Mathematical Statements in the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (original) (raw)

Skinner’s arguments for the independence of behavior analysis from physiology: a review.

One of the most important aspects of radical behaviorism is the defense of the autonomy of behavior analysis from physiology. Since his early works (e.g., The Behavior of Organisms, published in 1938), until his last article, Can psychology be a science of mind?, published in 1990, Skinner presented a variety of arguments in order to sustain the independence of behavior analysis from physiological explanations. Thus, the first aim of this presentation is to provide a classification of these arguments. In order to do that, 73 of Skinner’s works, published between 1933 and 1990, were analyzed. These works were selected because they contain keywords related to our subject matter. Through the analysis, we developed a classificationof Skinner’s arguments in the following categories: (a) the definition of behavior; (b) the conception of explanation; (c) the constructionof scientific concepts; and (d) practical matters.The second objective of this presentation is to evaluate Skinner’s arguments taking into account the advances of contemporary neuroscience. The physiology criticized by Skinner in the thirties, and even in the late eighties, suffered incredible advances. Therefore, itis important to discuss the pertinence of Skinner’s arguments in the context of contemporary neuroscience.

Filling the gaps: Skinner on the role of neuroscience in the explanation of behavior

It is often said, especially in philosophy and the neuroscience literature, that Skinner defended an anti-physiological position on the explanation of behavior. Aside from this, behavior analysts who discuss the relation between behavior analysis and physiology usually emphasize the independence of these two fields. Amid criticisms of Skinner's allegedly anti-physiological position and behavior analysts' defense of their discipline as an autonomous science, there is comparatively little discussion of Skinner's positive views on physiology. The goal of this paper is to present an analysis of these views, taking into account Skinner's writings from the 1930's to the 1990's. Among the topics to be discussed are the definition of the object of study of physiology, its role in the explanation of behavior, and the relation between behavior-analytic and physiological explanations. I pay special attention to Skinner's use of physiological hypotheses in developing his theories of private events and perception, and I hope to counteract the ill-founded notion that Skinner was always opposed to physiology in the study of behavior.

The Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Not so long ago the expression "a science of behavior" would have been regarded as a contradiction in terms. Living organisms were distinguished by the fact that they were spontaneous and unpredictable. If you saw something move without being obviously pushed or pulled, you could be pretty sure it was alive. This was so much the case that mechanical imitations of living things-singing birds which flapped their wings, figures on a clock tolling a bell-had an awful fascination which, in the age of electronic brains and automation, we cannot recapture or fully understand. One hundred and fifty years of science and invention have robbed living creatures of this high distinction.

Consequences of the functional interpretation of psychological terms1

Revista Brasileira de …, 2007

The Behavior Analysis (BA) has benefited in the past and continues to benefit from a specific kind of operational interpretation of terms/expressions developed in other systems of Psychology and similar areas. The Skinnerian model of the operational interpretation of ...

Invitation to Mathematical Psychology: Models and Benefits of Formal Theorizing

Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa

In most areas, psychological phenomena tend to be explained only through textual constructions. Several authors, however, point to the need for theories that have a more formal nature, based on mathematical reasoning. In order to encourage broader access to its applications, we present the models and advantages of a mathematical psychology approach to the study of behavior. We review the limitations of verbal theorizing, then a common taxonomy in mathematical psychology follows, that classifies formal models as descriptive, process characterization, and explanatory. As well succeeded cases, we examine the mathematical psychology of decision making, of helping behavior, of memory, and of romantic relationships. Finally, we discuss the potential benefits and uses of this approach. Welcome to mathematical psychology.

Consequences of the functional interpretation of psychological terms

Revista Brasileira de Terapia Comportamental e Cognitiva - 9(2), 73-85, 2007

The Behavior Analysis (BA) has benefited in the past and continues to benefit from a specific kind of operational interpretation of terms/expressions developed in other systems of Psychology and similar areas. The Skinnerian model of the operational interpretation of terms of other theories consists of the analysis of the context where theoreticians and researchers emit the analyzed terms/expressions. Therefore, these interpretations are analyses of the verbal behavior of psychologists. Several examples of this practice can be found in the work of Skinner and are recurrent in diverse periodics of the BA. In this article we argue the implications of these analyses in the survival of the BA as a cultural practice, for the conceptual, theoretical, and technological improvement of the BA and for teaching BA. Based on these analyses, it's suggested that the interpretation of terms of other theories should be considered an important research program and should receive greater attention from the behavior analyst.

Abstracts of the 60th Conference of Experimental Psychologists

2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in other ways, and storage in data banks. The use of registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The authors and the publisher of this volume have taken care that the information and recommendations contained herein are accurate and compatible with the standards generally accepted at the time of publication. Nevertheless, it is difficult to ensure that all the information given is entirely accurate for all circumstances. The publisher disclaims any liability, loss, or damage incurred as a consequence, directly or indirectly, of the use and application of any of the contents of this volume.