Although covert conditioning procedures are widely employed by behavior therapists, the literature is marked by considerable procedural variability and inconsistent results. Part of the problem is attributable to the lack of a generally agreed upon and experimentally supported theoretical account of covert conditioning procedures. Inasmuch as the procedural arrangements of covert conditioning techniques depend upon the underlying theoretical framework, it is important that the framework be experimentally supported. One prominent theoretical account of covert conditioning is the operant account proposed by the main proponent of covert conditioning, Joseph Cautela. As an explanation of the clinical effects of covert conditioning, however, Cautela's account has not been adequately tested. Two experiments were conducted, the purpose of which were to conduct laboratory analogue tests of Cautela's account of covert conditioning by examining the effects of covert reinforcement and covert punishment procedures on the subsequent free-operant rate of selected target responses of college students. The results failed to support Cautela's operant explanation of covert conditioning.