My life changed in the fall of 1970. A few days before the beginning of class, I was in my new office on the 3rd floor of the Florida State University (FSU) Psychology Building, busy unpacking books and trying to get settled in when there was a knock at the partially opened door. A young man in his early 20s pushed the door open and said, “Hi, I'm Brian Iwata. I'm your new student.” I replied, “Welcome, Brian. It's nice to meet you.” Brian followed with, “And what do you do?” Unaware that I was getting a graduate student because the selection process occurred the previous spring while I was still at the University of Kansas (KU), this came as quite a surprise.

Jumping ahead a little, I would have to say that this was the most fortunate thing that could possibly have happened to me. Someone on the admissions committee did me a giant favor that would make an enormous difference in my career. Sadly, I never learned who that was. But, back to the story.

I explained that I was a new assistant professor and that my specialty was behavior analysis, applied behavior analysis to be more specific. We chatted a bit about Brain's trip to Tallahassee from Baltimore. He told me he was newly married and this was a big adventure for him and his wife, Peg, as they had not been to Florida before. I believed that our initial meeting went well the second that Brian gestured to my partly filled bookcase and said, “Do you have anything that I can read? I'd like to learn about this field of yours.” I pulled out my heavily marked-up copy of Science and Human Behavior (Skinner, 1953) and Case Studies in Behavior Modification (Ullman & Krasner, 1965) and gave these to him as good introductions to behaviorism. I explained that these books included important examples of how applied behavior analysis could be used to change behavior. I concluded with pointing to the latest issue of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) sitting on my desk as I said, “And this is going to be the primary journal for our new field. Mont Wolf is the editor. I studied under him.”

Building a foundation for applied research

When I arrived at FSU, I was in the School Psychology program in the Psychology Department. I was assigned to teach undergrad courses in Educational Psychology, Developmental Psychology, and Child Psychology. I was told I might get a graduate course to teach the next semester (I asked for research methods). As a new professor, I was expected to set up a lab, but because my interests were in the community, I turned down the offer of the space that had been held for me. I completed my dissertation at Achievement Place in Lawrence, Kansas, under Mont Wolf, and I worked in the schools as part of the Home Based Reinforcement Project where we tested the use of daily report cards for motivation. My plan was to discuss these topics with Brian the next time I saw him and then determine if he was interested in similar settings where we might do some research. Brian was excited about this idea. He chose to work in the schools, and he helped me set up a tutoring experience at a fairly new elementary school as part of his departmental teaching assistantship. As a part of the tutoring experience, the undergrads in the educational psychology class would spend 3 hr per week for this one-credit course. For my part, having this requirement gave me a reason to visit half a dozen schools over the next few weeks. Activities included meeting with the principals, touring classrooms, drinking coffee, and trying to make a good impression. What we were offering was desirable; college students under our supervision would come to the schools at an assigned time and work with specific students whom the teachers determined could benefit from tutoring. I taught strategies, sometimes using my young son as the demo, on how to prompt and reinforce young children in reading and basic math. As it turned out, this assistance benefited both the children and the school, and it was greatly appreciated by the teachers and principals. As a result, later when I brought up the idea of doing some research at the schools, they were receptive, cooperative, and supportive. This connection led to several research projects for my graduate students in successive semesters and one in particular became the setting for Brian's thesis where he made friends with Mrs. Forster, an extremely competent special education teacher.

Learning how to conduct research

Quickly adapting to the school environment and making fast friends with the principal, Mr. McElwee, Brian needed no tutoring in the social skills department. He was proficient in his listening skills, and he knew how to respond to prompts the principal sprinkled throughout their numerous conversations about teachers who could use some help with certain classroom problems. One teacher implemented a rather rudimentary token economy, but it was not producing any desirable results. Basically, the students were running wild, and she needed HELP. This was at the beginning of Brian's second year, after he had taken my applied behavior analysis (ABA) research methods course and was on top of the JABA literature (which was the only text for the course) on token economies (Kaufman & O'Leary, 1972; Kazdin & Bootzin, 1972; McLaughlin & Malaby, 1972). Brian was able to help the teacher modify her system and gain control, and even better, it gave him an idea for his thesis. The published studies at that time did not make clear whether reward or cost token systems were better, and Brian had a research design to evaluate this. This is where the perfect combination of Brian's social skills and Mrs. Forster came in. He sold her on the idea of comparing the two approaches in her class, and she was eager to help this young man from the university who was always smiling and complimenting her on her teaching, which was sincere and well placed. She was an excellent teacher who was calm, organized, pleasant with her students, and sensitive to their needs. Brian and Mrs. Forster were a dynamic team, and it was a good thing because this study ran far longer than was expected.

Brian got published and I learned to be a major professor

As a grad student, I had no courses on how to teach or how to guide a person through their thesis. My fall back was to try and replicate my experience at KU with Mont Wolf. His gentle model was straightforward. Students were treated like colleagues from day one, so this became my plan with Brian. Fortunately, Brian reinforced this behavior and we both benefited. I didn't tell him what to choose for his thesis. He naturally found his own topic, ran his ideas by me, listened to my concerns, and made the necessary adjustments. I learned that asking questions was a good way to bring up issues and that in doing so we figured out solutions together—like colleagues. Brian wanted to execute his study using a multielement within a reversal design. He had seen something similar in JABA and wanted to try it. After some back-and-forth conversations, he convinced me that he could do this, and of course, he did. The design was elegant, and it controlled for all the variables; this was Brian's project through and through. By the time he got to his thesis, Brian wasn't doing this research for me. He had total buy-in, which I discovered is the most powerful form of reinforcement. A rather unusual incident happened right at the end of his study. I was at a conference in Washington DC where I was attending a seminar on token economies. The first speaker talked about the two ways to set up a token economy, explaining that the tokens could either be earned for correct responses or taken away for incorrect responses. Oh, no! It looked like we were about to be scooped, as this was a prominent person in the field and the data looked good. Brian and I planned to submit his thesis to JABA as soon as he had his master's defense, but that wasn't scheduled for several weeks. If this researcher submitted his work before Brian, then his study would probably not be accepted. This was an all-out academic crisis. I ran from the room, packed my bag, and headed to the airport. Fortunately, I was able to catch an earlier flight that would get me back to Tallahassee a day ahead of time.

I called Brian from a pay phone while I was waiting in the departure area. I told him what was happening and probed him for the status of his write-up. “It's basically done,” he said. “While you were out of town, I completed the Method and Results, and I am finishing the graphs now.” This was typical Brian, always one step ahead of me, anxious to move ahead, wanting to complete the project. “I don't want to press you on this,” I said, “but we need to add another condition to your study—something that will make it different from what I just saw here.” In his calm, unflappable style he replied, “Okay, I'll work up some ideas and we'll meet as soon as you get back.” When we met early the next day, Brian recounted a conversation he had with Mrs. Forster a few days prior. He brought up the difference between the reward and the cost systems and asked her which she liked the most. “Well, the reward system of course, I like giving the students their tokens when they behave. It makes me feel good and they respond well as you can tell.” But surprisingly, Brian went on to say that it looked to him that the students preferred the cost system. “Can you ask them why and see what they say? More importantly is there a way to test this quickly, we're running out of time.” That was the only prompt he needed. All of our troubleshooting sessions over the past months and our “think outside the box” discussions were paying off. “We'll just run some ‘choice’ sessions with the students,” he said. “They have had plenty of experience with our alternating reward and cost sessions, let's let them choose.” It was risky, but how could we lose, data was data. “It's your call, Brian, you're in charge here.” My young behavioral researcher did in fact pull this off in record time, and the data were clear and interesting. Mrs. Forster consistently said she preferred the reward system, but the students chose the cost method. When queried, the students explained that each period started with them having all their tokens in a cup on their desks, and as long as Mrs. Forster didn't see them off task or acting out, they could keep their tokens. The students were basically counting on her missing enough that they came out ahead with the cost system! This was one of the first studies to implement a choice alternative and measure the results. By the end of the week, Brian had the data analyzed and written up, and he presented me with a journal-ready draft. Not every student would have this ability. The extremely fluent writing skills came from Brian's undergraduate training at Loyola College, and his work ethic of responsibility, dedication, and professionalism he no doubt got from his parents.

In an unbelievably short period, the manuscript was in the mail to Todd Risley, the JABA editor. After two revisions, it was accepted (Iwata & Bailey, 1974). Brian, a second year graduate student, had just successfully published in the flagship journal in our field, and I had trained my first apprentice. He was over the moon, and I was right behind him. More importantly, Brian reinforced me for my mentoring style and my commitment to the student-as-colleague model. “It works,” I said to myself, “I think I like this professor business.”

A job, an opportunity for research, a bump in the road

In his third year, Brian accepted a position at the local Sunland Tallahassee, a residential center for individuals with severe and profound developmental disabilities. His job was a supervisory position where he was in charge of four living “units” that consisted of 127 clients and 50 staff who appeared somewhat unmotivated. We talked about in-service training and maybe bringing in the superintendent for a motivational speech, but setting this up would take time. Brian first wanted to take some baseline data, so we discussed how this could be managed. He would need some help with such a large project, and he set out to find some volunteers. In the meantime, another requirement was looming. Referred to despairingly as the “600 paper” (the course number assigned by the department), this was a major roadblock for most third-year students. The 600 paper consisted of a review paper covering the relevant research fundamental to a student's dissertation. It was intended to be an expansive and critical review that examined the methodology in detail, pointed out the flaws, and identified the direction of the study (their dissertation) that would correct the shortcomings. There was an unwritten rule that 600 papers would be a minimum of a couple hundred pages. For the first time, I saw Brian struggle. He had an essentially full time job as a supervisor at Sunland, was still taking grad courses, including some in the clinical program, and he had to decide months in advance on the topic of his dissertation. It was not going well. He was missing deadlines and canceling office hours with me. He was uncharacteristically behind, and I didn't know why.

About this time, I was traveling home from a meeting. My flight had been delayed in Atlanta, and we didn't land until nearly 9:00 p.m. I decided to take a shortcut through a neighborhood that I didn't often pass through and happened to notice that the tennis court lights in the park were on and there was a lone player banging tennis balls against the concrete practice wall. “Now there is a diligent athlete I thought …” When I got a little closer, I realized it was Brian! I slowed down to make sure and then headed on my way. He did not have a clue that he had been discovered. I asked him to stop by my office the next day. Surprised to see a dour look on my face, he cheerfully, said, “What's happening?” “It's about your tennis rackets. I saw you practicing last night, and I think that's an incompatible behavior; I want them on my desk tomorrow morning, and I'm keeping them for you until the 600 paper is turned in.” “Done,” was all he said as he turned and left. I was afraid that this might be misinterpreted as punishment and that it would ruin our relationship, but it did not. In fact, Brian seemed relieved. Now he could focus on that odious review paper and look forward to getting his rackets back.

The dissertation, a final challenge

With the 600 paper behind him, Brian could focus on his dissertation. He had decided to seek a solution to the motivation problems he found on the four living units at Sunland. State government puts serious limits on changes that can be made with employees. There is no room for monetary reinforcers, time off, or any special privileges. But one thing that Brian read about for his review paper was a suggestion by Ayllon and Azrin (1968) that “work shift preference and vacation choices” might be used as reinforcers and they might possibly be allowed in a state government environment. As it turned out, he had developed a close working relationship with Superintendent of Sunland Mr. Art Trunkfield and negotiated for the use of this form of choice, as long as it was fairly arranged and embedded in a lottery system that Brian would devise. The study itself was textbook perfect in design. He had two experiments planned, the first a sort of well-controlled large-scale pilot study on two of the units involving 26 staff with nine dependent variables (DVs) covering staff activities (custodial work, client training, on- and off-task behavior, etc.) and client welfare (dental care, out of bed, and soiled clothing). This was accomplished by way of 15 volunteer observers including undergrad and grad students who traveled out to Sunland each day according to a prearranged schedule. In keeping with the cutting edge requirements at the time, “reliability” (aka interobserver agreement) was taken on all the DVs over a 49-day period and proved to be consistently above 80%. A second experiment replicated the first but focused on some slightly different DVs (e.g., dental care of the residents was added), and the design was again a multiple baseline. Brian's doctoral committee was most pleased with his elaborate, detailed work, and at the defense, my recollection was that there were no corrections required. All that was left was to cut, cut, cut the dissertation down to size and prepare the manuscript for JABA (Iwata et al., 1976).1

An academic appointment, a sad goodbye

And now to the sad part. My last memory of Brian was when he pulled into my driveway, knocked on the door, and said he was heading to Kalamazoo. His car was packed, and Peg and their two girls Chrissy and Mary were loaded up too. We chatted for a few minutes but kept it brief, as the kids were anxious to be on their way. We shook hands, had a good hug, and off he drove ready to begin his academic career as Dr. Brian Iwata, Assistant Professor, Western Michigan University Department of Psychology. I sat on the front step, head in hands, and wept. It was the saddest day of my life but also the happiest; my first grad student was off on his own now. It feels like only yesterday that he knocked on my office door and introduced himself, “Hi I'm Brian Iwata …” (Figure 1).

Epilogue

After 4 years at WMU where he taught research methods using JABA as the text, Brian moved on to Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, where he began as Assistant then was quickly promoted to Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry and where he made his groundbreaking discovery on the functional analysis of self-injurious behavior. He returned to Florida in 1986 and became a Distinguished Emeritus Professor at the University of Florida, Gainesville, and trained over 50 doctoral students who now populate universities all over the United States and have continued to produce applied research of the highest quality and train their students in Brian's rigorous, systematic method of analyzing behavior, turning an interesting question into an exploration of controlling variables and moving our science ever forward (Figure 2).

Brian changed the way we think about behavior with his work on functional analysis (Iwata et al., 1982/1994), I tell people that he “Literally put the analysis in applied behavior analysis.”

My most recent and last contact with Brian was in a Zoom call Peg set up about a week before he died; he was frail and could barely speak but he brought me to tears once again thanking me for introducing him to behavior analysis and training him to be a researcher. I told him it was me who should be thanking him, after all he taught me to be a professor and changed my life.

中文翻译：

---

布莱恩·岩田：我的第一个学生，他塑造了我的行为

1970 年秋天，我的生活发生了变化。开课前几天，我在佛罗里达州立大学 (FSU) 心理学大楼 3 楼的新办公室里，忙着打开书本，并试图安顿下来。半开的门被敲响了。一个二十岁出头的年轻人推开门说道：“嗨，我是布莱恩·岩田。我是你们新来的学生。” 我回答说：“欢迎，布莱恩。很高兴认识你。” 布莱恩接着问道：“那你是做什么的？” 我没有意识到我正在招收研究生，因为选拔过程发生在去年春天，当时我还在堪萨斯大学 (KU)，这让我感到非常惊讶。

稍微向前跳一点，我不得不说，这是发生在我身上的最幸运的事情。招生委员会的某个人帮了我一个大忙，这对我的职业生涯产生了巨大的影响。可悲的是，我一直不知道那人是谁。但是，回到故事。

我解释说我是一名新的助理教授，我的专业是行为分析，更具体地说是应用行为分析。我们聊了一会儿布莱恩从巴尔的摩到塔拉哈西的旅行。他告诉我他刚刚结婚，这对他和他的妻子佩格来说是一次大冒险，因为他们以前从未去过佛罗里达。当布莱恩指着我半满的书柜说：“你有什么我可以读的吗？我想了解一下你这个领域。” 我拿出了我的大量标记的《科学与人类行为》（Skinner，  1953）和《行为矫正案例研究》（Ullman & Krasner，  1965），并将这些作为对行为主义的很好的介绍给他。我解释说，这些书包含了如何使用应用行为分析来改变行为的重要示例。最后，我指着桌上最新一期的《应用行为分析杂志》 ( JABA ) 说道：“这将成为我们新领域的主要期刊。蒙·沃尔夫是编辑。我师从他。”

为应用研究奠定基础

当我到达佛罗里达州立大学时，我正在心理学系学习学校心理学课程。我被分配教授教育心理学、发展心理学和儿童心理学的本科课程。有人告诉我，我可能会在下学期教授一门研究生课程（我要求提供研究方法）。作为一名新教授，我应该建立一个实验室，但因为我的兴趣在于社区，所以我拒绝了为我保留的空间的提议。我在堪萨斯州劳伦斯蒙沃尔夫的成就中心完成了我的论文，并且我在学校工作，作为家庭强化项目的一部分，我们测试了每日成绩单的使用以提高动机。我的计划是下次见到布莱恩时与他讨论这些话题，然后确定他是否对类似的环境感兴趣，我们可以在其中进行一些研究。布莱恩对这个想法感到很兴奋。他选择在学校工作，并帮助我在一所相当新的小学建立了辅导经验，作为他的部门助教的一部分。作为辅导经验的一部分，教育心理学班的本科生每周会花3个小时来学习这门一学分的课程。就我而言，有了这个要求，我就有理由在接下来的几周内参观六所学校。活动包括与校长会面、参观教室、喝咖啡以及努力给人留下好印象。我们提供的东西是令人满意的；在我们的指导下，大学生会在指定的时间来到学校，与老师认为可以从辅导中受益的特定学生一起工作。我教授策略，有时用我的小儿子作为演示，教如何提示和加强幼儿的阅读和基础数学。事实证明，这项援助让孩子们和学校都受益，得到了老师和校长的高度赞赏。结果，后来当我提出在学校做一些研究的想法时，他们很乐意接受、合作和支持。这种联系导致了我的研究生在连续几个学期中的几个研究项目，其中一个特别成为布莱恩论文的背景，在那里他与福斯特夫人交了朋友，福斯特夫人是一位非常有能力的特殊教育老师。

学习如何进行研究

Brian 很快就适应了学校环境，并与校长 McElwee 先生很快成为了朋友，在社交技能部门不需要任何辅导。他精通倾听技巧，并且知道如何回应校长在他们多次谈话中提出的关于教师可以​​在某些课堂问题上寻求帮助的提示。一位老师实施了相当初级的代币经济，但没有产生任何理想的结果。基本上，学生们都在疯狂，她需要帮助。那是在 Brian 就读第二年的时候，当时他已经完成了我的应用行为分析 (ABA) 研究方法课程，并掌握了有关代币经济的JABA文献（这是该课程的唯一教材）（Kaufman & O' Leary，  1972 年；Kazdin 和 Bootzin，  1972 年；McLaughlin 和 Malaby，  1972 年）。布莱恩能够帮助老师修改她的系统并获得控制权，更好的是，这给了他论文的想法。当时发表的研究并没有明确奖励或成本代币系统哪个更好，布莱恩有一个研究设计来评估这一点。这就是布莱恩的社交技巧和福斯特夫人完美结合的地方。他向她推销了在班上比较两种方法的想法，而她渴望帮助这个总是微笑着赞美的大学年轻人她的教学真诚且恰到好处。她是一位出色的老师，冷静、有条理、与学生相处愉快，并且对他们的需求敏感。布莱恩和福斯特夫人是一个充满活力的团队，这是一件好事，因为这项研究的时间比预期的要长得多。

布莱恩出版了，我学会了成为一名主要教授

作为一名研究生，我没有任何关于如何教学或如何指导一个人完成论文的课程。我的退路是尝试复制我在 KU 和 Mont Wolf 的经历。他的温柔模式很简单。从第一天起，学生就被当作同事对待，所以这成为我和布莱恩的计划。幸运的是，布莱恩强化了这种行为，我们都受益匪浅。我没有告诉他论文选择什么。他很自然地找到了自己的话题，向我传达他的想法，倾听我的担忧，并做出必要的调整。我了解到，提出问题是提出问题的好方法，这样我们就可以像同事一样共同找出解决方案。Brian 希望在反转设计中使用多元素来执行他的研究。他在JABA看到过类似的东西，想尝试一下。经过一番反复交谈后，他让我相信他可以做到这一点，当然，他做到了。设计很优雅，它控制了所有的变量；这始终是布莱恩的项目。当布莱恩写到他的论文时，他已经没有为我做这项研究了。他得到了完全的支持，我发现这是最有力的强化形式。就在他的学习即将结束时，发生了一件相当不寻常的事件。我当时正在华盛顿特区参加一个关于代币经济的研讨会。第一位演讲者谈到了建立代币经济的两种方式，并解释说，代币可以通过正确的回答获得，也可以通过错误的回答被拿走。不好了！看起来我们快要被抢先了，因为这是该领域的知名人士，而且数据看起来不错。Brian 和我计划在他完成硕士答辩后立即将他的论文提交给JABA ，但这个计划要等几周后才能提交。如果这位研究人员在布莱恩之前提交了他的工作，那么他的研究可能不会被接受。这是一场全面的学术危机。我跑出房间，收拾好行李，前往机场。幸运的是，我能够赶上较早的航班，提前一天回到塔拉哈西。

当我在出发区等候时，我用公用电话给布莱恩打了电话。我告诉他发生了什么事，并询问他的文章的状态。“基本上已经完成了，”他说。“当你出城时，我完成了方法和结果，现在我正在完成图表。” 这是典型的布莱恩，总是比我领先一步，渴望前进，想要完成项目。“我不想在这个问题上向你施加压力，”我说，“但我们需要在你的研究中添加另一个条件——使它与我刚刚在这里看到的不同。” 他以平静、镇定的方式回答道：“好吧，我会想出一些主意，你一回来我们就见面。” 当我们第二天一早见面时，布莱恩讲述了几天前他与福斯特夫人的谈话。他提出了奖励系统和成本系统之间的区别，并问她最喜欢哪一个。“嗯，当然是奖励制度，我喜欢在学生表现好时给他们代币。这让我感觉很好，正如你所见，他们的反应也很好。” 但令人惊讶的是，布莱恩接着说，在他看来，学生们更喜欢成本制度。“你能问他们为什么并看看他们怎么说吗？更重要的是，有没有一种方法可以快速测试这一点，我们的时间不多了。” 这是他唯一需要的提示。过去几个月我们所有的故障排除会议以及“跳出框框思考”的讨论都得到了回报。“我们只会与学生一起举办一些‘选择’课程，”他说。“他们对我们的奖励和成本交替会议有丰富的经验，让我们让他们选择。” 这是有风险的，但我们怎么可能会丢失，数据就是数据。“这是你的决定，布莱恩，你是这里的负责人。” 事实上，我年轻的行为研究员确实在创纪录的时间内完成了这项工作，而且数据清晰而有趣。福斯特夫人一直说她更喜欢奖励制度，但学生们选择了成本法。当被问到时，学生们解释说，每个学期开始时，他们都把所有的代币放在桌子上的一个杯子里，只要福斯特夫人没有看到他们完成任务或表现不佳，他们就可以保留他们的代币。学生们基本上指望着她的失误足够多，以至于他们在成本系统上领先了！这是最早实施替代方案并衡量结果的研究之一。到了周末，布莱恩对数据进行了分析和编写，并向我提供了一份可供日记使用的草稿。不是每个学生都有这种能力。极其流利的写作技巧来自布莱恩在洛约拉学院的本科训练，而他的责任感、奉献精神和专业精神无疑是从父母那里得到的职业道德。

在令人难以置信的短时间内，手稿被邮寄给JABA编辑托德·里斯利 (Todd Risley)。经过两次修改后，被接受（Iwata & Bailey,  1974）。布莱恩是一名二年级研究生，他刚刚在我们领域的旗舰期刊上成功发表了论文，而我也培养了我的第一个学徒。他欣喜若狂，我就在他身后。更重要的是，布莱恩强化了我的指导风格和对学生同事模式的承诺。“这很有效，”我对自己说，“我想我喜欢这个教授生意。”

一份工作、一次研究机会、路上的坎坷

在他的第三年，布莱恩接受了当地桑兰塔拉哈西的一个职位，这是一个为患有严重和严重发育障碍的人提供的居住中心。他的工作是一个主管职位，负责四个生活“单位”，其中包括 127 名客户和 50 名看上去有些缺乏动力的员工。我们讨论了在职培训，也许还请主管进行励志演讲，但建立起来需要时间。Brian 首先想要获取一些基线数据，因此我们讨论了如何管理它。这么大的项目他需要一些帮助，因此他开始寻找一些志愿者。与此同时，另一个要求也迫在眉睫。这被绝望地称为“600 篇论文”（系分配的课程编号），这是大多数三年级学生的主要障碍。这 600 篇论文由一篇综述论文组成，涵盖了学生论文的相关研究基础。它的目的是进行一次广泛而批判性的审查，详细检查方法，指出缺陷，并确定纠正缺陷的研究方向（他们的论文）。有一条不成文的规定，600 篇论文至少要有几百页。我第一次看到布莱恩挣扎。他在桑兰有一份基本上全职的主管工作，仍在修读研究生课程，包括一些临床项目，他必须提前几个月决定论文的主题。进展并不顺利。他错过了最后期限并取消了与我的办公时间。他一反常态地落后了，我不知道为什么。

大约在这个时候，我开完会正在回家的路上。我的航班在亚特兰大延误了，直到晚上 9:00 左右才落地。我决定抄近路穿过一个不常经过的街区，碰巧发现公园里的网球场灯亮了。一个孤独的球员正在用混凝土练习墙敲打网球。“现在有一个勤奋的运动员，我以为……”当我走近一点时，我意识到那是布莱恩！我放慢速度以确认情况，然后继续上路。他不知道自己被发现了。我请他第二天来我的办公室。看到我一脸阴沉的表情，他很惊讶，高兴地说：“发生什么事了？” “这是关于你的网球拍的。我昨晚看到你在练习，我认为这是一种不相容的行为；我希望明天早上把它们放在我的桌子上，我会为你保留它们，直到 600 份试卷上交为止。” “好了。”他转身离开时只说了一句话。我担心这可能会被误解为惩罚，从而破坏我们的关系，但事实并非如此。事实上，布莱恩似乎松了口气。现在他可以专注于那篇令人厌恶的评论论文，并期待着拿回他的球拍。

论文，最后的挑战

有了 600 篇论文，Brian 就可以专注于他的论文了。他决定寻求解决他在桑兰的四个居住单元中发现的动机问题的方法。州政府对员工可以做出的改变严格限制。没有金钱强化、休假或任何特权的空间。但布莱恩在他的评论论文中读到的一件事是 Ayllon 和 Azrin ( 1968 ) 的建议，即“轮班偏好和假期选择”可以用作强化剂，并且在州政府环境中可能会被允许。事实证明，他与桑兰的负责人 Art Trunkfield 先生建立了密切的工作关系，并就使用这种选择形式进行了谈判，只要它经过公平的安排并嵌入到布莱恩设计的彩票系统中即可。这项研究本身在设计上是完美的教科书。他计划了两项实验，第一项是对其中两个单位进行的一种控制良好的大规模试点研究，涉及 26 名员工，有 9 个因变量 (DV)，涵盖员工活动（保管工作、客户培训、上班和下班）行为等）和客户福利（牙科护理、起床和脏衣服）。这是由 15 名志愿者观察员完成的，其中包括本科生和研究生，他们每天按照预先安排的时间表前往桑兰。为了满足当时的前沿要求，在 49 天的时间内对所有 DV 进行了“可靠性”（又称观察者间协议），结果证明其始终高于 80%。第二个实验重复了第一个实验，但侧重于一些略有不同的 DV（例如，增加了居民的牙科护理），并且设计再次采用多基线。布莱恩的博士委员会对他精心设计、详细的工作感到非常满意，在答辩中，我的记忆是不需要更正。剩下的就是剪切、剪切、剪切论文，并为JABA准备手稿（Iwata 等，  1976）。1

一次学术约会，一次悲伤的告别

现在到了悲伤的部分。我对布莱恩的最后记忆是当他把车开进我的车道，敲门，说他要去卡拉马祖的时候。他的车里挤满了人，佩格和他们的两个女儿克丽丝和玛丽也装满了东西。我们聊了几分钟，但保持简短，因为孩子们急于上路。我们握手、拥抱，然后他开车出发，准备开始他的学术生涯，担任西密歇根大学心理学系助理教授 Brian Iwata 博士。我坐在前面的台阶上，双手抱头，哭了。这是我一生中最悲伤的一天，但也是最快乐的一天；我的第一个研究生现在独自一人了。他敲响我办公室的门并自我介绍道：“嗨，我是 Brian Iwata……”（图 1），感觉就像昨天一样。

结语

在 WMU 使用JABA教授研究方法四年后，Brian 转到巴尔的摩的约翰·霍普金斯大学医学院，在那里他开始担任助理，然后很快晋升为儿科和精神病学副教授，并在那里取得了自己的成就。自残行为功能分析的突破性发现。1986 年，他返回佛罗里达州，成为佛罗里达大学盖恩斯维尔分校的杰出名誉教授，培养了 50 多名博士生，这些博士生现在遍布美国各地的大学，并继续进行最高质量的应用研究并培养学生Brian 严格、系统的行为分析方法，将一个有趣的问题转化为对控制变量的探索，推动我们的科学不断向前发展（图 2）。

Brian 通过他在功能分析方面的工作改变了我们思考行为的方式（Iwata 等人，1982/ 1994），我告诉人们他“确实将分析置于应用行为分析中”。

我最近一次也是最后一次与布莱恩联系是在佩格去世前一周左右安排的 Zoom 通话中。他身体虚弱，几乎无法说话，但他再次让我流泪，感谢我向他介绍行为分析并训练他成为一名研究员。我告诉他是我应该感谢他，毕竟他教会了我成为一名教授并改变了我的生活。