Skip to main content
Article
The Motivating Operations Concept: Current Status and Critical Response
The Psychological Record (2014)
  • Sean Laraway, San Jose State University
  • Susan Snycerski, San Jose State University
  • Ryan Olson, Oregon Health and Science University
  • Bernd W. Becker, San Jose State University
  • Alan Poling, Western Michigan University
Abstract
This paper reviews the current status of the Motivating Operation Concept (MOC), followed by a critical response to Whelan and D. Barnes-Holmes (2010), who argued against the MOC and proposed an alternative analysis of motivation, the Consequence-Valuing Operation (CVO). In this paper, we: (a) review the MOC and discuss its conceptual and empirical status, (b) clarify certain aspects of the MOC, (c) correct Whelan and D. Barnes-Holmes’s inaccurate descriptions of the MOC, and (d) critique the CVO and related concepts. We demonstrate that the MOC is a high-impact innovation in behavior analysis that provides a useful theoretical framework for analyses of operant (instrumental) behavior. In contrast, the case made by Whelan and D. Barnes-Holmes for the competing CVO concept suffers from a range of problems. We, therefore, conclude that the MOC provides a superior and more useful behavioral analysis of motivation.
Keywords
  • Motivating operations,
  • Conditioned motivating operations,
  • Establishing operations,
  • Abolishing operations,
  • Evocative effect,
  • Abative effect,
  • Motivation,
  • Consequence valuing operations
Publication Date
September, 2014
DOI
10.1007/s40732-014-0080-5
Publisher Statement
SJSU users: use the following link to login and access this article via SJSU databases.
Citation Information
Sean Laraway, Susan Snycerski, Ryan Olson, Bernd W. Becker, et al.. "The Motivating Operations Concept: Current Status and Critical Response" The Psychological Record Vol. 64 Iss. 3 (2014) p. 601 - 623 ISSN: 2163-3452
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/bernd_becker/17/