Editing Reinforcement (section)

==Criticisms==

The standard definition of behavioral reinforcement has been criticized as [[circular definition|circular]], since it appears to argue that response strength is increased by reinforcement, and defines reinforcement as something that increases response strength (i.e., response strength is increased by things that increase response strength). However, the correct usage<ref>{{cite book |vauthors=Skinner BF |veditors=Epstein R |title=Skinner for the classroom : selected papers |date=1982 |publisher=Research Press |location=Champaign, Ill. |isbn=978-0-87822-261-2 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/skinnerforclassr00skin }}</ref> of reinforcement is that something is a reinforcer ''because'' of its effect on behavior, and not the other way around. It becomes circular if one says that a particular stimulus strengthens behavior because it is a reinforcer, and does not explain why a stimulus is producing that effect on the behavior. Other definitions have been proposed, such as F.D. Sheffield's "consummatory behavior contingent on a response", but these are not broadly used in psychology.<ref>{{cite book | first1 = Franco J. | last1 = Vaccarino | first2 = Bernard B. | last2 = Schiff | first3 = Stephen E. | last3 = Glickman | editor-last1=Mowrer |editor-first1=Robert R. |editor-last2=Klein |editor-first2=Stephen B. | name-list-style = vanc |title=Contemporary learning theories |date=1989 |publisher=Lawrence Erlbaum Associates |location=Hillsdale, N.J. |isbn=978-0-89859-915-2}}</ref>

Increasingly, understanding of the role reinforcers play is moving away from a "strengthening" effect to a "signalling" effect.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Cowie S, Davison M, Elliffe D | title = Reinforcement: food signals the time and location of future food | journal =   Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior| volume = 96 | issue = 1 | pages = 63–86 | date = July 2011 | pmid = 21765546 | pmc = 3136894 | doi = 10.1901/jeab.2011.96-63 }}</ref> That is, the view that reinforcers increase responding because they signal the behaviors that are likely to result in reinforcement.  While in most practical applications, the effect of any given reinforcer will be the same regardless of whether the reinforcer is signalling or strengthening, this approach helps to explain a number of behavioral phenomena including patterns of responding on intermittent reinforcement schedules (fixed interval scallops) and the [[differential outcomes effect]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=McCormack |first1=Jessica |last2=Arnold-Saritepe |first2=Angela |last3=Elliffe |first3=Douglas | name-list-style = vanc |date= June 2017 | title=The differential outcomes effect in children with autism |journal=Behavioral Interventions |volume=32 |issue=4 |pages=357–369 |doi=10.1002/bin.1489 }}</ref> <!--There's more controversies that can be added here.-->