J. Behav. ?'her. & Exp. Psychlat. Voi. 3, pp. 7-14. Pergamon Press, 1972. Printed in Great Britain.

COVERT BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION: AN EXPERIMENTAL

ANALOGUE*t
MICHAEL J. MAHONI~, CARL E. T H O ~ a n d BRIAN G . DANAHER:~
Stanford University

Summary--Data are presented from two experiments investigating the modifiability of covert
responses. We chose imagery as the target behavior because of its significant role in behavior
therapy techniques. Recent evidence on the facilitative effects of imagery in paired-associate
learning enabled us to corroborate self-reports of covert responding. In an attempt to control
the frequency of imagery, subjects were either reinforced or punished for self-reports of
specific associate methods. The data indicated predictable frequency changes in imagery
as a function of external contingency arrangements. An analysis of differential recall
performance substantiated subjects' self-reports by showing a consistent superiority on
imagined (versus non-imagined) items. These findings are interpreted as supportive of the
homogeneity assumption regarding overt and covert behavior principles. Clinical
implications are briefly discussed.

MODIFYING specific internal responses by be- Controlled experimentation, however, on the

havioral techniques has only recently begun to
receive controlled empirical attention. In their
work on the instrumental conditioning of
autonomic responses, Miller (1969, 1970) and
Shapiro (e.g. Shapiro et al., 1969) have demon-
strated that a variety of these behaviors can be
directly and significantly altered. Research in
bio-fcedback training (e.g. Nowles and Kamiya,
in press) and autogenic training (Luthe, 1970)
has also indicated the modifiability of internal
responses.
Higher process covert behaviors (e.g. thoughts
and images) have long been utilized by behavior
therapists as treatment variables (e.g. in de-
sensitization, implosion, and covert sensitiza-
tion). The therapeutic promise of positive and
negative thoughts and images has been presented
by Cautela (1970, 1971). Likewise, Thoresen
(1971) has discussed the relevance of several
behavioral techniques to increase "humanistic"
behavior by modifying covert response patterns.
modifiability of covert cognitive behaviors has
been modest. This may be due in part to both
methodological and ideological issues (Mahoney,
1970). Homme (1965) was one of the early
workers to recognize the need for applied
experimentation in this area. He followed the
lead of Skinner (1963), among others, in empha-
sizing the homogeneity assumption--i.e, that
overt and covert behaviors obey identical laws.
Unfortunately, that assumption has never been
empirically tested. By their very definition covert
behaviors are unobservable so that no direct
evidence can be gathered on their functional
relations. Thus, the homogeneity assumption
has persevered and those few researchers who
have delved into covert behavior modification
have relied--of necessity--on the honesty and
reliability of self-reports.
The present study was an attempt to inves-
tigate the homogeneity assumption via a covert
behavior whose occurrence could be reliably

*Requests for reprints should be addressed to Michael J. Mahoney, Department of Psychology, Stanford University,
Stanford, California 94305.
tThis research was supported by the Personal Competencies Project (0506) of the Stanford Center for Research
and Development in Teaching. The authors would like to thank G. C. Davision, A. Bandura, and G. H. Bower
for their comments and suggestions.
~Now at the University of Oregon.
7
8 M I C H A E L J. M A H O N E Y , C A R L E. T H O R E S E N a n d B R I A N G. D A N A H E R
inferred from observable data. By manipulating
the external consequences of that covert be-
havior, we obtained evidence bearing on its
modifiability. Imagery (I) was chosen as an ideal
behavior for experimental purposes both because
of its prominence in behavior therapy techniques
and because of recent evidence showing it to be
one of the few covert behaviors for which
reliability checks are possible. Although no un-
equivocal physical index of I has been found, a
performance index has shown itself to be reliably
related to such behavior (Bower, in press).
Numerous researchers have shown that I sig-
nificantly facilitates recall performance when
used as a mediator in paired-associate learning
tasks (e.g. Bower, 1970, in press; Paivio, 1969;
Paivio and Yuille, 1967, 1969; Reese, 1965).
These workers have shown that when I is used
in paired-associate learning, recall performance
is dramatically greater than when any other form
of mediation is employed (e.g. repetition). Self-
reports were, of course, required in these
studies. However, a highly replicable and
unmistakable performance superiority has
consistently been associated with self-reports
of I in such experiments. We therefore decided
that I would serve as a target behavior for
modification and that we would use recall
performance on a paired-associate learning task
as a reliability check on the self-reported
occurrence of I.
EXPERIMENT I:
POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT
Subjects. Subjects for the present study were
drawn from an introductory psychology course
at Stanford University. Although all subjects
had the opportunity to earn money from the
experiment, its monetary potential was not
advertised and all participants were asked to
refrain from discussing the experiment with
classmates. The experiment was described as one
involving "verbal learning".
Procedure. Subjects in this experiment (four
male, six female) were seated at a table in front
of a one-way mirror through which the experi-
menter monitored their overt responses. A box-
like coin dispensing apparatus occupied the
right-hand corner of the table. All experimental
instructions, paired-associate lists, and recall
tests were delivered via a tape recorder (Sony
Model TC-18). The experimenter operated
both the tape recorder and the consequation
apparatus by remote control. The initial instruc-
tions introduced the experiment as an attempt
to understand how people associate words. The
specific procedure followed that of a standard
paired-associate learning task--i.e, two nouns
were associated and a later recall test presented
the first member of a pair whereupon the subject
was required to recall its associate. The learning
materials were four lists of 15 paired-associates
which had been employed in the previously
cited research of Bower and his co-workers. The
pairs were presented at a 2 : 2 sec rate with an
8 sec interval. Each subject could use any of
four associative methods: imagery, sentence,
repetition, and other. These were designated on
an answer sheet by the initials ' T ' , "S", " R " ,
and "O". When they had chosen to associate a
particular noun pair with one of the above
methods, subjects were to write the initial of the
associative method on their answer sheet. This
allowed the experimenter--who observed their
performance through a one-way mirror--to
monitor and (when appropriate) consequate
their self-reported covert behavior.
After the initial experimental instructions, a
list of 15 paired associates was presented. No
consequences were given for self-reported cog-
nitive behaviors in this phase of the experiment.
Rather, it served as a baseline estimate of the
frequency of various covert mediating responses.
Thereafter, an intervention was announced by
the following taped instructions:
During the remainder of the experiment you will be
awarded money whenever the method by which you
choose to associate a n o u n pair corresponds to a pre-
established standard. Notice that there is a large box
located on the desk in front of you. A dime will be
dispensed from that box whenever your choice of
associative method is considered appropriate. Thus,
for example, you might receive a dime for using the
repetition method to associate a particular n o u n pair.
Which method is appropriate may vary from pair to
pair or list to list. Y o u should attempt to earn as many
dimes as possible and to vary your choice of associative
 COVERT BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION: AN EXPERIMENTAL ANALOGUE
method so as to maximize your earnings. You will, of
course, be allowed to keep whatever money you have
earned at the end of the experiment.
Depending on their self-reported baseline fre-
quency of I behavior, subjects were assigned to
one of two conditions. When baseline imaging
was infrequent (less than 50 per cent), they were
assigned to an Imagery-Repetition-Imagery
(IRI) condition. Conversely, subjects with high
frequency baseline imaging (greater than
50 per cent) were assigned to a Repetition-
Imagery-Repetition (RIR) condition. In each of
these groups (N--5=5) the targeted covert
behavior was reinforced, then extinguished, and
then reinforced again. After their baseline phase,
IRI subjects received dimes for self-reported I
during the second list of paired-associates.
During the third list, the mediating response of
repetition (R) was reinforced. On the final list,
I responses were again rewarded. The converse
was true of RIR subjects--i.e, after baseline,
R responses, then I responses, and then R
responses were reinforced during lists two,
three, and four respectively. The experimental
paradigm was intended to parallel conventional
research designs in the experimental analysis of
behavior. After an initial frequency estimate of
15
Group curves
+ A
._E IC
o
+
5
0 1
Baseline
FIG. 1. Mean frequency of imagery when subjects were alternately reinforced for self-reports of imagery (I)
9
a specific (covert) behavior was obtained, con-
ditions were implemented which were designed
to successively increase, decrease, and again
increase the targeted behavior. The four paired-
associate lists corresponded to the phases of
baseline, intervention, reversal, and re-interven-
tion which characterize the empirical case study,
In accordance with their assigned conditions,
subjects received dimes during the remainder of
the experiment for self-reports of I or R
behavior. A recall test for all 60 paired-associates
was then given. It was necessary to delay the
recall test until the end of experimental manipu-
lations because previous research had indicated
the irreversibility of I behavior once its recall
superiority had been demonstrated (Tieman,
personal communication). Following the recall
test, each subject was given his earnings and
asked (1) if he were aware of the experimental
contingencies, and (2) if he had been consist-
ently honest in reporting the covert associative
methods he employed.
RESULTS
The results of the first experiment are pre-
sented in Fig. 1. The mean frequency of
self-reported I behaviors for each group reflect
Reinforcement
e - - e I R I N=5
c---o RIR N =5
/ \
/
7,\
V ",
. 1 t t
Intervention ReverSal Re- ~tervention
Experimental phase
or
repetition (R).
10 MICHAEL J. MAHONEY, CARL E. THORESEN and BRIAN O. D A N A H ER

a predictable variation depending on experi- A quantitative index of the power of the

mental phase. Thus, for IRI subjects, I frequency
increased during the reinforcement phase, de-
creased during reversal, and increased again
when I reinforcement was resumed. The converse
was true in the RIR group. In three instances
the coin dispensing apparatus jammed but sub-
jects continued responding to its buzz. It should
be noted that the group curves presented in
Fig. 1 are very representative of individual
response curves. However, as an illustration of
inter-subject variability, Fig. 2 shows the indi-
vidual curves of subjects whose responding
conformed most or least to the experimental
contingencies. During debriefing, one of the
non-conforming subjects (S No. 16) indicated
that she had felt negatively about being awarded
money for her performance.
Individual curves
experimental contingencies was obtained by
comparing the number of predicted (directional)
frequency transitions with those actually ob-
served. Each subject's I behavior was expected
to increase, decrease, and then increase (or the
converse depending on condition). With 10
subjects, a total of 30 1 transitions were expected.
Of those 30, 23 were in the predicted direction
and three showedno change. A sign test (Siegel,
1956) reveals these transitions to be significant
at the 0.001 level (two-tailed).
The recall performance for each subject was
evaluated by comparing percentage of recall on
imaged items to percentage of recall on non-
imaged items. All 10 subjects showed superior
recall for items associated via imagery (sign test
P:0.002, two tailed). Considerable variability
Reinforcement
-- cIRI
c,--.. RIR

15 R ~)St6
\ ,,,, /
I0 \ / ' , 1
Y Y
"\ I\

I I ~ Q I
.g Boseline Tntervention Reversol Re-inlervenfion

g
!
h

lO

I I I ~S~k3.. I
Bosel'ine Intervention Reverse! Re-interventior~

Experimental phase
PIe. 2. Individual response curves of subjects whose performance conformed most (upper figure) or least (lower
figure) to the reinforcement contingencies,
 COVERT BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION: AN EXPERIMENTAL ANALOGUE 11

was observed in the relative superiority of I as much of your $4.00 as you can and to vary your choice
of associative method in such a way as to maximize
an associative method. Over all 10 subjects, your earnings. You will, of course, be allowed to keep
I-recall averaged 40 per cent whereas non-I- whatever money you have earned at the end of the
experiment.
recall averaged 22 per cent. Most subjects
reported awareness o f the experimental contin- Thereafter, the consequation apparatus was
gencies. Two individuals in the R I R condition operated whenever the targeted decelerative
indicated that they had occasionally reported I behavior was reported. IRI subjects were pun-
when they had in fact used some other asso- ished for imaging on the second list, for
ciative method. A within-subject analysis of repeating on the third, and for imaging on the
their recall difference (per cent I-recall minus fourth. RIR subjects were exposed to the con-
per cent non-I,recall) revealed it to be con- verse of these conditions. The recall test and
siderably less than that o f subjects who said they debriefing procedures o f Experiment I were
had been consistent in their self-reports of covert employed.
behavior (10"5 per cent versus 24-7 per cent
respectively). This, o f course, would be expected RESULTS
if non-I-recall were being inflated by surreptitious The results o f the second experiment are
imaging. presented in Fig. 3, Again, group curves are
employed both for simplicity and because of the
E X P E R I M E N T II: P U N I S H M E N T remarkable correspondence between individual
Subjects. Subjects were again recruited from and group performances. The degree o f inter-
an introductory psychology course at Stanford subject variability is illustrated in Fig. 4 which
University. depicts the two most extreme individual per-
Procedure. The general paradigm o f Experi- formances in each group. The least conforming
ment I was employed except that subjects (six subject (S No. 9) indicated during debriefing
male, six female) were alternatively punished for that he had intentionally responded contrary to
self-reports of I and R behavior in paired- the contingencies to show that "he wasn't so
associate learning. The optional associative easily managed". It is interesting to note the
methods were restricted to I and R in order to consistency with which all other punishment
enhance the informative feedback o f negative subjects performed. S No. 20, the least con-
consequation. The paired-associate lists o f forming R I R subject, responded very consist-
Experiment I were employed and subjects were ently with experimental conditions. Likewise,
assigned to an IRI or an R I R punishment con- the correspondence between the reinforcement
dition depending on the self-reported baseline and punishment data are striking (compare
frequency of the covert target behaviors. After Figs. 1 and 3).
baseline, the following taped instructions were The punishment contingencies were found to
presented: be extremely effective in altering response fre-
quency. Of the 36 predicted I transitions for
During the remainder of the experiment you will hear individual subjects, 34 were in the expected
a noise whenever the method by which you choose to
associate a noun pair corresponds to a pre-established direction and one showed no change (sign test
standard. Notice that there is a large box located on P<0-001, two-tailed). A within-subject com-
the desk in front of you. The noise will come from that
box whenever your choice of associative method is parison o f I-recall showed the former to be
considered inappropriate. Thus, for example, you superior in 11 o f 12 cases (sign test P < 0 . 0 0 1 ,
might hear the noise for using the repetition method
to associate a particular n o u n pair. You are presently two-tailed). The recall difference for the 12th
the recipient of $4.00 cash for signing up and attending subject was zero. Averaged across individuals,
today's experiment. Each time you hear the noise
indicating you have chosen the inappropriate associative I-recall was 42 per cent as compared to 25-5 per
method, a quarter will be subtracted from your $4.00. cent for non-I items. As in Experiment I, most
Which method is inappropriate may vary from pair to
pair or list to list. You should attempt to maintain as subjects were able to describe the experimental
12 MICHAEL Jo MAHONEY, CARL E. THORESEN and BRIAN G. D A N A H E R

Punishment
*--e IRI N=7
Group curves o---o RIR N=5

/
P
/
o ;. /
o~
E
10
'k/" .,-"\ \ / /\ i
o
JN '/ / \o
N / ' ,"
/ / ,'
S

:E
V '\ i \ I

0 ] I I I i
Baseline Intervention Reversal Re-intervention
Experimental phase
FIG. 3. Mean frequency of imagery when subjects were alternately punished for salt-reports of imagery (I) or
repetition (R).
Punishment
e----e IRI
Individual curves
o---o RIR

/e 75#12

10
", A / \ "
V V Y
5
,,'\ /,,, / \
==
.E 0
' ,v V \,...
1,, " I I , i , I
Baseline Intervention Reversal Re-intervention

g
u2
IO

,/ eS~9
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ /

I 1 I I I
Boleline In'tervent'ion Reversal Re- in'tervenfion
Experimental iohose
FIG. 4. Individual response curves of subjects whose performance conformed most (upper figure) or least (lower
figure) to the punishment contingencies.
 COVERT BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION: A N EXPERIMENTAL ANALOGUE 13

contingencies as debriefing. Two of the IRI (R) can become a boring mode of associative
punishment subjects reported that they had learning. This speculation is suggested by the
occasionally marked I when they were in fact research of Paivio and Yuille (1969) who found
employing R as an associative method. Four that subjects soon tired of R as a mediating
others admitted having frequently misrepre- response. It is possible that misrepresentation is
sented their covert behavior. An analysis of their less frequent in clinical situations involving
recall difference revealed that highly misrepre- motivated volunteers or clients. Nevertheless,
sentative subjects showed the least difference in the present data suggest that therapists working
recall performance (20-5 per cent). Subjects with covert response patterns would do well to
reporting occasional misrepresentations showed remember that at least t w o behaviors are being
moderate superiority (25.0 per cent), and the manipulated---one overt (e.g. verbal reports)
single IRI subject who said he had been con- and one covert (e.g. imagery). Their correspond-
sistent in his self-reports showed the greatest ence can only be cautiously presumed until
difference (27.0 per cent). related overt indices provide substantiation.
The implications of the present study for
DISCUSSION covert behavior modifiers are twofold: (1) some
The foregoing results lend support to the covert (cognitive) behaviors can be modified by
contention that covert behaviors are functionally their consequences, and (2) overt behavioral
related to their consequences. The covert re- indices may be very helpful in assessing the
sponse class of imagery was shown to be both magnitude and accuracy of self-reported changes
acceleratively and deceleratively manipulable via in covert responding. These findings substantiate
external contingency arrangements. A counter- previously reported attempts to modify covert
balanced order of manipulations across experi- behaviors. They also lend support to the
ments controlled for such variables as primacy, homogeneity assumption regarding overt and
recency, interference, and specific pair difficulty. covert behavior principles.
Although the act of imaging was inferred Given the clinical utility of imagery responses
from subjects' self reports, concurrent changes (Cautela, 1969) and the functional relationship
in recall performance support the notion that between covert behaviors and overt performance,
some consistent change in cognitive behavior the present evidence would seem to have direct
was taking place. A peripheralist interpretation bearing on therapeutic techniques in behavior
of the present results--i.e, that the behavior modification. Since covert responses play a
modified was that of writing the letter ' T ' on a significant role as reinforcers, punishers, and
piece of paper--leaves one with the dilemma of discriminative cues for other (often overt)
explaining why the peripheral response of responses, their modifiability presents a major
writing ' T ' was consistently associated with concern for adaptive behavior change. More-
superior recall performance. However, the fact over, cognitive forms of self-control have shown
that 36 per cent of the subjects in this study themselves to be therapeutically promising (cf.
reported that they had misrepresented their Mahoney, 1972; Thoresen and Mahoney, in
covert responses at least once suggests the need press). Finally, the fact that imagery responses
for further investigation. Although the superi- were demonstrated to be significantly manipu-
ority of I-recall allowed the present investigators lable in this study suggests the possibility that
to substantiate self reports, the tendency to mis- cases of imagery deficit may be amenable to
represent covert responses in situations of less treatment. For example, planned learning ex-
experimental control could prove troublesome periences for the strengthening of vivid multi-
to covert behavior modifiers. One possible sensory (e.g. visual, auditory, olfactory) imagery
explanation for the degree of misrepresentation may be possible (Danaher and Thoresen, in
evidenced in the present study is that repetition press; Phillips, 1971). What with the important
14 MICHAEL J. MAHONEY, CARL E. THORESEN and BRIAN G. DANAHER

MAHONEY M. J. (1972) Research issues in self-manage-

role p l a y e d b y i m a g i n a l a n d cognitive responses
ment, Behav. Therapy (in press).
in b e h a v i o r t h e r a p y , this latter i m p l i c a t i o n is a
MILLER N. E. (1969) Learning of visceral and glandular
w e l c o m e one. responses, Science 163, 43 A. A.A.5.
Mn~LER N. E., DICARAL, V., SOLO~ANH., WEISSJ. M.,
By d e m o n s t r a t i n g a n e x p e r i m e n t a l analysis
and DWORKIN B. (1970) Learned modifications of
autonomic functions: A review and some new data,
o f covert b e h a v i o r , we h o p e t h a t the p r e s e n t
Circulation Res. 26-27, 3-1 I.
study will e n c o u r a g e further a t t e m p t s to b r i n g
NOWLEs D. and KAMIYAJ. (in press) The control of
electroencephalographic alpha rhythm through feed-
e m p i r i c a l research talents to b e a r o n the a r e a o f
back and associated mental activity, Psychophysioiogy.
c o v e r t b e h a v i o r modification. P^Ivlo A. (1969) Mental imagery in associative learning
and memory, Psychol. Rev. 76, 241-263.
PAIVIO A. and YUILLE J. C. (1967) Mediation instruc-
tions and word attributes in paired-associate learn-
ing, Psychonom. ScL 8, 65-66.
REFERENCES PAIVlO A. and YtaLLE J. C. (1969) Changes in associa-
BOWER G. H. (1970) Analysis of a mnemonic device, tive strategies and paired-associate learning over
Am. Scient. 58, 496-510. trials as a function of word imagery and type of
BOWER G. H. (in press) Mental imagery and associate learning over trials as a function of word imagery
learning, Cognition and Learning in Memory (Edited and type of learning set, J. Exp. PsychoL 79, 458-463.
by GREGG L.), Wiley, New York. PmLUPS L. W. (1971) Training of sensory and imaginal
CAU3"EI~AJ. R. (1969) The use of imagery in behavior responses in behavior therapy, Advances in Behavior
modification. Paper presented at the Third Annual Therapy (Edited by RUBIN R. D., FENSTERHEIMH.,
Meeting of the Association for the Advancement of LAZARUS A. A. and FRANI~S C. M.) 111-122,
Behavior Therapy, Washington, D.C. Academic Press, New York.
CAUT~LA J. R. (1970) Covert reinforcement, Behav. SHAPIRO D., TURSK'ZB., GERSHON W. and STERN M.
Therapy 1, 33-50. (1969) Effects of feedback and reinforcement on the
CAU~LA J. R. (1971) Covert conditioning, The control of human systolic blood pressure, Science
Psychology o f Private Events: Perspectives on Covert 163, 588.
Response Systems (Edited by JACOnS A. and SACHS SIEGEL S. (1956) Nonparametric Statistics For the
L. B.) 109-130, Academic Press, New York. Behavioral Sciences, McGraw-Hill, New York.
DANAtIEI~B. G. and THOnES~N C. E. (in press) Imagery SKINNER B. F. (1963) Behaviorism at fifty, Science 140,
assessment by self report and behavioral measures, 951-958.
Behav. Res. & Therapy. REESE H. W. (1965) Imagery in paired-associate learn-
HOM~E L. E. (1965) Perspectives in psychology: ing in children, J. Exp. Child PsychoL 2, 290-296.
XXIV. Control of coverants, the operants of the THORESEN C. E. (1971) Behavioral humanism: A
mind, PsychoL Rec. 15, 501-511. direction for counseling research. Paper presented
LUTHE W. (1970) Autogenic Training: Research and at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Theory, Volume IV, Grune and Stratton, New York. Research Association, New York.
MAHONEY M. J. (1970) Toward an experimental THORESEN C. E. and MAHONEY M. J. (in press)
analysis of coverant control, Behav. Therapy 1, Behavioral Self-Control, Holt, Rinehart & Winston,
510-521. New York.

(Received 8 July 1971; in revised form 1 December 1971)