting by delay (rapid
loss of value as a function of delay) is a hallmark of a number of
psychological disorders. This talk will provide an overview of
techniques to assess delay discounting. In addition, several
environmental circumstances that can lead to steep discounting will be
illustrated. Finally, some personal characteristics associated with
rapid discounting will be described.
Attendees should be able to answer the following questions at the end
of this presentation:
1. What is delay discounting?
2. How is delay discounting assessed?
3. What are some environmental factors that influence the degree of
discounting?
4. What are some orgnaismic factors that influence the degree of
discounting?
Carol Pilgrim (Univ. of North Carolina, Wilmington)
Consequences as Equivalence-Class Members: Implications for Theory
and Practice
The stimulus equivalence paradigm has provided a basis for carefully
controlled laboratory study of novel or emergent behavioral relations
for over two decades. Sidman's recent (1994, 2000) theoretical
treatments of stimulus equivalence have expanded original
conceptualizations considerably in that all elements of a
reinforcement contingency (e.g., conditional stimulus, discriminative
stimulus, response, and reinforcer) are held to be members of an
equivalence class. This talk will review stimulus equivalence
methodologies, and describe a series of studies that seem to provide
additional support for the suggestion that the reinforcer can function
as a member of the equivalence class. Data from children with autism
show that when multi-element class-specific reinforcers (i.e.,
auditory and visual conditioned reinforcers, edible primary
reinforcers) are employed, each element of the reinforcer compound
will function independently as a class member. Further, each element
can function to expand the equivalence class when used as a single
consequence for identity matching with unrelated stimuli. These
results have important practical implications with respect to
efficient technologies of teaching, in addition to their theoretical
relevance. An illustration of this point will be provided by a study
designed to help young children learn basic math facts with class-
specific reinforcement procedures.
Objectives:
1. Describe and illustrate the stimulus equivalence paradigm
2. Show the facilitative effects of class-specific reinforcers on
class formation and expansion in basic & applied projects.
About the Speakers
Carl D. Cheney has taught behavior analysis and physiological
psychology at Utah State University for forty years. He received the
Ph.D. from Arizona State University in 1966 working with Drs. Jack
Michael, Israel Goldiamond, Arthur Schwarz and other behavior
analysts. His research has included basic operant and respondent
studies with traditional animal subjects including humans but also
with exotic wild and domestic species. He has taught behavior analysis
to elementary school children and conducted large scale personalized
systems of instruction. Recent work has investigated the variables
involved in diet selection by herbivores and the reduction of toxic
plant intake.
Michael Dougher is currently Professor of Psychology and Associate
Dean for Research at the University of New Mexico, where he started
his academic career in 1980. He received his bachelor's degree from
UCLA in 1974, and his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Chicago
in 1980. Dr. Dougher played an important role in the development of
the now rapidly growing field of clinical behavior analysis. He
conducts basic laboratory research on stimulus equivalence, relational
responding and the transformation of functions in an attempt to
identify and articulate the complex verbal process that underlie the
development and treatment of clinical problems. Dr. Dougher is a
Fellow of the American Psychological Association and the American
Psychological Society, a member of the Society for the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior, President of Division 25 of the American
Psychological Association, has served as an associate editor for the
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior and is now senior
editor of The Behavior Analyst.
Christine E. Hughes received her Ph.D. from the University of Florida
in the experimental analysis of behavior in 1991. She then completed a
post-doctoral fellowship and subsequently joined the faculty at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She has been in the
psychology department at the University of North Carolina Wilmington
since 1996. Dr. Hughes' research interests are in the area of
behavioral pharmacology, specifically the development of behavioral
tolerance to drug effects and effects of stimulants on self-control
choices and on punished behavior. She also investigates behavioral
practices in college education. Dr. Hughes has been program chair for
Behavioral Pharmacology and Toxicology for the Association for
Behavior Analysis, program chair, secretary, and President of the
Southeastern Association for Behavior Analysis, and currently is the
Secretary/Treasurer of Division 25 - Behavior Analysis of the American
Psychological Association. She is serving on the editorial boards of
both the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior and The
Behavior Analyst.
William R. Hutchison earned his B.S. at Kansas University and his
Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology at SUNY-Stony Brook, with Leonard Krasner
as his major advisor, and Howard Rachlin and Leonard Green as major
influences on his quantitative thinking at a time when they were all
interacting about token economies and their new behavioral economics.
He co-founded SUNY's graduate/undergraduate program in Environmental
Design in London, then taught in West Virginia University's Ph.D.
program in Behavioral Systems Analysis. After a two-year Visiting
Professor position teaching in Colombia in Universidad Catolica's
behavioral psychology program, he returned to the U.S. and began
developing computer models of operant behavior. He co-founded
BehavHeuristic, Inc. with Dr. Kenneth Stephens to develop commercial
applications of the computer models. He founded Behavior Systems, LLC,
to continue developing the technology with research on verbal behavior
and robotics, and co-founded Applied Behavior Systems with Dr.
Stephens to develop computer based tact training for developmentally
disabled individuals. The past 4 years his work has focused on the
problems of complex robotic control using behavior analytic
principles.
Peter Killeen went to Harvard to study with Skinner, where he was
educated by an exceptional cohort of graduate students. Rachlin, with
the help of Herrnstein, saw him through his degree. He went to the
defense of Fort Skinner in the Desert, which soon fell. Killeen hung
tough, trying to bring the theory of operant conditioning to the
unwashed in a series of a half dozen Psych Review articles. They still
didn't wash. He tried his hand at chairing his department, presiding
at Sigma Xi, the Society of Experimental Psychologists, and SQAB. They
lumbered along no matter. He tried hypnosis, and failing, wrote an
article with Mike Nash that won the Hilgard award as the Best
Theoretical Paper on hypnosis. Three years ago he worked at the Centre
for Advanced Study in Oslo, trying to do something useful. He slowly
came to understand the complex issues involved in clinical diagnoses.
With an outstanding group of experts on Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder, he helped devise a new theory of ADHD-
http://www.behavioralandbrainfunctions.com/content/2/1/30 - recently
nominated a "must read" by the Faculty of 1000 in Biology. In his
presentation, he will share what he learned about theories and models
using Aristotle's 5 causes as framework.
Jeff Kupfer is a licensed psychologist in Massachusetts, Colorado and
Nebraska, and a board certified behavior analyst. He is a founder and
member of the Board of Trustees for the Cambridge Center for Behavior
Studies and is the TBI Action Editor of The Current Repertoire. Jeff
received his doctoral degree in psychology from the University of
Florida, specializing in the experimental analysis of behavior. He
has practiced in outpatient clinics, schools, in-patient hospitals,
nursing homes and residential settings, and has treated severe
behavioral disorders such as aggression and self-destructive
behaviors. He has extensive experience treating persons with brain
injury, pervasive developmental disabilities, autism, mental illness,
and other neurologically-based disorders, and has published articles
in the areas of behavior analysis, pharmacology and visual
impairments. Jeff has been a guest reviewer for the journal The
Behavior Analyst and a guest contributor in newspapers and radio. He
consults and lectures, and writes novels. Jeff is completing his term
as the first President of Four Corners Association for Behavior
Analysis.
Michael Mozzoni is the Regional Program Director for Learning Services
Neurobehavioral Institute in Lakewood CO. He is a board certified
behavior analyst and certified brain injury specialist clinical
trainer who has worked with persons with brain injuries since 1985. He
holds a Ph.D. in applied behavior analysis from Florida State
University and a M.A. in experimental psychology from Harvard
University. He is a member of the American Congress of Rehabilitation
Medicine (ACRM) Brain Injury Special Interest Group and the
International Association of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). Mike has
served as an adjunct professor at Vanderbilt University School of
Medicine Department of Pediatrics and University of Arkansas at Little
Rock Department of Psychology. He has conducted extensive local and
national staff trainings, professional presentations and workshops in
the areas of: Brain Injury Rehabilitation, Employee Turnover, Behavior
Management and Skill Acquisition. He has publications in the Journal
of Head Trauma Rehabilitation; Behavioral Interventions; Journal of
Precision Teaching and Celeration; Infants & Young Children: Journal
of Special Pediatric Care Practices; Rehabilitation Management
Journal; Continuing Care; The Case Manager; and Case Review Magazine
in the areas of adult and pediatric brain injury rehabilitation. He
serves as treasurer for the ACRM Interdisciplinary Special Interest
Group and the American Academy for the Certification of Brain Injury
Specialists. He serves as a member of the editorial board of
Behavioral Interventions and is Chair of the ABA Rehabilitation and
Independent Living Special Interest Group.
Amy Odum received her B.S. from the University of Florida and her M.S.
and Ph.D. from West Virginia University. After a post-doctoral
position at the University of Vermont's Human Behavioral Pharmacology
Laboratory, she accepted a position as Assistant Professor at the
University of New Hampshire. She is now an Associate Professor at
Utah State University. She has been on the Board of Editors of several
journals, including the Behavior Analyst and Behavioral Processes. She
is currently Associate Editor at the Journal of the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior. Her research interests are in basic behavioral
phenomena, such as response persistence, sensitivity to delayed
outcomes, conditional discriminations, and environmental influences on
drug effects.
Carol Pilgrim received her Ph.D. from the University of Florida in
1987 with a specialization in the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.
She is currently Professor of Psychology and Associate Dean of the
College of Arts and Sciences at the University of North Carolina
Wilmington, where she has been honored with a Distinguished Teaching
Professorship (1994-1997), the North Carolina Board of Governors
Teaching Excellence Award (2003), and the Faculty Scholarship Award
(2000). She received the Chancellor's Award in 1992, and the ABA
student Committee Outstanding Mentor Award in 2006. Her research
contributions include both basic and applied behavior analysis, with
an emphasis in human operant behavior, relational stimulus control,
and the early detection of breast cancer. Dr. Pilgrim has served as
editor of The Behavior Analyst, associate editor of the Journal of the
Experimental Analysis of Behavior and The Behavior Analyst, co-editor
of the Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, and as a
member of the editorial boards of those and several other journals.
She has served as President of the Association for Behavior Analysis,
the Society for the Advancement Behavior Analysis, Division 25 of the
American Psychological Association, and the Southeastern Association
for Behavior Analysis. Additionally, she has been Member-at-large of
the Executive Council of ABA and Division 25, and member of the Boards
of Directors of the Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,
the Society for the Advancement of Behavior Analysis, and the
Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.
Raymond C. Pitts received his Ph.D. in Psychology from the University
of Florida in 1989. After a 2-year post-doctoral fellowship in the
Department of Psychology and Pharmacology at the Wake forest Medical
School, he took a job as a Research Assistant Professor in the
Department of Psychology at the University of North Carolina - Chapel
Hill, where he remained until 1996. In 1996, he moved to the
Department of Psychology at the University of North Carolina
Wilmington, and has been there ever since. He achieved his current
rank of Professor in 2005. Dr. Pitts has served on the Editorial
Boards of the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior and The
Behavior Analyst, and routinely reviews for a variety of other
journals, including Behavioural Processes and Psychopharmacology. His
work has been supported by grants from the National Institute on Drug
Abuse, and has been published in journals such as Behavioural
Pharmacology, Behavioural Processes, Journal of the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental
Therapeutics, and Psychopharmacology.
Call for Posters
Posters consist of visual displays of information, usually reporting
empirical research. All posters are reviewed and approved by the
Conference Committee.
Guidelines - Your poster is similar to a condensed version of an APA
report. It should include the same sections, but in an abbreviated
format.
· You will be provided a tabletop for your poster. Your poster should
be free standing or you may bring your own easel.
· Your poster should be about 4' x 6' in size.
· The poster session area will not provide projection equipment,
electrical outlets, etc.
· Posters must only report findings of the research. No advertising or
product identification by brand name is allowed.
· At least one of the authors must be by the poster to answer
attendees' questions during the poster session.
Helpful Hints - The text of your poster should be visible from at
least 1 meter away. As a result, you should use a large font for your
primary text (20 point or larger) and an even larger font for your
headings.
· Avoid fonts that are script or difficult to read.
· Use graphs, and/or tables (preferably color) to show results.
Graphics make your poster more interesting.
· A neutral poster is more amenable to the eye than a brightly colored
background. A splash of color here and there, perhaps highlighting
central finding(s) or provocative results, will make your poster
"stand out" from the crowd.
· Although handouts are not required, it is recommended that you come
prepared with a brief handout that summarizes your presentation that
can be given other attendees (50 copies are recommended).
Poster Submissions Must Be Received by March 1, 2008