Chapter 13 BEHAVIORISMZeitgeistRussia from .docx

Chapter 13:
BEHAVIORISM
ZeitgeistRussia from 1860 to 1917.
IntroductionThis chapter details some of the multiple sources
that led to the eventual demise of introspective psychology.
Russian PsychologyRussian psychology was inspired by
discoveries in physiology made during the latter half of the 19th
century.Ivan Sechenov (1829–1905) He had put in place all of
the pieces they would need to discover the first empirical
connections between physiology and psychology.
Russian PsychologyIvan Pavlov (1849–1936)Pavlov spent his
early career in the single-minded pursuit of the physiology of
digestion.

Russian PsychologyIvan Pavlov (1849–1936)Pavlovian
conditioning ― (also known as Classical conditioning) the
pairing in time between a neutral stimulus (e.g., any stimulus in
any modality that does NOT naturally cause a consistent
physiological response) and a stimulus that DOES cause a
consistent physiological response (e.g., food and salivation) so
that, over time, the neutral stimulus comes to cause the SAME
physiological response.
Russian PsychologyIvan Pavlov (1849–1936)Pavlov was
convinced that the only way to approach an understanding of
psychology was through the elucidation of underlying
physiological laws.
Russian PsychologyVladimir Bekhterev (1857–1927)His major
book, Objective Psychology, was written in 1910.He founded
the Psychoneurological InstitutePavlov and Bekhterev were
intense competitors with each other and their personal relations
were unfriendly.
American Psychology at the Turn of the 20th
CenturyComparative psychology ― the branch of psychology
that explores the behavior of all animals (including humans) and
attempts to demonstrate phylogenetic linkages of those
behaviors between species and assess their adaptive value.
American Psychology at the Turn of the 20th CenturyJohn
Broadus Watson (1878–1958)He published, Behavior: An

Introduction to Comparative PsychologyBehaviorism ― the
approach to psychology spearheaded by Watson that sought to
eliminate consciousness and introspection and substituted
objective methods that focused on animal and human behaviors
only.
Broadus Watson (1878–1958)Conditioned emotional responses
― terminology first introduced by Watson and Rayner to
describe the acquisition of emotional responses in children
through classical conditioning.“Little Albert”Watson’s refusal
to be discreet in his relationship with Rayner while he was still
married lead to his forced resignation for Johns Hopkins.
Broadus Watson (1878–1958)Watson’s Career after HopkinsJ.
Walter Thompson advertising agency.Watson became a vice-
president of the agency four years after being hired and earned a
salary astronomically higher ($70,000 per year) than any
academic position of the time.In addition to founding
Behaviorism, Watson also contributed much to the
establishment of applied psychology.
CenturyWilliam McDougall (1871–1938)Probably the most
vociferous early critic of Watson was fellow psychologist,
William McDougall.He published a book, An Introduction to
Social Psychology, in 1908.

CenturyWilliam McDougall (1871–1938)Hereditarianism ― the
view that individual differences in behavior are mostly due to
innate and inherited factors.Environmentalism ― the view that
individual differences in behavior are mostly due to experience
and other environmental factors.
CenturyWilliam McDougall (1871–1938)At nearly the same
time as Watson, McDougall (1912) wrote a book defining
psychology as the study of behavior. His book, however,
preserved an important role for introspection and free will in
psychology.
American Psychology at the Turn of the 20th CenturyThe
Battle of BehaviorismWatson won.
46
Neobehaviorism and Second Language Acquisition
Laleh Fakhraee Faruji
Department of Humanities, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad
University, Tehran, Iran
[email protected]

Abstract
Behaviorism dominated the field of SLA until the end of the
1960s and found its most
visible application in contrastive analysis and the audiolingual
method (Johnson, 2004, p. 10). In
this tradition, the focus was on the learner’s external
environment. By now it is consensus that a
mature psychology will contain a level of intermediate theory
which bridges the divide between
physiology and behavior, but there is disagreement over the best
way to do that (Reisman, 2003).
Now behaviorism is like a cube of sugar dissolved in tea; it has
no major, distinct existence but it is
everywhere (Harzem, 2004).
Keywords: Bloom's taxonomy, Behaviorism, Neo-behaviorism,
Competition model
1. Behaviorism
Three general principles of language learning have been
identified in this framework
(Dakin, 1973, as cited in Ellis, 1994, p. 299). The law of
exercise which indicates that language
learning is promoted if the learner repeats the responses to the
stimuli. Here, practice plays a
fundamental role. The law of effect which places importance on
reinforcing the correct or native
like response and on correcting the non-native like responses.
Here reinforcement, such as approval
of correct responses strengthen the association and is necessary
to learning. These two principles
had been proposed by Thorndike, as cited in Ellis, 1994, p.
299). And, the principle of shaping

which mentions that learning will be rapid and smooth if the
complex behaviors are broken into
smaller units and are learnt bit by bit.
Jordan, Carlile, & Stack (2008, p. 32) explained some criticisms
of behaviorism. They
believed that it can be considered anti-humanistic in its refusal
to acknowledge human freedom and
choice. Behaviorism gives insufficient weight to contextual
factors such as the social, economic and
political conditions and forces that promote or constrain action.
It also fails to consider other
determinants in learning, such as inherited intelligence and
personality.
In higher level learning, behaviorist techniques may not be
effective in promoting deep
learning, which is related to personal understanding and
meaning-making. In adult, further, and
higher education, it is also difficult to apply behaviorist
principles, because they often fail to take
account of creative processes and of incidental, unexpected and
self-initiated learning. In general,
behaviorism is often seen as anti-intellectual (Jordan, Carlile, &
Stack, 2008, p. 33).
They concluded that behaviorism is not totally antagonistic to
other theories of learning;
rather, it can co-exist with later learning theories that focus on
cognition or the social acquisition of
meaning. It may serve as a foundational element on the basis of
which more complex cognitive
processes are developed.
2. New behaviorism

By the mid-twentieth century, there was a growing recognition
that conditioning involves a
cognitive element. Neo-behaviorists acknowledge that operant
and classical conditioning together
do not completely determine behaviors. For example, the
American psychologist Tolman (1948)
demonstrated that rats could go beyond simple stimulus–
response behavior and could learn,
remember and use facts about a maze. The new-behaviorist,
Clark Hull (1943, 1951, 1952, as cited
in Ormord, 2008), was the first behaviorist who recognized the
importance of learner’s internal
characteristics such as motivation.
Hull's plan for an S –R behaviorism was very ambitious. It
aspired to conceptualize the
bases for adaptive behavior in a broad sense, including certain
cognitive processes and the
L. F. Faruji - Neobehaviorism and Second Language Acquisition
47
performance differences between species and individuals
(Rashotte & Amse, 1999, p. 126). He
believed that learning was insufficient for behavior and
therefore we need to have motivation.
Hull proposed that a number of other factors (intervening
variables) unique to each organism and
each occasion must be considered in order to predict the
likelihood and strength of a response’s
occurrence (as cited in Ormord, 2008). Thus, Hull’s ideas

comprised an S-O-R theory, rather than
an S-R theory, of learning. According to Ormord (2008), Hull
described the following intervening
variables which are critical for a response to occur.
Habit strength: The degree to which a particular stimulus and a
particular response are
associated. The more often a response has previously been
rewarded in the presence of the stimulus,
the greater is the habit strength and the more likely the response
is to occur.
• Organism’s drive: An internal state of arousal that motivates
its behavior. To illustrate,
one might become “driven” by a need for approval if approval
has previously been
associated with a candy bar.
• Stimulus intensity: An intense stimulus bringing about a
stronger response than a weak
stimulus.
• Incentive: The amount and immediacy of reward
All of the above factors work together to increase the likelihood
and relative strength of a
particular response. At the same time, inhibitory factors (e.g.,
fatigue) decrease the likelihood and
strength of the response.
Recent models of language learning, like connectionism and
competition models with
reinforcement learning algorithms, inspired by one of the
fundamental law of behaviorism;
association between input and response are now having their
advocates (Keramati, 2008).

3. Connectionism and new behaviorism
Connectionism is a cognitive framework for explaining learning
processes, which began in
the 1980s and became increasingly influential. It assumes that
SLA results from increasing strength
of associations between stimuli and responses (Savile Torike,
2006, p. 186).
“As learners are exposed to repeated patters of units in input,
they extract regularities in the
pattern; probabilistic associations are formed and strengthened”
(Savile Torike, 2006, p. 80). So, for
them the notion of innateness is not seen as an innate capacity
to learn the abstract rules of
language. In connectionism, knowledge is assumed to be
distributed between neural
connections and learning consists of reinforcing certain types of
connection. Mental
patterns can be represented by neural assemblies (that is, groups
of neurons that are close
together or particularly well connected) (Mistri, 2002).
The claim that learning is not innate nor rule based is supported
by computer simulations. In
learning irregular verbs, it is known that children go through
three phases: first they produce the
correct form of irregular verb, i.e. went. In the second phase,
they over-generalize the regular past
tense ending to irregular verbs, i.e., goed, known as U-shape
curve of learning for irregular verbs,
and in the third phase, they produce irregular form correctly
(Keramati, 2008). Pinker (1991) argued
that irregular verbs are retrieved from an associative memory,

like what connectionists have
described, but regular verbs are produced by learners as a result
of suffixation rule.
Kaplan et al. (1990) explaining the criticisms of the
connectionist models argued that: first,
connectionist models are fundamentally behaviorist in nature
(and, therefore, non-cognitive), and
second that connectionist models are fundamentally
associationist in nature (and, therefore,
cognitively weak). The critical difference between the two,
however, lies in the respective building
blocks of association. The only associations that behaviorists
considered were those between
observable entities, that is between stimuli and responses. The
associationists, on the other hand,
were concerned with the association of "ideas". In spite of the
fact that "idea" was a rather nebulous
construct by modern standards, it clearly referred to an internal,
mental entity. So, while
behaviorism denied the existence (or at least the usefulness) of
cognitive processes, associationism
was a cognitive theory.
BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and
Neuroscience
Volume 3, Issue 4, "Brain and Language", December 2012,
ISSN 2067-3957 (online), ISSN 2068 - 0473 (print)
48
According to Kaplan et al. (1990) modern connectionists are

proposing an alternate way of
modelling cognition; they certainly do not deny the existence of
cognition or the validity of
studying it. However, the possibility remains that the
connectionist models themselves have
unavoidable behaviorist implications which their proponents did
not intend.
4. Competition model and new behaviorism
Competition model (Bates and MacWhinney 1981; MacWhinny
2001, as cited in Savile
Torike, 2006, p. 87) of language learning offers a theory of
performance in contrast with
Chomsky’s theory of competence. This approach considers that
learning the system of form–
function mapping is basic for L1 acquisition. SLA involves
adjusting the internalized system of
mapping that exists in the learner’s L1 to one that is appropriate
for the target language.
Besides, they claim that language learning is nonmodular and is
not domain specific
(Jordan, 2004). Relevant to the discussion in this paper is two
of the theoretical commitments
(Keramati, 2008). The first one is the connectionist model
which competition model uses to model
the interaction between lexical mappings. There, they reject
nativist view and argue that brain relies
on a type of computation that emphasizes patterns of
connectivity and activation. The second one is
that of input- driven learning. According to this commitment,
learning is explained in terms of input
rather than innate principles and parameter. Cue validity is the
key construct in this explanation.

The basic claims of competition model is that cues such as
stress, intonation, rhythm,
morphological marking, and word order are available in input
and language processing involves
competition among these cues. Different types of cues interact
dynamically every time children or
adults hear a sentence. Word order or first position of nouns is
very strong cue for English speakers
(Savile Torike, 2006, p. 87). However, strong cue in one
language might be weak cue in another.
Transfer of L1 cues strengthen to L2 is something which is
likely at early stages of SLA when the
systems differ.
5. Educational implications of new behaviorism
Neo-behaviorists recognized the importance of learners’
internal characteristics, such as
personality, motivation and habit. Whereas classical
behaviorism focused only on the external
manipulation of the organism, the development of cognitive
science led to a stronger awareness of
the importance of internal as well as external behaviors (Jordan,
Carlile, & Stack, 2008, p. 25).
Skinner (1953, as cited in Jordan, Carlile, & Stack, 2008, p. 26)
talks about students
developing self-control and self-monitoring programmes, where
they identify their own reinforcers
and apply behaviorist principles to themselves. For example, a
student might identify tendencies
towards lateness, monitor performance, decide which stimuli are
effective, set goals, and consider
reinforcers.

In the 1950s, the neo-behaviorist Benjamin Bloom attempted to
develop a model that linked
external and internal behaviors (Bloom and Krathwohl 1956, as
cited in Jordan et al., 2008, p. 26).
In his influential taxonomy of learning, he proposed three
domains or spheres of learning; the
cognitive, affective and psychomotor, which translate learning
into overt observable behaviors.
Each domain presents a set of behaviors, which are hierarchical
according to complexity and
sophistication.
The cognitive domain is the best-known and most educationally
applicable of Bloom’s
domains and deals with the ways that internal knowledge may
be revealed by external behavior.
Behaviors progress from those demonstrating basic subject
knowledge up to an ability to evaluate
or judge the worth of knowledge. For example, learning a
language moves from knowing simple
vocabulary at the lowest level to the ability to evaluate literary
texts at the highest level.
Bloom’s taxonomies, particularly in the cognitive domain, have
been used to guide
curriculum planning; his concept of ‘mastery learning’ (1968 as
cited in Jordan et al., 2008, p. 26)
has been particularly influential. ‘Mastery learning’ involves
the statement of educational objectives

49
and their translation into learner behaviors so as to generate
criteria for assessment grades at various
levels in the domain.
6. New behaviorism and language assessment
One of the applications of new behaviorism is in concerning the
assessment. It is commonly
held that effective assessment tasks should test the performance
of behaviors stated in learning
outcomes under the same conditions as those under which they
were learnt (Jordan et al., 2008, p.
30). For example, if the learning outcome states that apprentice
carpenters will be able to hang a
door, the assessment should require them to hang a door rather
than describe the technique in a
written examination, which is what often happens.
Behaviorist principles may also be seen in the move towards
criterion referenced
assessment. The extent to which a learner has achieved stated
learning outcomes is judged
according to behavioral criteria specified in those outcomes.
This replaces older concepts of norm-
referenced assessment, which are based on rating learner
performance in relation to average or
‘normal’ group performance. In norm-referenced assessment,
the pattern of distribution around the
norm means a certain portion of learners must be rated as
performing at a below-average level
(Jordan et al., 2008; Keramati, 2008, p. 31).
Behaviorist principles are useful as part of formative

assessment, which is a kind of
assessment designed to provide feedback for the learner and
teacher, rather than to record or certify
achievement. Formative assessment may be seen as a form of
reinforcement, designed to motivate
and encourage learners. To be effective, the reinforcement of
desired behavior must be provided
consistently and in a timely manner so that the correct response
is reinforced. When it comes to
assessment, therefore, learners should receive feedback as
quickly as possible after the assessment
task (Jordan et al., 2008; Keramati, 2008, p. 31).
7. Conclusions
The explicit linking of cognitive developments and
behaviors helps teachers both to devise
learning activities that allow learners to practice the behaviors,
and to look for these behaviors when
assessing learners’ performance (Jordan et al., 2008, p. 27).
Despite the fact that connectionists
reject innateness in the sense that Chomsky uses, they differ
from behaviorists in fundamental
ways: they consider causal explanation and try to overcome all
theoretical bias (Keramati, 2008).
Behaviorism is no more considered merely as stimulus-
response-reinforcement chains; rather it
contains an element of cognition without which it will lose its
real effectiveness in different areas of
learning and assessment.
References
[1] Ullman Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language
acquisition. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.
[2] Harzem, P. (2004). Behaviorism for new psychology: What
was wrong with behaviorism
and what is wrong with it now? Behavior and Philosophy, 32,
5-12.
[3] Johnson, M. (2004). A philosophy of second language
acquisition. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
[4] Jordan, A., Carlile, O., & Stack, A. (2008). Approaches to
learning: A guide for teachers.
New York: McGraw-Hill House.
[5] Kaplan, S., Weaver, M., & French, R. (1990). Active
symbols and internal models: Towards
a cognitive connectionism. AI & Soc, 4, 51-71.
[6] Keramati, M. N. (2008). Is behaviorism creeping back? ELT
Weekly, 14, 34-47.
[7] Mistri, M. (2002).Consumer learning, connectionism and
Hayek’s theoretical
legacy. Eastern Economic Journal, 28(3), 301 -317.
[8] Ormord, J. E. (2008). Beyond Pavlov, Throndike, and
Skinner: Other early behaviorist
theories. Retrieved October 2010 from
www.prenhall.com/ormrod/.../2_BeyondPavlov.pdf
[9] Pinker, S. (1991). Rules of language. Science, 35,530-535.
Neuroscience

50
[10] Rashotte, M. E., & Amse, A. (1999). Clark L. Hull’s
behaviorism. In W. Odonohue & R.
[11] Kitchener (Eds.), Hand book of behaviorism (120-154).
London: Academic Press, Inc.
[12] Reisman, K. (2003). The new behaviorism. Biology and
Philosophy, 18, 715–729.
[13] Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introducing second language
acquisition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
[14] Tolman, E. C. (1948) Cognitive maps in rats and man,
Psychological Review, 55(4), 189–
208.
46
[email protected]
Abstract

Competition model
1. Behaviorism

personality.
Stack, 2008, p. 33).
2. New behaviorism

47

is to occur.
has previously been
stimulus.

2006, p. 186).
connection. Mental

Neuroscience
48

not intend.
not domain specific

sophistication.
been used to guide
49

7. Conclusions
References
University Press.

5-12.
University Press.
Weekly, 14, 34-47.
Neuroscience

50
208.
46
[email protected]
Abstract

Competition model
1. Behaviorism

personality.
Stack, 2008, p. 33).
2. New behaviorism

47

is to occur.
has previously been
stimulus.

2006, p. 186).
connection. Mental

Neuroscience
48

not intend.
not domain specific
The basic claims of competition model is that cues such as

stress, intonation, rhythm,
morphological marking, and word order are available in input
and language processing involves
competition among these cues. Different types of cues interact
dynamically every time children or
adults hear a sentence. Word order or first position of nouns is
very strong cue for English speakers
(Savile Torike, 2006, p. 87). However, strong cue in one
language might be weak cue in another.
Transfer of L1 cues strengthen to L2 is something which is
likely at early stages of SLA when the
systems differ.
5. Educational implications of new behaviorism
Neo-behaviorists recognized the importance of learners’
internal characteristics, such as
personality, motivation and habit. Whereas classical
behaviorism focused only on the external
manipulation of the organism, the development of cognitive
science led to a stronger awareness of
the importance of internal as well as external behaviors (Jordan,
Carlile, & Stack, 2008, p. 25).
Skinner (1953, as cited in Jordan, Carlile, & Stack, 2008, p. 26)
talks about students
developing self-control and self-monitoring programmes, where
they identify their own reinforcers
and apply behaviorist principles to themselves. For example, a
student might identify tendencies
towards lateness, monitor performance, decide which stimuli are
effective, set goals, and consider
reinforcers.

sophistication.
been used to guide
49

7. Conclusions
References
University Press.

5-12.
University Press.
Weekly, 14, 34-47.
Neuroscience

50
208.
Unit 7A: Chapter 13 Notes
Adapted from History of Psychology: The Making of a Science
(Edward P. Kardas, 2014)
Susanne Nishino, Ph.D. 2013
Chapter 13: Behaviorism
Russia From 1860 - 1917
• By 1905 Russia nearly perpetual state of political & social
agitation

• Three physiologists arose in this climate
– Ivan Sechenov
– Ivan Pavlov
– Vladimir Bekhterev
• Took 1st steps toward physiologically-based psychology that
would for 1st time provide
convincing mechanism for associationism
• History of associationism traced back to ancient Greek
philosophy
• Pavlov’s discovery of conditioned reflex made the scientific
study of associationism or
associative learning possible
• Pavlov experimental paradigm set standard for what required
for experimental analysis of
associative learning and virtually all advances that have been
made since 1965, based on
procedures closely modeled on those Pavlov developed
Demise of Introspective Psychology: Behaviorism
• Multiple sources
• One source Russian physiologists Sechenov, Pavlov, &
Bekhterev

• Pavlov’s discovery of classical condition re-energized older
associative models of psychology
derived from British empiricists
• American Comparative Psychology early research such as
Jacques Loeb & Herbert Spencer
Jennings followed by number of influential psychologists main
emphasis study of animal
behavior
• Others began to study animals for own sake, gradually
relinquished ideas about study animal
mind, instead began to use only objective methods
• John B. Watson most prominent, 1913 launched new school of
psychology, Behaviorism,
intentionally rejected mentalistic approaches to psychology,
emphasized all psychology should
be based on objective methods only, took a decade before
psychologists as a whole began to
join new school in great numbers
• William McDougall, English psychologist, debated Watson on
radio 1924, had own version of
behaviorism, his approach retained role for introspection,

emphasized instinctive behavior with
definition different from earlier psychologists such as Herbert
Spencer
• Watson’s brand of Behaviorism eventually evolved into
Neobehaviorism
Russian Psychology
• Inspired by discoveries in physiology
• Most important was Sechenov’s realization of importance of
physiological inhibition
– Previous physiological accounts of behavior depended solely
on reflex activation,
insufficient to explain complexity of animal & human behavior
– Also promoted use of animal models for human behaviors,
argued against introspective
methods
• Work inspired next generation of Russian physiologists,
especially Pavlov & Bekhterev
• Their research strongly linked physiology to behavior, led to
materialist and objective approach
to psychology unlike contemporary models elsewhere in Europe
or U.S.
Ivan Sechenov (1829-1905)

• Met Hermann Helmholtz & Emil Du Bois-Reymond, students
of Johannes Muller, pioneers in
applying methods of physical science to biology
• Du Bois-Reymond work on electric fishes, created field of
electrophysiology
• Outside Russia Sechenev conducted physiological research,
discovered reflexes could be
inhibited via direct stimulation of some parts of forebrain
(thalamus) but not others (cerebral
cortex), discovery broadened understanding of reflect action,
demonstrated that CNS played
role in control of reflexes
• Argued that all behaviors had cause, that cause always
external & physical, not psychic or
mental
• Argued for psychology to become science to quit looking for
universal theories derived from
introspection, instead concentrate on uncovering facts that
could be verified
• Held physiology portal to psychology
• Argued because human psychology so complex, natural
starting place simpler animal models

• Put in place pieces Russian physiologists would need to
discover 1st empirical connections
between physiology & psychology
Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936)
• Read Sechenev as student, interested in physiology of
digestion, focused on all physiological
aspect of complex process, met Sergei Botkin, needed someone
to supervise graduate students
in animal laboratory, hired Pavlov
• Used dogs to work out details of digestive process, pioneered
surgical & insertion of tubes into
glands
• 1904 Nobel Prize for Physiology & Medicine
• Beginning in 1897 direction of laboratory’s research became
behavioral, one of students
discovered that all that was required was close pairing in time
of neutral stimulus followed by
food stimulus
Pavlov: Classical Conditioning
• Pavlov shifted research direction to study of new “Pavlovian”
conditioning process, rejected any

explanations for conditioning that involved introspective
elements
• Pavlovian Conditioning = known as classical conditioning =
the pairing in time between a neutral
stimulus (any stimulus in any modality that does not naturally
cause a consistent physiological
response) and a stimulus that does cause a consistent
physiological response (e.g. food &
salivation) so that over time, the neutral stimulus comes to
cause the same physiological
response
• “The results were according to our expectations: the
observable relations between external
phenomena and variations in the activity of glands could be
systematically analyzed; they
appeared to be determined by laws, because they could be
reproduced at will” (Pavlov 1904,
quoted p. 292)
• Convinced only way to approach understanding of physiology
was through elucidation of
underlying physiological laws
• Soon discovered other conditioning phenomena
– Extinction

– Generalization
– Spontaneous recovery
• These too seemed to rise to level of scientific laws, could be
investigated in lab, without
recourse to consciousness or introspection
• By 1930 Pavlovian conditioning well known to American
psychologists, Behaviorists found
conditioning powerful way to explain new responses,
emphasized study of learning as new
central focus of psychology in United States
• Pavlov more interested in how conditioning could be
suppressed or inhibited
• Pavlov’s research concentrated on conditioning of autonomic
responses, surgery almost always
required
Vladimir Bekhterev (1857-1927)
• Emphasized conditioning of voluntary responses
• Realized Pavlov’s discoveries could be generalized to other
responses than salivation
• In school specialized in psychiatry & mental illness, later

research in neuroanatomy and brain
localization
• 1907 founded Psychoneurological Institute, Objective
Psychology published 1910, incorporated
Pavlov’s conditioning model, instead of using autonomic
responses, emphasized voluntary
movements in response to external stimulation
• Demonstrated that Pavlovian conditioning applied to voluntary
behaviors as well
• He noted that his methodology did not require researchers to
perform surgery
• Conflicts with Pavlov, career declined
Nascent Behaviorism
• Bekhterev & Pavlov pioneers of nascent behaviorist
movement, no evidence knew of Watson’s
work
• Pavlov’s data combined with Watson’s ideas eventually led to
theoretical & practical synergy
• Russian physiologists argued for & sought objective methods
to study psychology while rejecting
consciousness & introspection, used animal models of human
behavior & provided behavioral

psychology with 1st strong methodologies: classical
conditioning
• Edwin B. Twitmyer discovered classical conditioning one year
before Pavlov, reported in
dissertation 1902 & at APA meeting 1904, few took notice
Classical Conditioning: New Discoveries Since Pavlov
• Pavlov explained in terms of contiguity in time, temporal
relationship between previously
neutral stimulus (CS) & stimulus that caused physiological
reaction (UCS) was key to process,
conditioned stimulus had to precede unconditioned stimulus,
limit to how much time could pass
before conditioning failed
• Robert Rescorla (1968) demonstrated simply temporal
contiguity not enough, showed that CS
would not cause classical conditioning even when paired with
UCS unless CS reliably predicted
occurrence of UCS
• Modern explanations require CS & UCS stimulus close in time
and the CS reliably predict the UCS
• Modern does not require appeals to consciousness or
introspective accounts

American Psychology: Turn of 20th Century
• William James & G. Stanley Hall living & influential
• E. B. Titchener at Cornell promoted structuralism view of
psychology
• Functionalists at Chicago & Columbia opposed to
structuralism, alternative little different from it
• Animal research beginning to become prominent, proponents
differed over goals, one side
research as way to understand minds of animals, other side
believed animal consciousness
unapproachable to scientific methods
• Comparative Psychology = branch of psychology that explores
the behavior of all animals
(including humans) and attempts to demonstrate phylogenetic
linkages of those behaviors
between species & assess their adaptive value
Comparative Psychology: Turn of 20th Century
• At turn of century, relatively few psychologists specializing in
comparative psychology,
• As in Russia, animals consciousness unapproachable came to
dominate new subfield of
comparative psychology

• Chicago Jacques Loeb studies in animal tropisms (forced
movements), catalogued how reached
to physical stimulus, believed animals passive until faced with
specific environmental stimuli,
then would react in stereotypical manner
• Johns Hopkins H. S. Jennings believed behavior of so-called
simple organisms was highly variable
& responded differently to same physical stimuli depending on
internal state
• Robert Yerkes set out to compare how different animals might
learn, used new & original
apparatus, looked at learning in many species, wrote article on
importance of classical
conditioning, did not apply Pavlovian to own research
• Yerkes friend & collaborator eventually adopted classical
conditioning methods into his own
research
John B. Watson (1878-1958)
• Recognized early that same methods used to study animals
could be used to study humans
• At 1st Watson only person bold enough to consider quitting

focus on human consciousness &
use of introspective methods, radical reorientation of
psychology
• Behaviorism arrived on stage
• Chicago’s 1st PhD in psychology, thesis learning ability of
albino rats
• Ran Chicago’s animal laboratory, research concentrated on
elucidating sensory capacities of
animals, especially vision, also conducted naturalistic
observation & field experiments
• Editor of most prestigious journal in psychology,
Psychological Review, influence in field largely
from publication of articles & books, editors of scholarly
journals gatekeepers of new ideas,
1915 President of American Psychological Association
• Famous speech at Columbia 1913 and subsequent publication
journal pitted Behaviorism
against two original schools of thought in psychology:
Structuralism & Functionalism
Behaviorism
• Behaviorism = the approach to psychology spearheaded by
Watson that sought to eliminate
consciousness and introspection and substituted objective

methods that focused on animal &
human behaviors only
• Behaviorism not original with Watson, earlier trends in animal
psychology, testing, applied
psychology & clinical psychology demonstrated utility of
focusing on behavior while minimizing
or ignoring consciousness & introspective reports
• Animal researchers laid foundation by emphasizing
relationship between environmental events
& behavior, and behavioral complexity of all creatures
• Pavlov’s research on conditioning instrumental, provided
mechanism to explain how
associationism worked
• Thorndike’s pioneering experiments with puzzle boxes
influential
• Galtonian style testing under way
• Applied Psychology making headway education & classroom
practice
• James’s clinical psychology led effort to include
psychopathology & treatment as part of
psychology

Watson & Behaviorism
• Watson’s contribution to meld disparate streams into one,
proposed radical new approach to
psychology, served to nearly separate psychology from its past
• Argued for a completely new psychology that dispensed with
introspection & consciousness in
single stroke, called his approach “Behaviorism”
• Claimed Structuralism & Functionalism made little progress in
advancing psychology because
both wedded to consciousness in different way, neither could
provide coherent scientific
account of discipline
• He wished to “never use the terms consciousness, mental
states, mind, content, introspectively
verifiable, imagery” (Watson 1913, quoted p. 300)
• In their place proposed the study of behaviors only
• “Psychology, as the behaviorist views it, is a purely
objective, experimental branch of natural
science which needs introspection as little as do the sciences of
chemistry and physics. It is
granted that the behavior of animals can be investigated without
appeal to consciousness . . .

The position is taken here that the behavior of man and the
behavior of animals must be
considered on the same plane; as being equally essential to a
general understanding of
behavior. It can dispense with consciousness in a psychological
sense” (Watson, 1913, quoted p.
300)
• “Should human psychologists fail to look with favor upon our
overtures and refuse to modify
their position, the behaviorists will be driven to using human
beings as subjects and to employ
methods of investigation which are exactly comparable to those
now employed in animal work”
(Watson, 1913) quoted p. 300).
• Cited examples where behavioral approach already success:
educational psychology,
psychopharmacology, advertising, forensics, & testing
• Favored adoption of uniform experimental procedures
• Later began to research human psychology, wanted to study
psychopathology, began to study
newborn babies, created Watson’s infant laboratory, one of
babies Little Albert, research with

Little Albert high point of Watson’s research career, also the
beginning of the end of it
• After World War I, became interested in studying emotional
behavior in humans
• At first could only identify three instinctive emotions,
unlearned behaviors: fear, rage, love
• Began to realize repertoire of unlearned behaviors, reflexes, in
babies, discovered baby strong
grasp reflex, also found some babies were afraid of stimuli
(rats, dogs, masks) while others not
Watson & Behaviorism: “Little Albert”
• Observations of baby fear of stimuli led to hypothesis that
babies exhibiting such fears must
have learned conditioned emotional responses
• Conditioned Emotional Responses = terminology 1st
introduced by Watson & Rosalie Rayner to
describe the acquisition of emotional responses in children
through classical conditioning
• To test hypothesis selected Alfred B. (Little Albert)
• “Healthy from birth and one of the best developed youngsters .
. . He was on the whole stolid
and unemotional. His stability was one of the principal reasons

for using him as a subject in this
test” (Watson & Rayner, 1920, quoted p. 302)
• Stated goals to determine whether could condition Little
Albert to be afraid of white rate,
whether fear would transfer to other objects, and if emotional
responses could be removed
following acquisition
Little Albert
• Watson & Rayner used loud noises, after only two trials
Albert showed fear responses, showed
fear of white rat that had not scared him previously, five days
later again showed fear & burst
into tears, also showed fear transferred to cotton & seal fur coat
• Fear did not disappear over time, did not decondition or
extinguish Albert’s fears, left hospital to
go home
• Watson’s student Mary Cover Jones (1924) later 1st to
demonstrate possible to extinguish
conditional emotional responses
• Later critics Albert’s observed fear responses stimulated by
removal of thumb from his mouth,
how unusual in psychology for study using only one subject to

have achieved prominence &
notoriety
• Today accepted that people & animals can acquire fear
responses through conditioning,
extinction of fears possible through behavioral theory
techniques (counterconditioning &
flooding)
Watson: Applied Behaviorism
• Watson & Rayner, collaborators, eventually married, Watson
already married
• Watson’s total commitment to behaviorist tenets, argued that
children should be treated like
little adults and should never be kissed or hugged
• Scandal with Rayner, immediate resignation, career after
Hopkins at J. Walter Thompson
advertising agency
• Used behaviorist methods bringing scientific approach to
manipulation of consumer behavior
through advertising, brought earlier ideas about biological
primacy of love, rage, & fear to
advertising, saw job as attempt to stimulate one of those basic

impulses through advertising
• Likely Watson’s vision of Behaviorism spread more quickly
though pop writings than if remained
at university
Watson’s Legacy
• After founding Behaviorism, contributed much to establishing
applied psychology
• Helped move psychology away from philosophy toward
biology, later in life opened conduit
between psychology & business
• Behaviorism slowly became the leading school of thought in
American psychology
• Behaviorism’s appeal to nearly emerging mass markets and
Watson’s late career expertise in
advertising helped him sell Behaviorism to the public
William McDougall (1871-1938): Behaviorism
• Outspoken early critic of Watson
• McDougall also called his brand of psychology, Behaviorism
• Watson Behaviorism & McDougall Behaviorism far apart in
theory & practice
• Instincts major focus of McDougall

• Defined instincts “an inherited or innate psycho-physical
disposition which determines its
possessor to perceive, or pay attention to, objects of a certain
class, to experience an emotional
excitement of a particular quality upon perceiving such an
object, and to act in regard to it in a
particular manner, or, at least, to experience an impulse to such
action” (McDougall, 1926,
quoted p. 305).
McDougall: Instincts
• Not 1st to study instincts, believed previous definitions
inadequate because only focused on
inborn patterns & tendencies
• Added emotion & goal directedness to earlier definitions
• Instinct always included three components
– Behavior
– Emotion
– Goal
• Both animals & humans possessed instincts, only human
instincts could be modified or inhibited

by culture or habit
• Proposed seven basic instincts & associated emotions, later
added mating & associated lust
emotion to list
• List p. 305
McDougal: Hereditarianism
• British, after World War I accepted chair of psychology at
Harvard, never fully comfortable in
U.S.
• His hereditarianism ran counter to prevailing
environmentalism 1st promoted by functional
psychology, later radicalized by Watson & Skinner
– Hereditarianism = the view that individual differences in
behavior are mostly due to
innate & inherited factors
– Environmentalism = the view that individual differences in
behavior are mostly due to
experience & other environmental factors
• Also a Lamarckian, conducted research attempting to
demonstrate successive generations of
white rats could inherit increased abilities in discrimination
tasks

• Became interested in parapsychological topics,
The Battle of Behaviorism
• Over time psychologists appreciation of views of McDougall
& Watson, each grains of truth
• Before reconciliation possible, newer form of Behaviorism =
Neobehaviorism took stage for four
decades
• 1924 Watson-McDougall radio debate over nature & definition
of Behaviorism
– Watson wanted to rid psychology of all mentalist terms & use
only objective methods,
did not deny existence of consciousness, but denied can be
studied objectively
– McDougall studied behavior of animals & humans, but not
willing to part with analysis
of consciousness through introspection, dualistic position
– End of debate Watson judged winner by narrow margin
Border with Philosophy
• Behaviorism sealed border long existed between psychology &
philosophy

• Eventually led to another solidifying distinction between
disciplines = experimentation
• Behaviorists promoted design & conduct of experiments that
did not require introspective
methods, took psychology into newly founded laboratories
Behaviorism to Neobehaviorism
• McDougall “in America the tide of Behaviorism seems to flow
increasingly” . . . “Dr. Watson
knows that if you wish to sell your wards, you must assert very
loudly, plainly, and frequently
that they are the best on the market” (Watson & McDougall,
1929, quoted p. 307).
• Watson’s ideas narrowly won debate, quickly won hearts and
minds of nearly all American
psychologists
• Neobehaviorism followed, not monolithic, practitioners agreed
studying behavior objectively
was key, disagreed over other issues
• Three most prominent neobehaviorists = Edward Tolman,
Clark Hull, & B. F. Skinner
• In Europe Gestalt Psychology school emerging, followers
dissatisfied with structuralism & its
emphasis on mental elements, proposed radical solution

disregarding elements, looking at
relationships instead
Ideas
• Behaviorism synergized classical conditioning, physiological
psychology, comparative
psychology, testing, applied psychology & clinical psychology,
all interested in behavior not
mental states, saw little difference in methods necessary to
study human or animal behavior
• Combining classical condition with psychophysics allowed
investigation of sensory capacities of
animals
• Behaviorism moved into applied areas, Little Albert
demonstrated fears could be learned &
extinguished, blossomed into modern day behavioral medicine
& wellness therapies
• Business took advantage of behavioral approach, research in
marketing & power of advertising
• Hereditarian theories competed with environmental, debated
existence, extent, & nature of
instincts
• 1st inklings of widespread technological change date from rise
of radio & subsequent forms of

media created since
Summary
• By turn of 20th century, Russian psychologist’s advances in
physiological psychology, Pavlov work
on conditioned reflex most important, filtered to the U.S.
• American psychology in flux as Structuralism, Functionalism,
applied psychology, & animal
research vied for attention
• Behaviorism began with 1913 Watson speech, worked for
advertising agencies, lectured, wrote,
& promoted applied psychology using Behaviorism
• William McDougall British behaviorist, Lamarckian,
hereditarianism, emphasized role of instincts
in behavior
• Watson & McDougall debate on raid in “The Battle of
Behaviorism”
• Watson’s position gradually strengthened, taken over by
Neobehaviorism

Chapter 14:
NEOBEHAVIORISM
ZeitgeistThe United States from 1914 to 1945.
IntroductionNeobehaviorism ― the modification of Watson’s
Behaviorism that allowed for the experimental analysis of
operationally defined unobservable variables related to
cognitive states and emphasized the study of learning along
with the use of animal models for human behavior.
Three NeobehavioristsTolman, Hull and Skinner.
NeobehaviorismPurposive Behaviorism ― Tolman’s version of
Neobehaviorism that emphasized goal directed activity in
animals and humans while only relying on objective behavioral
data.
NeobehaviorismEdward Chase Tolman (1886–1959)Tolman
popularized the use of the white rat in psychology.Expectancy
― an internal state in which an organism anticipates an event

based upon prior learning trials.
NeobehaviorismEdward Chase Tolman (1886–1959)Cognitive
maps.Latent learning.The distinction between learning and
performance.
Figure 14.1
Insert Figure 14.2 Here
Figure 14.3
NeobehaviorismEdward Chase Tolman (1886–1959)Intervening
variable ― unobservable variables such as internal states or
cognitions assumed to influence behavior.Operationism ― the
idea that science is best understood as a public, operationally
defined enterprise in which phenomena may only be analyzed
via methods that yield concrete results.
NeobehaviorismClark Hull (1884–1952)Hypothetico-deductive
system ― a system using logic derived from a small, restricted
set of given truths used to deduce new, derived, and logically
consistent statements. After, those deductions are tested
experimentally. Statements experimentally confirmed are kept

and the others are discarded.
NeobehaviorismHull’s System In its final “revision of the
system a total of eighteen postulates and twelve corollaries was
produced.Three types of variables:Stimulus, organismic or
intervening, and response.Hull’s equation.Hull was an S-R
theorist.
Figure 14.4
NeobehaviorismB. F. Skinner (1904–1990)Radical
BehaviorismMentalism ― explaining behavior by recourse to
variables such as cognitions, memories, or motivations.Radical
Behaviorism explains learned behavior through selection by
consequences.SD → R → SR
NeobehaviorismB. F. Skinner (1904–1990)Radical
BehaviorismApplied behavior analysis ― the design,
application, and assessment of environmental modifications that
lead to improvements in human behavior in the real world using
principles derived from Radical Behaviorism.
NeobehaviorismB. F. Skinner (1904–1990)Understanding
Skinner Five common misperceptions or myths:1 the role of
physiology and genetics in behavior.2 the extent to which all
behavior can be conditioned.3 the uniqueness of the

individual.4 the use of punishment in controlling behavior. 5 the
existence of internal states.
NeobehaviorismB. F. Skinner (1904–1990)Understanding
SkinnerBaseline ― the environmental situation or context that
exists before a treatment or intervention is applied.Intervention
― a specific alteration to the baseline condition designed to
change the response rate initially observed.
NeobehaviorismB. F. Skinner (1904–1990)Long-term Successes
of Radical Behaviorism.Four basic schedules of intermittent
reinforcement.Shaping ― the reinforcement of successive
approximations of a final, desired response.Skinner’s utopian
visions appear most prominently in his books Walden Two
(1948) and Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971).
Figure 14.5
Photo 14.2
NeobehaviorismRadical Behaviorism Today
The Trend Toward CognitivismWith the exception of radical
behaviorism, most of contemporary psychology has been

dominated by a new cognitive paradigm, one derived from the
sources outside of neobehaviorism.
Unit 7B: Chapter 14 Notes
Adapted from History of Psychology: The Making of a Science
(Edward P. Kardas, 2014)
Susanne Nishino, Ph.D. 2013
Chapter 14: Neobehaviorism
The United States from 1914 - 1941
• 1913 when Watson 1st proposed behaviorism as way of
making psychology more scientific,
United States began to experience rapid technological & social
changes
• Social changes for women dramatic, filled workplace while
men in military service
• After war successfully completed long battle for women’s
right to vote, 19th Amendment ratified
1919
• 1929 stock market crash led to Great Depression, economic
shrinkage, unemployment levels,
leaving land for jobs in cities, spending power, full recovery not

until start of World War II
Neobehaviorism, Gestalt Psychology, & Psychoanalysis
• From 1918 onward psychology changed too
• Functionalist attacks on Structuralism left field open for new
definition
• Most psychologists Europe and U.S. now saw themselves as
scientists, less a philosophers, any
redefinition had to place firmly on side of science
• Europe two new forms of psychology emerged, both saw
themselves as sciences closely linked
to biology & psychophysics
– Wertheimer’s Gestalt Psychology
– Freud’s Psychodynamic Psychology
• In U.S. Neobehaviorism grew out of Watson’s Behaviorism
Neobehaviorism
• Neobehaviorism = the modification of Watson’s Behaviorism
that allowed for the experimental
analysis of operationally defined unobservable variables related
to cognitive states &
emphasized the study of learning along with the use of animal
models for human behavior

• Concentrated on understanding learned behaviors, used animal
models, practically eliminated
any references to mental life in psychology
• Influenced by success of physics, some attempted to construct
overarching theories to explain
all learning through action of measurable variables, others
turned to analyses of goals &
intentions along with how variables related to each other, still
others closer to evolutionary
biology & attempt to develop systems that competed for
survival through consequence
• Watson’s brand of behaviorism failed to satisfy many
• By 1930 had come to dominate American psychology, would
dominate for 30 years
Neobehaviorism: Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism
• By beginning of World War II, American psychology
dominated by neobehaviorists, nearly all
used rats or pigeons as research subject within laboratory
context
• Public image of American psychology changed, psychologists
wore lab coats, ran experiments
with rats, generalized findings to humans

• Most American psychologists saw themselves as behavioral
scientists pursuing yet unknown
laws governing learning
• Neobehaviorist approaches would dominate into the 1970s
• Today difficult to spot remains of that era, except for one:
Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism
Three Major Neobehaviorists
• After Watson’s Manifesto, American psychologists struggled
to incorporate Behaviorism into
psychology, by 1930 change in psychology away from
introspection toward more moderate
approach from Watson’s original position
• Term “Neobehaviorism” distinguishes newer approach from
Watson’s position
• Edward Tolman
• Clark Hull
• B. F. Skinner
Edward Chase Tolman (1886-1959): Purposive Behaviorism
– 1st to use albino lab rats extensively as models for human
learning, introduced use of
intervening variables, intervening variables hypothetical,

unseen, but operationally
defined making them objective & measurable unlike
introspective variables, intervening
variables cognitive, assumed to have causal power over
behavior
– Neither Thorndike’s nor Watson’s approaches to learning
satisfied him
– Developed own theoretical approach: Purposive Behaviorism
– Emphasized goal-seeking behavior, assumed learning and
performance different from
each other
– Purposive Behaviorism = Tolman’s version of
Neobehaviorism that emphasized goal-
directed activity in animals & humans while relying on
objective behavioral data
Tolman: Expectancy & Cognitive Maps
• One of 1st to incorporate theoretical explanation from Gestalt
psychology into Behaviorism
• Wanted to divorce psychology from close dependence on
physiology, at the same time seeking
better theoretical structure for Neobehaviorism

• One of 1st contributions was redefining behavior into two
categories: molecular & molar,
molecular closely linked to physiology, molar on larger scale
such as maze learning & driving
home from work, argued molar behavior could be studied
without reference to any underlying
physiological mechanisms, Popularized use of white rat in
psychology, discovered number of
cognitively based phenomena including expectancies &
cognitive maps
• Expectancy = an internal state in which an organism
anticipates an event based upon prior
learning trials , Tolman & Tinklepaugh monkey experiments,
interpreted monkey’s different
reaction as behavioral evidence of different cognitive states,
Tolman believed he had
demonstrated expectancy in non-human animal
• Most famous cognitive map, concept derived from Gestalt
Psychology, cognitive maps develop
from experience, the more experience the better the map,
Tolman: Latent Learning
• Demonstrated that rats learned spatial relationships between
self & food, reinforcement not

necessary for learning = latent learning
• Distinction between learning & performance
• Argued latent learning because learning had already taken
place, argued new presence of the
food reinforcer now changed situation, causing errors to go
down accordingly
• Reinforcement not necessary for learning
• Critics, issue of latent learning essentially abandoned,
textbooks uncritically point to Tolman’s
cognitive map as only solution, other historical & contemporary
explanations do exist, no longer
covered in introductory texts, historical misinformation
Tolman: Intervening Variables
• Created neobehaviorist alternative to Watson’s scheme
• Endowed rats (& people) with intervening variables or
variables that lay between physical
stimulus & observable behavior
• Intervening variables the actual cause of behavior, but not
observable
• Intervening Variable = unobservable variables such as internal
states or cognitions assumed to

influence behavior
Tolman: Operationism
• Intervening variables amenable to experimental analysis via
doctrine of operationism that came
to psychology via physics
• Operationism = the idea that science is best understood as a
public, operationally defined
enterprise in which phenomena may only be analyzed via
methods that yield concrete results
• Best example, hunger, operationalized hunger by providing
descriptions of how to obtain
hunger, namely by withholding food
• Operational definitions allowed neobehaviorists to describe
internal states without using the
methods of traditional introspection
• Tolman created compromise between introspective methods of
past and Watson’s extreme
behaviorist position
Modern Physics: Border with Computational Science
• Rise of modern physics about the same time as emergence of
Neobehaviorism, influenced

psychology
• In psychology intervening variables that predicted particular
behaviors also viewed as real but
unobservable
• During 20th century, physics model for how any science
should operate, most psychologists
aspired to make science resemble it
Clark Hull (1884 – 1952)
• For Hull, Tolman’s theories too close to introspective
psychology, Hull was Tolman’s main
theoretical rival
• His neobehaviorism sought to emulate Newton’s physics by
discovering objective variables that
underlay behavior, dispensed with cognition entirely, created
complex theoretical system
designed with minimal number of assumptions, also adopted
intervening variables but anchored
in physical world, intervening variables tied to stimuli &
responses not to cognitive states
• Sought to make psychology more like physics, dominant
model of 20th century science, created

theoretical structure that attempted to assess causal relations
between stimuli & responses
based on mathematical relationship between underlying
intervening variables
•
Solution
to problems of Watson’s behaviorism was to keep Watson’s
central idea intact:
behavior could be controlled & predicted without using any
reference to cognitive concepts
such as expectancies or cognitive maps
• Hull tried to explain learning via complex overarching theory
of full mechanistic variables
• Interested in aptitude testing, concept formation, verbal
learning, turned strictly to rat learning
after arriving at Yale, spent rest of career providing alternative
to Tolman’s line of research

while providing synthetic theory that combined Thorndike’s
Law of Effect & Pavlovian
conditioning
• Believed that much could be learned about human behavior by
running laboratory experiments
using white rats,
• His theory only of historical interest today, influential during
his lifetime
Hull: Hypothetico-Deductive System
• Wished to make psychology as scientific as physics, his two
models : Newton’s Principia and
Euclid’s Elements
• From both adopted Hypothetico-Deductive System = a system
using logic derived from small,
restricted set of given truths used to deduce new, derived, and

logically consistent statements.
After these deductions are tested experimentally. Statements
experimentally confirmed are
kept and others are discarded.
• HDS tight logic of inferred theorems constructed from
minimal set of a priori postulates &
definitions
• Believed that psychology would advance only when theory &
observations were closely linked,
would yield “facts of intrinsic importance”, would yield “truth
or falsity of the theoretical system
from which the phenomena were originally deduced”,
“Scientific theory in its best sense
consists of the strict logical deduction from definite postulates
of what should be observed
under specified conditions. If the deductions are lacking or are

logically invalid, there is no
theory” (Hull, 1935, quoted p. 319)
Hull: Mechanistic Learning
• Used Thorndike’s Law of Effect & Pavlov’s analysis of
classical conditioning as starting point,
retained Watson’s S-R model but added intervening variables
• Dynamic system, designed to change in face of unexpected
new data
• Purposive behavior no place in Hull’s system, ultimately
failed to explain learning
• Inspired other psychologists to pursue his vision of a
mechanistic explanation for learning
• Hull’s system intended primary principles to be used
deductively to predict secondary qualities

• S-R theorist, believed learning strengthened by repetition,
reinforcement related to satisfaction
of internal drive states
• Basic structure of system, three types of variables: stimulus,
organismic or intervening, &
response, measurable
• Biggest change, Hull added incentive because experiments by
Crespi (1942) demonstrated rats
run faster when food reward in goal box bigger
B. F. Skinner (1904-1990)
• Rejected Tolman & Hull formulations, in place proposed
Radical Behaviorism, borrowed from
Darwinian selection at three levels: phylogenetic, individual,
cultural
• Defined psychology as science of behavior, biology closest
science, used operant conditioning to

explain much behavior in organisms
• Environmental determinism along with overarching definition
of the environment
• Environment extended inside the skin, move that displaced
cognitive components & any
arguments for free will or individual autonomy
• Only Skinner’s approach survives in present day, only small
percentage of contemporary
psychologists
Skinner: Radical Behaviorism
• Another neobehaviorist movement, would prove to be most
tenacious form of Neobehaviorism,
still thrives today
• Radical Behaviorism opposed to all forms of mentalism
including neobehaviorist approaches

using intervening variables
• Skinner knack with mechanical devices, invented two pieces
of lab apparatus instrumental in
development of Radical Behaviorism
– Operant conditioning chamber (Skinner Box)
– Cumulative Recorder
– Dependent variable in Skinner Box rate of response (number
of responses over time),
measured by Cumulative Recorder
• 1990 days before death, public appearance American
Psychological Association meeting,
reaffirmed his commitment to Radical Behaviorism in face of
“cognitive revolution” which had

swept through psychology during his lifetime
• Speech “Cognitive science is the creation science of
psychology, as it struggles to maintain the
position of a mind or self” (Skinner, 1990, quoted p. 323).
• World War II engineered apparatus for pigeons inside bombs,
could guide to target by pecking
display, device worked, never operationally deployed
• Air Crib, raised daughter, partly to keep her warm, attempted
to market device, described it as
experiment in child rearing
Radical Behaviorism: Border with Biology
• Radical behaviorists believe no border between psychology &
biology, RB part of biological
science
• Borrowed mechanism of natural selection from evolutionary

theory, argue operates at 3 levels
– 1st level Darwin’s natural selection of organisms whose genes
allow to reproduce, innate
behaviors
– 2nd level operant condition that selects organism’s emitted
behaviors (operants) through
action of environment, selected behaviors reproduce, learned
behaviors
– 3rd level cultural, human verbal responses (operants) selected
through action of
linguistic communities people live in, selected verbal responses
become more
numerous, culturally based behaviors
• Interprets each type of selection in own time frame:
phylogenetically millions of years, learned
behaviors lifespan of species, cultural behaviors long periods

1000s of years
• All three levels either genes, behaviors, or verbal behaviors
selected mechanistically according
to environmental consequences at respective levels
Radical Behaviorism
• Completely different from Watson’s & others
• Preserves Watson’s definition of psychology, prediction &
control of behavior, rejects
neobehaviorist theories of intervening variables because
mentalistic & assume dualism
• Mentalism = explaining behavior by recourse to variables such
as cognitions, memories, or
motivations
• Not S-R psychology, instead explains learned behavior
through selection by consequences

• Operant conditioning occurs when a response is followed by a
reinforcer causing that response
to be emitted more often, organisms also learn environmental
occasions when reinforcement
likely, relationship discriminative stimulus, to emitted response
to reinforcer (SD to R to SR)
Radical Behaviorism: Applied Behavior Analysis
• Applied Behavior Analysis branch of RB specialized in
searching for & understanding how
operants or discriminative stimulus are at work in natural
situations
• ABA = the design, application, and assessment of
environmental modifications that lead to
improvements in human behavior in the real world using
principles derived from Radical

Behaviorism
• Work in clinical psychology, knowledge to alter patient
environments that lead to positive
outcomes (e.g. token economies) to health or adjustment
• Behavior modification one of techniques, consists of imposing
new & consistent environmental
contingencies in real world situations such as classrooms, e.g.
tokens as conditioned reinforcers
Understanding Skinner
• Believed genetics played important role in behavior
• Understood that physiology & genetics important role in
behavior, innate behaviors existed,
innate behaviors result of natural selection as environment
changed, when changed selection
pressures, organisms either adapted or extinct, behaviors that
were adaptive at one point in

phylogenetic history might become maladaptive at later point
• Never claimed all behavior modifiable by operant
conditioning, contingencies at phylogenetic or
cultural level might prevent
• Believed in human uniqueness, maintained except twins all
person uniquely shaped by genetics,
environments, & cultures they lived in
• Believed introducing large group designs & analyzing them
statistically confused understanding
Understanding Skinner: ABA Design
• One of most common N = 1 designs
• Organism observed in its environment without altering any
behavioral contingencies = A
• Experimenter alter contingency & looks for change in rate of
responding (intervention) = B

• If change occurs then next step to remove contingency and
observe whether rate of responding
returns to baseline rate = A
• If rate of responding consistently changes, then can infer that
intervention was causally
responsible for change in behavior
• ABA often used in applied behavior analysis to discover
interventions to change behaviors
Understanding Skinner: Reinforcement & Punishment
• Differentiated between reinforcement & punishment
• Offered three reasons why punishment should not be
administered
– Only work temporarily

Chapter 13 BEHAVIORISMZeitgeistRussia from .docx

Chapter 13 BEHAVIORISMZeitgeistRussia from .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Chapter 13 BEHAVIORISMZeitgeistRussia from .docx

Similar to Chapter 13 BEHAVIORISMZeitgeistRussia from .docx (15)

More from keturahhazelhurst

More from keturahhazelhurst (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Chapter 13 BEHAVIORISMZeitgeistRussia from .docx