Defining the stimulus in stimulus–response interventions: On the need to embrace theory and organism in stimulus–organism–response

Abstract

AbstractWe comment on a proposal in the target article that draws on “behaviorism” for developing interventions geared at attenuating negative consumer behaviors. One interpretation of this proposal emphasizes the influence of stimuli (S) on responses (R) and de‐emphasizes intervening mental processes. We contrast this S–R perspective with an S–O–R perspective that embraces O, the organism (in our context, the consumer) and in doing so attempts to explain and then leverage S–R relations. We discuss in detail that without an organism‐ and theory‐centered perspective of S–R relations, it is difficult to identify relevant stimuli and predict patterns of behavior in new contexts. We illustrate in more depth using Janiszewski and Laran's example of aiding an individual suffering from depression how this theory‐ and organism‐centered perspective can improve possible intervention strategies.