ABSTRACT
Until quite recently behavior modification had been much concerned with developing appropriate contingency situations for individuals. While in some instances such persons resided in group settings, the environment was merely a convenience. As in any medical or educational environment, the aggregation of clients, patients, students, or other recipients and the concentration of technical and professional resources was a way of economizing on or facilitating services; it was not in itself an instrument of change. To be sure, as long as a decade ago some reports (see Bronfenbrenner 1962, for example) described Russian uses of group contingencies, modeling, and other collective-oriented behavioral approaches. However, the impact of these reports was limited because the populations at issue were generally not found in American total institutions.
Lately the situation has undergone considerable change. The work described in this chapter and the implications developed for the use of total settings as instruments and not merely as convenient containers deserves special attention. Here is an excellent example of recognition that the settings themselves represent a powerful environment (Bloom 1964) that can and should be aimed at producing desired and eliminating unacceptable behavior. The specific requirements for developing such an environment are a guide and a challenge. They will direct attempts at environmental change, but not without continuously challenging the innovator to justify any new arrangements in terms of their behavioral consequences.
