Uriel González-Bravo

Human behavior is a constant negotiation between various activities competing for our attention and time. Since our time in life is finite, organisms—including humans—tend to allocate their behavior based on the rewards each activity offers. However, in a world where instant gratification is more accessible than ever, certain behaviors can quickly turn into difficult-to-control habits. In this text, we will explore two cases that illustrate how the constant availability of immediate reinforcers, such as social media and dating apps, can shape behavior patterns and impact people’s quality of life.

The Cases

Rubén and Michael lead seemingly different lives—one is a teenager navigating his school years, while the other is an adult with a stable job. Despite their differences, they share a common challenge: managing behaviors that once brought them pleasure but, over time, started to interfere with their responsibilities and well-being. Through these cases, we will explore how key principles of behavioral analysis—such as the matching law, temporal discounting, and behavioral contrast—can provide insight into the increasing reliance on social media and digital apps.

Michael

Michael is a 33-year-old adult with a stable job who has recently begun experiencing issues that are affecting both his emotional well-being and professional life. A recent breakup has added to his stress, and in an effort to cope with the emotional and sexual void, as well as to distract himself from work-related challenges, he decided to download and use Grindr—a dating app primarily focused on facilitating sexual encounters between men.

Initially, Michael used the app as a distraction and a source of comfort. However, he soon started facing more significant challenges, both in his workplace and emotional well-being. Since the breakup, his anxiety levels have increased. At first, he turned to Grindr for temporary relief, finding in casual sex an escape from his daily worries. Yet, this relief proved to be short-lived—after each encounter, his anxiety not only returned but intensified, triggering a cycle of compulsive app use.

Michael has grown increasingly concerned about the possibility of not finding a stable partner and the health risks associated with casual encounters, such as sexually transmitted infections (STIs), on top of his usual work-related stress. His behavior has become a vicious cycle: he uses Grindr to ease his anxiety, but after each encounter, his worries and stress heighten, leading him to seek out more interactions.

This pattern is not only taking a toll on his mental health but has also begun to affect his job performance and social life.

Rubén

Rubén is a 14-year-old teenager with strong academic performance and an active social life at school. He lives in the suburbs, where leisure activities such as going to the movies or visiting parks require transportation due to the long distances. One of his main challenges is that his parents work and are not always available to take him places.

Despite his academic success and good social relationships, Rubén spends most of his free time at home, engrossed in his phone. Initially, he would only spend a few moments on platforms like TikTok and Instagram without impacting his academic performance or daily activities. However, over time, he began dedicating more and more hours to social media, eventually neglecting his schoolwork and seeing a decline in his grades. The situation escalated to the point where, even when he was out with his parents, he remained glued to his phone, paying little attention to his surroundings.

His parents tried to talk to him about the importance of balancing his digital life with his academic responsibilities. Still, Rubén seemed increasingly disengaged and uninterested in the activities he once enjoyed. To them, it felt like Rubén had become “addicted” to social media. Their solution was to take away his phone, but this backfired—Rubén became more irritable, lost even more interest in school, and started sleeping long hours.

Behavioral Principles

At first glance, Rubén and Michael’s behavior might be interpreted as a lack of self-control or even addiction. However, from a behavioral perspective, these cases can be understood through well-established principles that explain how people allocate their time based on the rewards available in their environment. Below, we will briefly describe some key principles and regularities identified in the behavioral sciences.

General Idea

Behavior can be understood as a set of activities distributed over time, which is a finite resource. If we represent the total available time in a day as T, it can be broken down into the sum of the time spent on n specific activities.

Where each t_i represents the time allocated to a particular activity, this means that activities compete with one another, as dedicating time to one reduces the amount of time available for the others. Is there a rule that governs how behavior is distributed?

Matching Law

One of the most important regularities in behavioral sciences is that the amount of time or the proportion of times a behavior is performed is proportional to the amount of reinforcement it produces compared to other sources of reinforcement. In other words, people allocate their time based on the relative value of the benefits obtained from each activity.

For example, in a discussion among three people—A, B, and X—the behavior of X is influenced by the level of support received from A and B. If, over an hour, A supports 80% of X‘s arguments while B supports only 20%, X will direct 80% of their interventions toward A and 20% toward B.

Mathematically, this relationship can be expressed with the following equation:

where x represents the proportion of time or responses allocated to an activity, R(x) is the amount of reinforcement obtained from that activity, R₀​ corresponds to the total available reinforcement from other sources, and k is a proportionality constant.

Temporal and Probabilistic Discounting

Another key regularity identified in behavioral sciences is that the perceived value of a reward decreases as it is delayed in time or when its likelihood of occurring is low. In other words, people tend to prefer immediate and sure rewards over distant or uncertain ones.

For example, suppose two rewards of equal magnitude, X and Z, are presented, but reward X is delayed while reward Z is immediate. In that case, Z will be preferred over X, meaning Z > X. Similarly, if the probability of obtaining X is lower than that of Z, Z will be chosen more frequently.

The following discounting equation can describe the subjective value of rewards in relation to time and probability:

where V represents the subjective value of the reward, A its magnitude, D the delay in receiving it, θ an indirect measure of the probability of occurrence (an expected value of the waiting time required to obtain a reward in a series of probabilistic trials), and k a parameter reflecting sensitivity to discounting. This model suggests that the value of a reward is directly related to its magnitude when delivered immediately; however, as delay or uncertainty increases, its perceived value diminishes. Higher values of k indicate greater sensitivity to delay or uncertainty, implying a stronger preference for immediate and less uncertain rewards.

Behavioral Contrast

Unlike the matching law, which describes the simultaneous distribution of behavior across multiple sources of reinforcement, behavioral contrast occurs in situations where reinforcement sources vary depending on time and context. This phenomenon refers to how the rate of reinforcement in one period influences the rate of response to other sources of reinforcement in a subsequent or different period.

Behavioral contrast can manifest in two ways: positive contrast, where a decrease in reinforcement in one context leads to an increase in response rate in another, and negative contrast, where an increase in reinforcement in one context results in a decrease in response rate in another.

This effect highlights the influence of past and present conditions on behavior allocation, reflecting an organism’s sensitivity to changes in its reinforcement environment.

Returning to the Cases

Michael

Previously, his romantic relationship occupied a significant portion of his time, driven by the positive aspects it brought to his life, such as affection, companionship, emotional support, validation, shared experiences, and sexual gratification. These elements served as positive reinforcers, increasing the likelihood that Michael would continue investing time in relationship-related activities. Additionally, being in a relationship reduces negative stimuli, such as stress and anxiety, providing a sense of well-being and stability. This is an example of negative reinforcement, where removing aversive stimuli is a reward.

However, Michael’s behavioral distribution changed with the removal of this reinforcement source. One of the most common substitutes for this void is social media applications, especially those focused on sexual gratification, such as Grindr. When individuals lack hobbies and face high stress levels, some therapists suggest that getting hooked on these apps becomes easier due to their immediate gratification. In Michael’s case, his compulsive use of Grindr stems from the fact that the rewards obtained are immediate, while the negative consequences—such as increased anxiety—are delayed and probabilistic. Despite being aware of these adverse effects, he continues using the app because immediate rewards, although small, carry greater weight in his decision-making. The absence of other sources of reinforcement, such as hobbies or new relationships, likely contributes to his predominant focus on Grindr.

Moreover, his dissatisfaction with work has reduced the amount of positive reinforcement he used to receive from his job. While theoretically, this situation shouldn’t affect other areas of his life, in practice, it does. 

This is where behavioral contrast plays a crucial role: the decrease in rewards from his work environment has intensified his pursuit of gratification on Grindr, leading to positive contrast, meaning an increase in his time spent on the app. However, this excessive gratification through Grindr might be causing negative contrast, further diminishing his interest and engagement in other areas of his life, such as his work performance and social relationships, thus perpetuating the cycle of anxiety and avoidance.

A more practical solution for Michael would involve gradually introducing new sources of gratification that could partially replace the rewards he once obtained from his relationship, such as seeking new social interactions, developing hobbies, or engaging in recreational activities that provide emotional well-being. This approach would help him redistribute his time more evenly, reducing his dependence on Grindr without causing a drastic impact on his well-being. Additionally, establishing progressive limits on app usage—such as gradually decreasing the time spent on it and setting specific moments for its use—could help him regain control over his behavior. Implementing self-control strategies, such as setting short- and medium-term personal goals and reflecting on the negative consequences of excessive Grindr use, could also aid him in making more conscious decisions. Finally, improving his work environment by seeking new opportunities or challenges could increase the reinforcement he receives in this area, reducing the need to seek compensation in less beneficial spaces in the long run.

Rubén

Rubén’s case can be explained through the same behavioral principles. Initially, he distributed his time across various activities, such as school, socializing with friends, and moderate use of social media. According to the matching law, the time he allocated to each activity was determined by the reinforcement each provided compared to the others. However, due to transportation limitations and his parents’ unavailability, opportunities to obtain reinforcement from out-of-home activities decreased, making his phone an easily accessible and immediate source of gratification. Platforms like TikTok and Instagram offer constant and immediate rewards—such as entertainment, social validation, and continuous novelty—which gradually led Rubén to increase his usage at the expense of less accessible or rewarding activities, such as doing homework or engaging in offline interactions.

From the perspective of temporal discounting, social media presents a source of frequent and immediate rewards. In contrast, the benefits of completing school assignments or participating in outdoor activities require more effort and provide delayed gratification. As a result, Rubén began to prefer the instant gratification offered by social media despite its long-term negative consequences on his academic performance and family life. The lack of an alternative structure offering immediate rewards contributed to his growing dependence on social media.

Behavioral contrast explains Rubén’s reaction when his parents decided to take away his phone. By removing a highly accessible and gratifying source of reinforcement without providing attractive alternatives, his behavior exhibited negative contrast—a decline in interest in other activities, such as school and family interactions, coupled with an increase in problematic behaviors like irritability and lethargy. The loss of access to his phone eliminated a significant source of positive reinforcement, resulting in a general lack of motivation and a possible emotional response of frustration due to deprivation.

A more effective strategy in Rubén’s case would have been to gradually reduce phone usage while introducing alternative activities that provide immediate and satisfying rewards, such as sports, artistic pursuits, or social events that capture his interest. The abrupt removal of his phone triggered negative contrast, which could have been avoided by implementing controlled usage schedules combined with incentives to encourage greater participation in offline activities. Additionally, reinforcing his academic achievements with meaningful short-term rewards—such as recognition for his efforts or small incentives—could have helped balance his time between social media and school responsibilities. Establishing a clear reward structure and limits and fostering more engaging family interactions would have helped maintain his “motivation” without creating resistance or frustration. Lastly, equipping him with self-regulation tools, such as time management and activity planning, would enable him to develop healthier habits and a more responsible approach to technology use.

Conclusion

Excessive use of social media and apps is not merely a matter of lack of self-control or “addiction” in the traditional sense; instead, it reflects how the structure of rewards in our environment influences our daily behavior. By understanding these behavioral principles, we can develop more effective strategies to redistribute our activities and improve our well-being.

In the next post, we will explore how the use of terms like “behavioral drugs” contributes to stigmatization and why it is essential to recognize that these behaviors, while problematic, should not be equated with substance abuse. Stay tuned for Part 2!

References

Baum, W. M., & Rachlin, H. C. (1969). Choice as time allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 861–874

Conger, R., & Killeen, P. (1974). Use of concurrent operants in small group research: A demonstration. Pacific Sociological Review, 17(4), 399-416

Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect 1. Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 13(2), 243-266.

Martín, G. J. (2016). Quiérete mucho, maricón: Manual de éxito psicoemocional para hombres homosexuales. Roca editorial.

Rachlin, H., Brown, J., & Cross, D. (2000). Discounting in judgments of delay and probability. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(2), 145-159.

Reynolds, G. S. (1961). Behavioral contrast. Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 4(1), 57