EDF5684 Chap.7 Motivating Operations
Motivating Operations
Motivating operations change both the current effectiveness of a consequence and behaviour that has previously produced that consequence. This chapter keeps value-altering effects separate from behaviour-altering effects, then distinguishes establishing from abolishing operations and evocative from abative changes.
It also contrasts motivating operations with discriminative stimuli and consequences, which can all participate in one behavioural episode.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Motivating operations and their two defining effects
- 02
Establishing and abolishing effects on reinforcer value
- 03
Evocative and abative effects on current behaviour
- 04
Unconditioned and conditioned motivating operations
- 05
Motivating operations versus discriminative stimuli
- 06
Value, availability and delivery within one contingency
Worked example · free
Separate a snack MO from the request cue
- +1Identify snack restriction as increasing the snack's current reinforcing effectiveness.
- +1Name that value change a reinforcer-establishing effect.
- +1Identify increased requesting as an evocative effect on behaviour with a relevant history.
- +1Treat eating the snack as reducing reinforcer effectiveness, an abolishing effect.
- +1Treat the later fall in requesting as an abative effect.
- +1Classify the request card as an SD if it signals requests will contact reinforcement.
Key terms
- Motivating Operation
- A condition that changes reinforcer effectiveness and current related behaviour.
- Establishing Operation
- A motivating operation that increases the current effectiveness of a consequence as reinforcement.
- Abolishing Operation
- A motivating operation that decreases the current effectiveness of a consequence as reinforcement.
- Evocative Effect
- An increase in behaviour that has previously produced the now-valued consequence.
- Abative Effect
- A decrease in behaviour that has previously produced the now-less-valued consequence.
Motivating Operations FAQ
What are the two effects of a motivating operation?
The value-altering effect changes how effective a consequence is as a reinforcer. The behaviour-altering effect changes current responding that has previously produced that consequence. A complete MO analysis names both effects and the relevant response history.
How is an MO different from an SD?
An MO changes the value of a consequence and related current behaviour. An SD signals that a particular response has contacted reinforcement in its presence. Value and availability can change independently, even though both events may occur before the response.
Does an establishing operation increase all behaviour?
No. It evokes behaviour with a history of producing the consequence whose value increased. Responses without that learning history do not automatically rise. State the specific reinforcer and response class rather than describing a general increase in motivation.
How can one antecedent have more than one function?
An event may alter the current value of a consequence while another feature of the same situation signals that a response can obtain it. Analyse each proposed function separately. Name the consequence affected by the motivating operation, the response history it momentarily influences and the cue that indicates availability.
Then form counterfactual predictions by changing value while holding availability constant and changing availability while holding value constant. This prevents the broad word antecedent from hiding distinct processes and allows a case to contain both functions when the evidence supports both.
Assessment move
Use two lines for every MO vignette. On line one, write the value effect on a named consequence. On line two, write the current effect on a response that has produced that consequence. Then inspect other antecedents separately for stimulus-control functions. Practise with both establishing and abolishing examples so the abative terms are as fluent as the evocative ones.
Avoid converting naturally occurring conditions into prescriptive deprivation strategies. Expand each example into a four-part table: current condition, consequence whose effectiveness changes, relevant response history and predicted present effect. The consequence must be specific; a condition may establish escape while abolishing the value of another outcome.
Create matched establishing and abolishing cases and use the full pairs value increase with evocation and value decrease with abation until both directions are equally fluent. Next compare the motivating operation with a discriminative stimulus. Hold consequence value constant and change whether a cue signals availability, then hold availability constant and change current value.
Explain the different predictions for where responding occurs and how much consequence effectiveness changes. When a scenario contains both variables, name both rather than forcing one label. For ethical application, study naturally occurring changes and document relevant context instead of proposing deprivation as a teaching shortcut.
Identify uncertainty when access, effort, instruction and motivating conditions shift together. Keep preference measures time-specific and verify reinforcer effectiveness through behaviour. Finish with a counterexample: select an antecedent that changes behaviour through instruction, elicitation or stimulus control without altering consequence value.
Explaining why it is not an MO sharpens the boundary and prevents motivation from becoming an untestable explanation for any momentary change.
Working through Motivating Operations in EDF5684? Sia is AskSia’s AI Education tutor — ask any EDF5684 Motivating Operations question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how EDF5684 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
