Self-Control

Author(s): Howard Rachlin

Source: Behaviorism, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Spring, 1974), pp. 94-107
Published by: Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27758811 .
Accessed: 21/10/2011 09:40
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Behaviorism.

http://www.jstor.org

Self-control1

State University

of New

York

Howard Rachlin
at Stony Brook

use
to describe
We
the term "self-control"
decisions
between
ordinarily
alternatives arriving at different times. For instance, having a roast-beef sandwich
can
a
for lunch provides a reward now;
having cottage cheese instead
provide
reward tomorrow when I step on the scale. Take the temporal issue away and the
issue of self-control goes away as well.
If itwere
that cottage
suddenly discovered
cheese was just as fattening (and therefore had the same ultimate consequences
for me) as a roast beef sandwich and I still ate the cottage cheese, Iwould have to

admit that I simply liked the cottage cheese better. The decision would become,
one of taste.
like one between blue and brown suits,
simply
are continuous
When the events chosen between
in the sense that they cannot
a
at a
be located in a brief
interval
(e.g., working at
job and being paid
temporal
events differ in
extent.
certain rate) then self-control
the
when
applies
temporal
at an
The primary rewards obtained
by working
job must extend
unpleasant
further in time than the job itself before we ascribe self-control to the worker
are
co
when
he works.
If the
and pleasantness
unpleasantness
completely
not
as
see'
We
self-control
is
worker
involved.
the
would
temporaneous,
weighing
to work
the two factors and
was
Other
choosing
only if the resultant
pleasant.
? to
reward extend further in time
wise, why work? But let the worker's
providing
for his family, enjoying
luxuries, etc. and working versus not working becomes
a matter of self-control.
(JVlischel, 1966; Rotter,
1954) have long
Psychologists
studying self-control
noticed
that self-control is a "now" versus "later" issue. Their subjects show self
control when
they prefer larger rewards in the future to smaller rewards in the
or,
present
symmetrically, avoid greater pain in the future in return for lesser pain

1.

Preparation

For

of

this paper

was

supported

by

a grant

from

the National

Science

Foundation.

helpful comments on a previous draft of this paper I thank G. Ainslie, W. Baum,

E. Erwin,

E.

Fantino,

R. J. Herrnstein,

F. Levine,

G.H.

94

Whitehurst,

and G.T.

Wilson.

Howard

Kachlin

In this context visiting the dentist is showing self-control and not

in the present.
lack of self-control. The hedonic picture looks something
him
shows
like
visiting
two alternatives, one
that of Figure 1. The reason for indecision between
already
to be better than the other, is that the better alternative
is only better in
assumed

don't

visit

dentist

MORE
PAIN

visit

dentist

LESS
PAIN

Figure 1: Hypothetical diagram of the way pain would

without visiting the dentist.

vary on visiting the dentist and

The difference
the long run. The worse
alternative offers immediate benefit.
someone who
is controlling himself and someone who is not controlling
between
himself is thus not in the spatial locus of control (from inside versus from out
seems to
in the
side his skin) as the term "self-control"
temporal locus
imply but
?
how far away from the present must we look to find the source of control.
to ask is how con
of self-control the question
With regard to the establishment
to distant consequences.
trol is shifted from immediate
Again, this is a temporal

as Skinner (1955) has

one.
However,
pointed out, psy
spatial
to events far apart,
to ascribe
have
been
hesitant
temporally,
causality
chologists
from each other. They have translated the action of distant events into present
events inside the organism.
events and
Thus "ego strength," "in
placed the present
to
"resistance
frustration," and other cog
ternalization,"
"subjective
probability,"
terms have made
of self-control.
nitive or motivational
their way into discussions
These terms refer to mediating mechanisms which represent a past or a future event
are not
in the present.
It is my contention
that these mediating
mechanisms
or
to
for the
have
served
self-control.
understand
necessary
They
empirically study
question,

not a

95

Self-control
as a way of
as the ether
bridging
psychologist,
formerly served the physicist,
were
causes and their consequences
when those causes and consequences
between
an
was not believed that
act.
it
which
could
separated by
entity through
causality
was unfilled space.
case of the psy
In the case of the
In
this
the
entity
physicists
interval. As Staddon
this entity is an unfilled temporal
(1973) has
chologists
. . limitation of the
in a recent
in
".
of
concluded
causality
psychology,
analysis
causes of behavior
to
stimuli is without
contiguous
justification.,,
temporally

WHATCAN CAUSE BEHAVIOR?

A
research has recently shown that the cause of
good deal of psychological
can be the
behavior
between
that behavior and events in the environ
relationship
ment
Herrnstein
and Hineline,
1973;
1972;
1966; Majer,
Bloomfield,
(Baum,
one
To
and
take
Herrnstein
and Hineline
Solomon,
1969).
Seligman
example,
a
a
so
set
rat
rate
of
of
for
that
the
(1966)
arranged
contingencies
irregularly
delivered brief electric shocks varied inversely with rate of bar pressing.
If the
rats
came slower;
the
if
faster
shocks
the
slower
shocks
pressed
they pressed
came faster. The rats learned to press the bar
no
although
single bar press avoided
rate
shock.
of
rate
The
bar
and
the
of
shocks were the critical
any single
presses
at an instant of time.
But the rate of a discrete event has no
variables.
meaning
At any instant the event is either occurring (in which case its rate is
or is
infinite)
not
case
rate
which
its
is
2.
Consider
The
(in
occurring
zero).
Figure
pips
of the Herrnstein
represent shocks or bar presses in a hypothetical
replication
Hineline
It is generally true about the bar presses and shocks that
experiment.
the more bar presses, the fewer shocks. But if all the data were not available,
if
an observer
saw what was between M and N, between O and
or
between
just

shocks

il

!
bar

presses

II Mil

II I

0
TIME
Figure 2: Hypothetical pattern of shocks and responses in the Herrnstein-Hineline experiment.
Tne pips on the top line stand for shocks and the pips on the bottom line stand for responses.
The

vertical

dotted

lines

represent

restricted

periods
96

of

observation,

M-N,

0-P

and

Q-R.

Howard

Kachlin

that shocks were causing bar presses, that bar presses

Q and R he might conclude
or
were
an extended
that
the two were unrelated.
view of
causing shocks
Only
us
see the true relation
to
of
the temporal properties
bar presses and shocks allows
a rat in the Herrnstein-Hineline
that presses the bar as
Imagine
experiment
ship.
in Figure 2. We can now ask, "What causes the bar
In the
presses?"
light of the
the cause of the bar presses is the relationship between bar press
above discussion
as it is
ing and shocks
by the rat.
experienced
in the Herrnstein-Hineline
that each bar press costs the
Suppose
experiment
rat something.
We could imagine that the effort of pressing was increased or that
a low
In that case the immediate con
intensity shock followed upon each press.
of
be painful (or effortful) but the long-term
sequences
pressing the bar would
of not pressing the bar would
be still more painful.
The picture
consequences
would be something like that shown in Figure 1.
"visit dentist"
Replace
by "press
bar" and "don't visit dentist" by "don't press bar" and you have a fair picture of
In a more recent
the rat's situation. Will rats press bars under these conditions?

Smith (1973) arranged contingencies

for
experiment, Lambert, Bersh, Hinelineand
a rat so that a press
a
shock
but
avoided
several
produced
single
immediately
con
shocks of equal intensity later on. The rats in the Lambert et al experiment
we say that the rats were
Can
the
bar.
self-control?
sistently pressed
exhibiting
an alternative which
If the criterion for
involves
exhibiting self-control is choosing
over a smaller present
a
were
rats
future
these
then
larger
good
good
exhibiting
a more
in the distant future in favor
self-control;
they avoided
painful experience
in the immediate future.2
of a less painful experience
if, on the other hand, we
or other
insist that exertions of "ego-strength,"
"internalization,"
"expectancy,"
or motivational
events must also go on somewhere within the rat we shall
cognitive
have the difficult task of trying to verify their occurrence.
But such
explanatory
The behavior
efforts are unnecessary.
itself is all the evidence we need that self
is going on. What would we say ifwe found somehow
control
that the rat had
or
not
the appropriate
motivational
did
but
press the bar?
cognitive apparatus
It would
be pointless,
itself. It is the
then, to claim that the rat was controlling
in relation to the contingencies
rat's behavior
imposed that comprises self-control.
Similar arguments apply as well to all human instances of self-control. The way
in which human behavior
is more
than a rat's behavior
is not that
complicated
is controlled
human behavior
from inside while
the rat's behavior
is controlled
events
from outside but that the environmental
controlling human behavior prob
occur over a wider
control the behavior
interval
than
those which
ably
temporal
of the rat. When we refuse the third martini at a party (ifwe do refuse it) it is not
to con
of an exercise of some force within us but part of a response
because
we are offered the drink. The
out
in
time
before
and
after
tingencies spread
widely
wider contingencies
involve events on the way home and the next morning while
the narrow contingencies
involve only events at the party itself. Why we should
act in accordance with wide contingencies
rather than with the narrow ones which
2. Fantino (1966) showed that pigeons could learn to show self-control in a symmetrical
situation with positive reinforcement. The pigeons in Fantino's experiment could obtain an
immediate reward (followed by a penalty) by pecking a red key or they could wait a few
seconds until the key turned green and obtain a reward with no penalty. The pigeons
initially pecked the red key but with six months of training came eventually to wait for
the green

key.

97

Self-control
of the drink is another question, which we shall try to deal
acceptance
It suffices to say now that the question
is answered no better by
later.
to internal events or states than it iswithout
them.
referring
Let us return to the rats in the Herrnstein-Hineline
rats
These
experiment.
were
I
the
bar
few
and
shocks.
pressing
receiving relatively
relatively rapidly
as
the
that
between
the
the
bar
and
shocks
presses
argued
contingency
experienced
rat is the cause of the bar
invoke
by the
pressing. Traditional
psychology would
the cognitive and motivational
mechanisms
What
discussed.
mediating
previously
In order to avoid having an event at one
is the purpose of those mechanisms?
an event at another time the concept of a state of the
time caused
organism
by
is introduced. Events at one time affect the state, and the state affects the behavior.
dictate

with

or
are
The state in question may be motivational
cognitive. Past events
supposed
to govern present events via the motivational
state while future events are
supposed
to govern present events via the cognitive state. Herrnstein
(1969), Bolles
(1972),
and Seligman
and Johnston
have argued against motivational
and for
(1973)
of the bar pressing of rats, but ifwe grant that events
cognitive
explanations
are
in both
events
extended
temporal directions
similarly
directly caused by other
extended
there is no need to refer to either kind of state. The notion that cog
states mediate between past and future events and present
nitive and motivational
It obscures
behavior
is not necessary.
the search for the most direct causes of

it tends to direct that search into the organism instead of into

behavior
because
the past and future.
events which occur
This does not imply that a given act can be manipulated
by
event and the behavior are extended
after the act is over. When the environmental
in time it makes no sense to talk of an environmental
sub-event at one point in
time causing a sub-act at another
as
in time. Each sub-act is to be seen
point
only
it
act
of
the
and
is
the
relation
the
between
causal
part
complete act;
complete
and the complete
event which concerns us.
In Figure 2 a certain
environmental
rate of bar
shocks and bar presses.
pressing is caused by the relationship between
At our level of inquiry no individual bar press is "caused"
at all. It makes as little
sense to
cause of an individual bar press in the
past as it does to place
place the
me who
I like a
the cause in the future.
if
likes the
painting, it is
Analogously,
as a whole.
not
One
could
painting
say whether my left eye liked the lower
corner of the
right
painting.3
With respect to the traditional
between
classical and instrumental
dichotomy
cause
the
notion
that
of
the
behavior
extends into both the past
conditioning,
and future removes the usual
temporal distinction between classical conditioning
?
?
the
reinforcer
the
unconditioned
stimulus
the act) and
(where
precedes
instrumental conditioning
(where the reinforcer follows the act) and concentrates,
as has
Gamzu
and
1972;
1971;
Catania,
(Bloomfield,
recently been suggested
on
one
correlations
between
1973;
1970;
Schwartz,
Rachlin,
Staddon,
1973),
event and another
environmental
and between an environ
(classical conditioning)
mental and a behavior event (instrumental
conditioning).

3.

If we

were

forced

to consider

individual

sub-events

as being

caused

we would

have

to admit

that an event could be changed by a subsequent event. Modern historians recognize that the
facts of the past are not easily separable from their interpretation (their context). If individual
past events were considered in isolation of their context, a modern theory of history which
revises

our

interpretation

of

those

events

in effect,

would,
98

be

changing

them.

Howard

Kachlin

To

is not in the self is not to say that the

say that the origin of self-control
no
or
has
been
has
subtracted out of consideration.
The
organism
properties
of
events
the
determine
which
environmental
properties
biological
organism
events. What has been subtracted out are those psy
control which behavioral
to
as memory,
(as opposed
chological
properties of the organism such
biological)
etc.
serve
to
which
response
expectancy,
strength,
gaps.
only
bridge temporal
are those that serve for reaction
The remaining biological
properties of the organism
as well as
to immediate
If a man
is stabbed
and he
long-term contingencies.
no
one
to
will
be
talk
the
about
of
and
bleeds,
memory
tempted
stabbing
the
of
and
between
response
strength
bleeding
intervening
stabbing
bleeding,

although the properties of his body determined that he would bleed when

events such as his dissatisfaction

But for temporally
extended
with a
stabbed.
bad
traditional
invoke memory,
expectancy
psychological
job,
analysis will
to
cause and effect into immediate
and response
strength in order
bring the
It is certainly something about the man that reacts to the
temporal proximity.
on strike
the
low
pay, the hostile boss, etc., by complaining,
long hours,
going
or
events that
But it is nevertheless
these external temporally extended
quitting.
cause his behavior
and not his immediate memories,
and
response
expectations,
strengths.

cause
often widespread
and narrow
the same behavior.
contingencies
at a
rewards now, in the past and in the future.
job provides
Working
pleasant
The relationship
between
these rewards and work, more
directly than anything
to be done.
events cause
But often temporally extended
else, causes the work
behavior in conflict with that caused by temporally constricted events. When such
the constricted
between
and extended
conflict arises a choice has to be made
of
the
choice
extended
self-control.
The sub
consequences,
consequences
being
no
to "exertion
state
of
be
different
self-control"
may
jective
corresponding
to any difficult choice.
than that corresponding
whether
Deciding
qualitatively
to accept that third cocktail may be more difficult than deciding whether
it is to
the two decisions would
be a martini or a manhattan
but the difference between
Very

be simply that one ismore difficult, not that one is different in kind from the other.
in time is not to
To say that the cause of action can be narrow or widespread
occur.
events
is often a
whenever
have
There
that
effects
say
equal
they may
to
to
constricted
than
attached
The
greater weight
contingencies.
widespread
to
invoke
of
and
and
motivational
theorists
memory
cognitive
certainty
gradients
or
events
in
in
the
far
future. But, given
the reduction
control by
past
explain
to the state of the
not be first
these gradients,
organism and
applied
they need
can
to behavior.
to its behavior.
then
Furthermore,
directly
apply
only
They
many actions, and in the case of humans most of our significant actions, are un
or
We move
from one city to another, get married
related to present causes.
or
not
at
is
of anything that
because
the
divorced, get jobs
quit them
happening
are
the actions
themselves
(even when
very moment we perform these actions
to trace chains of
It has proved difficult and fruitless, moreover,
brief).
secondary
some
reinforcer
reinforcers back from
primary
just in order to bring
presumably
If a man moves
the acts.
from
the reinforcer in temporal
proximity with
on
move
not
to
the day he moves al
of
the
weather
he
Maine
does
because
Florida
The cognitive or motivational
of the weather.
though he may be moving because
causes a certain state in the man and
in Maine
theorists will say that the weather
causes another state in the man and that moving
is rein
in Florida
the weather
99

Self-control
But such states have been
forced by a transition from one state to the other.
and invite freewheeling
difficult to pin down. They are awkward, unparsimonious
terms. Their one convenience,
of
can
in
their
which
theorizing
explain anything
not worth its price.
is
causes and effects into
simply
temporal proximity,
bringing
to Florida
is most parsimoniously
cause of a man's moving
from Maine
The
in Florida ? in terms
inMaine and the weather
in terms of the weather
described
?
occur
and average
of mean
snowfall, etc.
nothing that could
temperatures

a brief
temporal interval.
I am not arguing that there are
on the environment
the
emphasis above
Despite
Like other abilities,
no individual differences
in ability to exercise self-control.
some combination
of genetic and en
self-control undoubtedly
through
develops
issue here.
vs. environment
is not the main
conditions.
vironmental
Heredity
What is at issue is whether the causes of behavior we label self-control are different
within

reveals
in kind from the causes of behavior we label lack of self-control. Analysis
that the two causes differ in degree of temporal extent, not in their place of origin.
TECHNIQUES

OF SELF-CONTROL

The kind of self-control to which we have been referring might be called "brute
is offered it is simply refused.
The
the temptation
When
self-control.
is turned down at the party, the bakery is passed without a purchase, the
etc. The direct cause of such behavior
is
is the long-term
pushed away,
the behavior and its consequences.
correlation between
An objection might be raised that the view espoused here applies well enough to
self-control but not to more sophisticated
brute-force
techniques of self-control
or the
or
Alcoholics
such as those developed
Anonymous
by Weight Watchers,
our own
to
we are
in
life
manipulate
strategies
inventing
constantly
everyday
in which a student might get himself
the following ways
behavior.
Consider
to
study:
to go to the
1.
He
the temptation
studies despite
simply
movies
instead.
He
2.
rewards himself for studying by going to the movies

force"
martini
dessert

afterward.

3.

a
sum of money with
He has previously deposited
fairly large
a friend. He has instructed the friend to check every half-hour
to see that he is
If the friend
studying.
during the evening
not
find him studying, the friend is further instructed to
does
are
to a
send the money
exactly
political party whose views
to
of
those
the
student.
contrary

1 and that only in theory.

far we have discussed
only alternative Number
reserve for the next section
on how self-control
might be
speculations
now
to
turn
are
2
of self
and
and
3.
both
forms
alternatives
brought about,
They
is to increase the likelihood
control because
their object
that behavior will be in
are
accordance
with its long-term consequences.
of
They
fairly representative
of
self-control
often
recommended
behavior
and
be
types
might
by
therapists
called, respectively, self-reinforcement and commitment.
Let us consider self-reinforcement first. A little
analysis reveals that the reinforce
ments given to oneself do not support the behavior upon which
are
contingent.
they
a moment,
our
for
in
the
that
student
increased
his
Suppose,
example
studying by
So

Let

us

100

Kachlin

Howard

to the movies afterward.

cont
that this self-reinforcement
Now,
suppose
going
the social approval
inued but external reinforcers, the good grades, the knowledge,
were withdrawn.
to be gained from
How
long would
studying continue
studying
without
them? What would
the point of studying be? Would going to the movies
as a
to "work"
One does not have
continue
self-imposed reinforcer for studying?
to answer these questions
to do an experiment
In
what sense, then,
negatively.4
was
the movie a reinforcer? This is a critical question because
the test for a re
it can support behavior.
If we take away external re
inforcer must be whether
inforcers leaving only self-reinforcement which
supports no behavior other than
then self-reinforcement
loses its effectiveness.
that involved in its consumption5
It seems likely that self-reinforcement
is a form of secondary
reinforcement.
not because of its
to the movies
have
increased
Going
might
reinforcing
studying
of its stimulus properties.
could be tested
This hypothesis
properties but because
For instance, a
by substituting neutral, but strong, stimuli for self-reinforcers.
a
10
minutes
of
each
who
rewards
after
himself by eating
student
peanut
studying
as well if, instead of eating it, he
to
the
transfers
peanut from
ought
study
simply
one dish to another as a way of
counting 10-minute periods of studying. The ques
tion is empirical, but in the research on self-reinforcement, whether with humans
or animals, it has
rarely been addressed directly.6
to institute a program
A behavior
of self
therapist might ask his patient
for studying as sort of a cast or mold but the therapist might not
reinforcement
The program might start with going to
be satisfied until the cast was removed.
the movies as a self-reinforcer, switch to a more convenient and less time consum
ing activity like eating peanuts after each 10 minutes of studying, then switch to a
con
then nothing.
program of record-keeping,
Presumably,
by this time, the
between
and
would
be
tingency
grades
controlling
studying
studying directly.
to prior supports.
The point is that the
might be treated by returning
Relapses
to peanuts to
to
from going to the movies
sequence
record-keeping
nothing may
not be a withdrawal
of reinforcement but a withdrawal
of stimuli.
I did just do that," per
Self-reinforcement
may be like saying to oneself "Yes.
same function for the
as the feedback click which we arrange
the
subject
forming
a
to tell the
events affects
pigeon it has just pecked
key. if the correlation between
intense
other
correlations
between
stimuli
will affect
behavior,
things being equal,

4. Yet,

self-reinforce

recently

ment

has

as

emerged

an

area

1971) and even animals (Mahoney and Bandura, 1972).

of

study

with

humans

(Bandura

5. The behavior involved in eating, chewing and swallowing, for instance, can be thought of as
reinforced

by

the digestion
of food.
Restricted
common
use
But the more

interesting
concept.
where
the behavior

is not

to such

of

is a valid and
self-reinforcement
events,
the term is in the sense of example
number
2

consummatory.

6. Bandura and Perloff (1967) had children set their own criterion for a task (turning a crank)
and then reward themselves with tokens for reaching their own criterion. The children who set
their own criterion turned as fast as those childrenwhose criterionwas set for them (the latter
group was also given tokens instead of rewarding themselves). The interesting part of this
experiment is the setting of the criterion, which is a question of commitment (Why didn't the
children set the criterion as low as possible?), not the self-reward. Once the criterion was set
the children would have been disobeying the rules of the "game" (they were told that they

were

evaluating

a game)

had

they

rewarded

themselves

101

without

reaching

criterion.

Self-control
behavior more than will correlations between weak stimuli. The feedback involved
in self-reinforcement may well be more
intense than the normal proprioceptive
and kinesthetic
of most behavior.
Where
feedback
this is not the case, self
reinforcement
should not work.
is used the way
the term "self-reinforcement"
Occasionally
cognitive and
of self-control have been used, to bring cause
motivational
internal mechanisms
and effect into temporal contiguity.
theorists
If, as the cognitive and motivational
assume, reinforcement must come immediately after the act being reinforced but
no immediate external reinforcer is observed then one has to be invented. Covert
is a
It
of un
self-reinforcement
likely candidate.
provides all the advantages
observable
the
of
while
behavioral
flavor
(hence, untestable)
concepts
preserving
But covert self-reinforcement,
rather than lending rigor to a basically
terminology.
to the
is in danger of lending vagueness
vague underlying
concept,
basically
it
borrows.
behavioral
rigorous
terminology
Now
let us turn to the sort of involved strategies exemplified
by the third
an
to send his
where
the
student
has
made
with
his
friend
alternative,
agreement
an
to
not
if
he
does
This
self-control
money
opposing
political party
study.
It is rather like the signing of a contract
involves a commitment.
specifying various
in the future and setting forth penalties for failure to
kinds of performance
comply.
(1970) and Leonard Green and I (1972) have argued that commit
George Ainslie
ment of this kind follows from the
of choice advanced by
simple descriptions
We
Herrnstein
that
and
showed
internal
(1965)
(1970).
Logan
complicated
by
were not necessary
to
rats
mechanisms
that
and
commitment;
pigeons
explain
were
con
of employing
commitment
strategies in situations where the
capable
were
involved
and
his
Ainslie's
argument
tingencies
experiment
straightforward.
differ in their detail from Green's and mine, but the main arguments are the same

and will be summarized here.

are valuable, but
Let us suppose
of
that the long-term consequences
studying
not
the
of
is that,
value
rises
above
dilemma
The
occasionally
studying
studying.
of the short-term aversive consequences
of studying, the time in the
because
presence of the stimuli which make it possible to study (a quiet room with a desk,
a book, a
not
pad and sharpened pencils) is the very time that the value of
study
soon
as
are
rises
above
As
in
those
while
stimuli
removed, say,
ing
studying.
lying
assumes its usual
bed in the morning,
is
the value of
This
high place.
studying
where a commitment
the
contract
is
The
is
offered
useful.
student
strategy
(the
in alternative Number
commitment
outlined
3 at the beginning of this section).
commitment
is offered and
at a time when the value of
accepted
studying is
? to
to
The
commitment
of
the
is
effect
the
choice
student's
reduce
high.
compel
him to
study.
a
decision process in the case of alter
Figure 3 is diagram of the commitment
native 3. There are two decisions
in question.
Decision X takes place in the even
to
Y takes
when
is
the
student
Decision
ing
supposed
study.
place the morning
at time X
not
before.
The decision
at
is between
and
studying
studying. But
time X the short term consequences
of not studying will determine the student's
choice.
Thus, not studying will be the invariable result. The other decision at
to agree to the commitment.
time Y is whether
the commitment
is ef
Assuming
not tolerate the
fective (that the student
to
will
of
his
money
absolutely
sending
an
to
is equivalent
opposing
political party) instituting the commitment
choosing

The

102

Howard

Kachlin

TIME I

Figure 3: Flow diagram of commitment to study. Choice at X isbetween studying immediately

and not studying. It is assumed that a student would not study at X. Choice at Y is between
having a choice later (top arm) and being forced to study later (bottom arm). A student who
would not study at X might nevertheless commit himself to study by choosing the lower arm at Y.

to
the lower branch of Figure 3, to
the consequences
experiencing
studying, and
thereof. But, given the value structure as we have outlined
it, at time Y the value
of studying is higher than that of not
agree
studying and the student must
to the commitment.
Once
the commitment
is available
are made
and once the contingencies
effec
commitment
behavior
To
follows
that exercise of
tive,
automatically.
emphasize
was
not
on ego
commitment
to
resistance
dependent
strength, internalization,
or
or
other
motivational
Ainslie
frustration,
apparatus,
cognitive
sophisticated
showed with rats, and Green and I, with pigeons,
that
relatively naive animals
would
The experiment Green and I did
exhibit commitment.
closely follows the
schema of Figure 3. The choice at Xfor our pigeons was between a small immediate

103

Self-control
a
to not
(analogous
studying in Figure 3) and
larger food reward
to
in
several
seconds
Figure 3). The pigeons in
delayed by
(analogous
studying
at
at
X.
Y, several seconds before
But,
variably chose the small immediate reward
not to
X, when they could choose to restrict subsequent
alternatives,
they chose
?
a
have
choice
the larger
they chose the bottom branch of Figure 3 and obtained
reward. The values of the delays and amounts were determined by
(but delayed)
Herrnstein's
model
for choice which
that preference
varies
(1970)
predicts
amount and
with
with
The
model
further
directly
inversely
predicts that
delay.7
commitment will be more
the
the
the
greater
likely
temporal separation between
choices at Y and X. This was also confirmed.
?
It is necessary to
two
the exercise of the com
operations
distinguish between
mitment strategy and the invention of the strategy. While the exercise of commit
ment has
to do with
nothing
higher mental processes, the invention of commitment
is
matter.
another
The invention may be a higher mental process (how
strategies
ever that is
it
and
defined)
may be performed by the user (the student) or another
or
a commitment
friend
his
person
(his
strategy is not
therapist) but inventing
etc.
it
Neither
self-control.
does
take
internalization,
exercising
ego strength,
to invent a self-control strategy any more than these
were necessary
to
qualities
invent the cotton gin. Self-control
is done by using the strategy so that one's be
havior will be in accordance
with its long-term consequences.
And use of the
occurs
once
an
is
effective
invented.
strategy
strategy
automatically
are related to self
To
both self-reinforcement
and commitment
summarize,
control because
both
increase
the
that
will be controlled
likelihood
behavior
they
its
Self-reinforcement
relation between
the
makes
long-term consequences.
by
more vivid
behavior
and its consequences
stimuli
correlated with
by providing
those consequences.
Commitment
restricts choice so that behavior will automatic
ally conform to long-term consequences.
food

reward

TEACHING

SELF-CONTROL

we shall have little to

say in this section. Most of the research
Unfortunately,
self-control has been on the personality
correlates of people who are good at
it
it better than the young (Mischel,
The
themselves.
do
seems,
old,
controlling
sane
the
better
than
the
1958),
(Klein, 1967), the intelligent better
schizophrenic
than the unintelligent
(Mischel and Metzner,
1962), the rich better than the poor
etc.
to have.
is a good
self-control
But
(Maitland,
1967),
Obviously,
thing
events which can generate self-control (i.e., shift the cause of be
environmental
havior from short-term to
long-term events) have not been systematically examined.
The
to the
areas:
direct
preceding
investigation
analysis would
following

on

7. According to Herrnstein's model, the relative value of two activities is:

A

amount

and

delay

of

reinforcement.

In our

experiment,

alternative

A2 Dl

1 was

wnere

a small

im

reward and alternative 2 a larger delayed reward. A1/A2 always equalled 0.5, and
VI =
D2 was always 4 seconds greater than Dl.
At choice X, referring to Figure 3,
0.5
that
the
small
immediate
reward
be
would
At
chosen.
choice
Y, 10
(^ )= infinity,predicting
VI =
=
seconds prior,
0.5 (4+10/0+10)
0.7 predicting that the large delayed reward would be

mediate

chosen.

104

Howard

Kachlin

one
practice with
controlling
long-term contingencies
activi
will
control
other
that
the
likelihood
increase
they
activity
that there are "addictive
ties? The notion
personalities"
implies
con
to
cannot or do not
that some people
long-term
respond
areas. Can
to behave
in
be
behavioral
several
taught
they
tingencies
a per
in accordance
with these contingencies?
Perhaps
generally
son who has learned not to overeat will have an easier time learning
not to smoke.
This implies that the way to begin in the cure of
harmful habits may be through control of other habits. For instance,
alcoholics might first be trained to keep their weight under control
or to stop
Control of eating an ice cream sundae by the
smoking.
to control of getting drunk
next
day's consequences
might transfer
next
the
day's consequences.
by
of certain
2.
and
The
consequences
long-term antecedents
events
other events by techniques
those
of
from
be
isolated
might
to make
them more vivid or salient. The subject is in pretty much
of events controlling his
the same state with respect to observation
as the observer
is. The way that we know better than
behavior
is not that we have access to
anyone else what causes our behavior
we have more
our internal sources of control but
simply that
data.
behavioral
or written
and timing of events with mechanical
Counting
aids and the techniques of self-reinforcement
(and self-punishment)
are, as we have indicated before, ways to increase the salience of
1.

Does

behavior
and its consequences.
between
the relationship
Simply
to be as effective in short-term
found
been
has
calories
counting
as self-reward, external monetary
reward, aversive
weight reduction
in
relaxation
connection
with
and
food,
training
imagery
reason for
The
and
Wilson
1973).
Thorpe,
Tracey,
(Romanczyk,
this may be that the reward for eating less is losing weight regardless
the two events. These
of the subsidiary rewards inserted between
no more than
the relation between
do
rewards
emphasize
subsidiary
as well
a function
and
just
by
performed
eating
losing weight,
calories.
counting
Like self
commitment
3.
strategies may be instituted.
Finally,
in
be
force
reinforcement
kept
permanently.
strategies they may
as
is guaranteed
to
Behavior
long-term contingencies
according
are in force.
as
clock
alarm
If I habitually
keep my
long
they
across the room from my bed, I will have to get out of bed every
to turn it off. This technique of getting myself up in the
morning
But often
one that can
is
morning
conveniently be used every day.
or expensive
awkward
involve
commitment
apparatus,
strategies
are commitments
and because
they limit choice.
Ironically,
they
behave
itmay be better to occasionally
in the ultimate
term,
long
to act
to short-term contingencies
(i.e.,
impulsively).
according
and may be
such behavior
does not allow
commitment
Rigid
Commitment
for that reason.
undesirable
strategies thus might
into conformity
often be instituted only to bring behavior
initially
are ex
Once
these consequences
with long term consequences.

105

Self-control
serve to maintain
behavior
by themselves.
they may
perienced
For instance, consider the following studies being done by G. T.
at Rutgers
Research
Behavior
Wilson
Laboratory.
University's
The aim of these studies is to bring control outside

of the laboratory

and into the everyday life of the alcoholic by a seriesof graded

It has been found easy to control drinking in the

live together for several weeks
laboratory (atRutgers, four alcoholics
?
severe electric shock
at a time)
but this
following each drink
by
not transfer to the
life
of
the
alone
will
alco
everyday
procedure
In future studies alcoholics will be asked to commit them
holic.
a "contract" which
selves in the morning
(the "morning after") to
commitments.

specifies that they be shocked after each drink they take that

the commitment
could be made each day and
Eventually
cease
in
the
drinking may
laboratory setting. The control of drink
have
would
been
transferred
from the immediate shock to the
ing
seems more
between
long-term relationship
drinking and shock. It
that
in
will
this way
carry over to
likely
non-drinking established
everyday life, where temporally extended rewards for non-drinking
are present in other forms, than would
non-drinking established by
immediate
for each drink, a form of contingency
punishment
absent from everyday life.
notoriously
night.

Itmay be naive to expect that harmful habits with

complex and varied etiologies
should be curable by such a straightforward technique but, straightforward as the
not yet been tried,
a
to focus
technique may be, it has
perhaps because of
tendency
on the inner
when
with
of
If
faced
this
self-control.
organism
problems
technique
or a similar one does work,
it will be the best kind of evidence
that such a
focus

is misplaced.

REFERENCES
Ainslie, G. The learningof an op?rant to limit the subject's own future behavior. Described
in H. Rachlin, Introduction to modern behaviorism
San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1970.
Bandura,

A.

Vicarious

New

reinforcement.

York:

and

self-reinforcement

Academic

Press,

1971.

In R.
processes.
Pp. 228-278.

Glaser

(Ed.),

The

nature

of

Bandura, A. and Perloff, B. Relative efficacy of se If-monitored and externally imposed

reinforcement systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 7, 111-116.
Baum, W.M. The correlation based law of effect. Journal of theExperimental Analysis of
Behavior, 1973,20, 137-153.
Bloomfield, T.M. Reinforcement schedules: Contingency or contiguity. In R.M. Gilbert,
and J.R. Millenson (Eds.), Reinforcement: Behavioral Analysis. New York: Academic Press,
1972. Pp. 165-208.
Bolles, R.C.
Reinforcement, expectancy, and learning. Psychological Review, 1972,
79, 394-410.
Catania,

A.C.

Fantino,

E.

Elicitation,

reinforcement

and

Immediate

reward

followed

control.

stimulus

of reinforcement. New York: Academic Press, 1971.

by

In R. Glazer

Pp. 196-211.

extinction

vs.

later

reward

(Ed.),

without

The

nature

extinction.

Psychonomic Science, 1966, 6t 233-234.

Gamzu, E. and Schwartz, B. The maintenance of key pecking by stimulus-contingent and
response-independent food presentation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,
1973,79, 65-73.
Herrnstein, R.J. Method and theory in the study of avoidance. Psychological Review,
1969, 76, 46-69.

106

Howard

Herrnstein,

R.J.

and

P.N.

Hineline,

Rachlin
as

reinforcement

Negative

shock-frequency

reduction.

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1966, 9, 421-435.

Klein, R.H. The effects of length of delay interval and expectancy control on preferences
for delayed rewards in children and normals and schizophrenic adults. Dissertation Abstracts,
1967,2S, 1199.
Avoidance conditioning with
Lambert, J.V., Bersh, P.J., Hineline, P.M. and Smith, G.D.
shock contingent upon the avoidance response. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of
Behavior, 1973, i9, 361-367.
Logan, F.A. Decision making by rats: Delay versus amount of reward. Journal of Compara
tive and Physiological Psychology, 1965,59, 246-251.
Mahoney, M.J. and Bandura, A. Self-reinforcement in the pigeon. Learning and Motivation,
1972,5, 293-303.
Maier,

S.F.,

Seligman,

M.E.P.

and

R.L.

Solomon,

Pavlovian

fear

conditioning

and

learned

helplessness. In B.A. Campbell and R.M. Church (Eds.), Punishment and aversive behavior
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969. Pp. 299-343.
Maitland, S. Time perspective, frustration failure and delay of gratification inmiddle-class
and

lower-class

children

from

organized

and

disorganized

families.

Dissertation

Abstracts,

3676-3677.
1967,27(B),
Mischel, W. Preference for delayed reinforcement: An experimental study of a cultural
observation. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958,56,57-61.
Mischel, W. Theory and research on the antecedents of self-imposed delay of reward. In
B.A. M?her (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research. Vol. 3. New York: Academic
Press, 1966. Pp. 85-132.
Mischel, W. and Metzner, R. Preference for delayed reward as a function of age, intelligence
and length of delay interval. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 64, 425-431.
Rachlin, H.C. Introduction to modern behaviorism San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1970.
Rachlin, H. and Green, L. Commitment, choice and self-control. Journal of theExperimental
Analysis of Behavior, 1972, 17, 15-22.
Romanczyk,

R.G.,

Tracey,

D.A.,

Wilson,

G.T.

and

Thorpe,

G.L.

Behavioral

techniques

in

the treatment of obesity: A comparative analysis. 1973, unpublished manuscript.

Rotter, J.B. Social learning and clinical psychology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1954.
Seligman, M.E.P., and Johnston, J.C. Does teleology have a place in conditioning. In F.J.
McGuigan and D.B. Lumsden (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to conditioning and learning.
New York: Halsted Press, 1973.
Skinner, B.F. What is psychotic behavior? Theory and treatment of the psychoses: Some
newer aspects. Paper presented at thededication of theRenard Hospital, St. Louis, October, 1955.
Staddon, J.E.R. On the notion of cause, with applications to behaviorism. Behaviorism,
1973,7, 25-64.

107