Behaviorism has remained a major trend in psychology in relation to the biological significance of natural processes including behavior. Behaviorism emphasizes the role of environmental factor in influencing the behavior of individuals. Behaviorism excludes the influence of innate of the various inherited factors (Burgos, 2016). Therefore, behaviorism amounts fundamentally to a focus on learning whereby new behavior is learnt through classical or operant conditioning theory. The theory of learning suggests therefore that when born, our minds are blank slates. Therefore, behaviorism is still applied currently in classrooms to promote learning based on the learning theory whereby educators strive to encourage learning by rewarding positive behavior among learners.
B.F. Skinner founded behaviorism as well as the learning theory and behavior modification methods. His work was generally viewed as controversial as it opposed the conventional framework regarding the subject of psychology. His radical behaviorism offered a different conceptual framework for explain human behavior that had no close relationship with conventional psychology thus using the term radical to underscore the contrast that existed between the methodological behaviorism and his new approach (Burn et al, 2011). Therefore, Skinner attempted to demonstrate orderly relationships existing between behavior and environment as opposed to placing causal status in hypothetical constructs or entities. As such, Skinner viewed cause as a rather complex interaction that extended across a set of temporal scales involving organisms and the surroundings. Skinner’s general view of behaviorism is therefore based in operant conditioning in that, a certain behavior is followed by a consequence that has the potential of modifying the organism’s tendency to repeat the behavior in the future. The nature of the consequence will determine whether an organism will repeat the behavior. If the consequence is reinforcing, the chance of the organism repeating the behavior in the future will be higher.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Therefore, Skinner’s radical behaviorism follows an empirical framework that has maintained relevance over time due to its wide applicability in daily lives. The operant conditioning theory is still applicable in modern days because it has the potential of directly influencing the behavior of individuals. Therefore, positive behaviors can be reinforced in classroom or workplace using the learning theory by employing reinforcement techniques.
History of Behaviorism
Edward Thorndike
The history of behaviorism dates back to early twentieth century where various behaviorists contributed to the development of its concepts. Behaviorism refers to the theory that studies the overt observable behaviors of individuals for purposes of understanding their mental processes. It focuses on the environment and its influence on the individual in order to establish if the surroundings causes people to react or act in certain mannerisms. Behaviorism is a reaction to preceding theories that were argued by behaviorists as being too philosophical rather than being scientific enough to allow for empirical analyses. Therefore, behaviorism involves observations and measurements regarding what are actually happening to individuals. There are various behaviorists who have contributed significantly in the development of behaviorism along history such as Edward Thorndike, John Watson and B.F. Skinner.
Edward Thorndike initially studied the law of effect by placing cats that were hungry inside puzzle boxes and observed their actions (Burn et al, 2011). He discovered that cats were able to learn the efficacy of various behaviors and would repeat such behaviors that enabled them to successfully escape. He rewarded the cats that successfully escaped with food. Therefore, cats could learn from previous behaviors after successive trials and could escape from the boxes easily with time. Therefore, cats appeared to learn from an intricate pattern of trial and error process. As such, a well-practiced cat could efficiently recall and reuse actions that were successful in escaping and getting the food reward.
From the experiment, Thorndike realized that stimuli and responses as well as consequences modified the behavior of cats. He used the findings to develop the famous ‘law and effect’ theory. According to the theory, behaviors that are followed by satisfying consequences are more likely to be repeated while behaviors that are followed by unpleasant consequences are less likely to be repeated. Therefore, the theory implies that organisms are likely to repeat a behavior that brings a desired result as opposed to a behavior that brings an undesired result to the organism.
Thorndike’s theory of law and effect now informs much of operant conditioning and behaviorism. Law and effect theory suggests that behaviors are modified by their consequences. As such, the basic stimulus-response relationship can be learned by and operant individual or animal. The response can be reinforced upon establishing the association between a behavior and a consequence (Burg et al, 1996). Therefore, the association holds the primary responsibility for the occurrence of the particular behavior. He posited that learning was merely a pattern of change in the behavior of individuals as a result of a consequence. Therefore, if an action brings a reward, it as stamped into the mind and it can be recalled later.
The law of effect has been extrapolated to several forms of behavior modification because it relies majorly on what can be observed in human behavior. Although the theory does not account for the entirety of human behavior, it has been applied in every sphere of human life especially in psychology and education.
John Watson
John Watson coined the term ‘behaviorism’ in 1913 in his work ‘Psychology as the Behaviorist View It.’ He took the work of Pavlov and adapted it to psychology in a bid to explain why people behaved in the way they did. He adapted the concept of stimulus response to human learning in order to explain that certain conditioned responses actually existed. He posited that responses are based on past experiences hence people can learn, adapt and grow behaviors into more complex ones. The study of such responses helped significantly in understanding the entire range of human behaviors as well as adapting such understanding to more complex things. John Watson conducted an experiment with Little Albert which involved conditioning certain phobia in the child by showing him different white fluffy animals and thereafter banding loud objects together behind him. As a result, the child grew afraid of the white objects due to the noise that he anticipated after seeing them.
Watson gave behaviorism definitive goals, methods and parameters hence giving it a structure based heavily in rationalist thought as well as on the primary precept that learning is the major influence on behavior and development (Burg & Fergusson, 2000). As a result, he severed the relationship that existed between psychology and philosophy. He abandoned the famous philosophical terms and adopted an appropriate language that could effectively express the pragmatism and immediacy of behaviorism. One of his memorable views was the concept of focusing on the causes and control of human behavior. In his view, applied behaviorism was essential in the success of men, businesses and nations.
B.F. Skinner
B.F. Skinner graduated from college with a degree in literature in 1926. Thereafter, he proceeded to Harvard University where he earned a PhD in Psychology in 1931. Although he had not initially done psychology, he was enthusiastic about field and consequently read a number of books and research papers relating to psychology. While in college studying his PhD, behaviorisms was experiencing challenges based on the departure of Watson from academia.
Skinner was not satisfied with information obtained from a rat experiment he had conducted. He further revisited Pavlov’s experiment and came up with a concept that transformed the view of behaviorism. He began studying the entire organism instead of viewing each individual stimulus response as a discrete part of the entire organism being studied. Such a small change in perspective led to the examination of the animal subjects between experiments. Skinner began to record behaviors between the experiments without removing the animal subjects from the experimental cage. As such, he believed that all behavior is controlled mechanically and he began to perform orderly well controlled experiments. Such insights significantly helped him to frame his works as well as the influence of his works.
Skinner published his first academic paper the effectively illustrated the value of orderly well-controlled experiments therefore setting behaviorism away from cognition and consciousness (Malone et al, 2014 ). Thereafter, Skinner began to move away from his mechanical view in relation to behavior as a result of increasing complexity in experiments performed. For many years, it had been held that respondent entirely revolved around stimulus and the response. However, his complex experiments led to the concept of the operant. An operant involved a consequence in a three-tier reinforcement schedule comprising of a stimulus, response and the resulting reinforcing stimulus. A new line of reasoning was born from this framework that eventually led to the view that a stimulus may result into more than one kind of response by an individual. He began thinking in terms of contingencies instead of biological drives. As such, this marked Skinner’s movement away from the conventional mechanistic philosophies that were used to explain human behavior. This led to a shift in perspective from the mechanistic view towards a functional view. He saw the behavior as a functional component as it mediated the competing needs of the organism.
However, skinner did not spend his entire life in the laboratory conducting experiments on rat behavior. His passion for writing led into his contribution to popular press as he gradually moved from the field of academia towards the field of public consciousness (Catania, 2008). As a result, his name became synonymous with behavioral psychology and his works became an enduring influence on the American society as well as his favorite discipline of psychology. Skinner stayed out of the popular press for about ten years after which he came back energetically. He wrote articles in the ladies home journal. His articles resurfaced at a particular time when he and behaviorism were being viewed as a significant potential in the field of commerce.
Skinner attempted to bring the influence of behaviorism to the market place which led to his contracting with the government in using birds to guide bombs as well as inventing a mechanical teacher and marketing it as well. However, his contributions faced setbacks during an era where there was increasing concern regarding mind control and free will brought about by the constant fear of Communist subversion. Fortunately, some post war exuberance along with a faith in technology supported Skinner and behaviorism.
Widespread support of behaviorism in areas where it was applied increased significantly. Applied Behavior Analysis was considered a new and effective technique of teaching difficult to train populations (Altus & Morris, 2009). The techniques were used to help autistic children to learn basic skills associated with daily living in the society. Moreover, schools and hospitals found the technique a very useful approach in facilitating learning. Behavior modifications were limited to the confines of institutions and were unsuccessful when applied outside such institutions. Skimmer’s book Beyond Freedom and Dignity, spurred significant controversy in the public as his views were compared to those of Hitler and Stalin. Moreover, his research funding hanged in a precipice but the threat was short-lived.
Skinner made a huge mark in the history of functional psychology and his works are still applicable in the modern day life. His commitment to develop structures and frameworks as well as concepts that have helped in understanding human behavior cannot escape the records of psychology history. He is also credited for developing useful learning techniques for use in hospitals and learning institutions to teach children with autistic conditions.
Murray J. Goddard
Murray Goddard is a psychologist specializing in animal learning and behavior. He received his BA from the University of Calgary and earned his PhD from McMaster University before joining the psychology department in 1987 at the University of New Brunswick. He was a research scientist at Duke University between 1993 and 1994 where he was awarded a university merit award in 1999. Moreover, he was awarded a university teaching award in 2002. Dr. Goddard specializes in animal learning and behavior and his research interest are in classical conditioning. He deals particularly on the signal value of food using rats as subjects. He is a member of the Canadian Psychological Association, Psychonomic Society as well as the Eastern Psychological Association. Moreover, his research is funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
In his work ‘The impact of Human Intuition in Psychology’ he points out three psychological outcomes that violate human intuition. He further discusses how human intuition may be detrimental to human behaviorism and evolutionary perspectives of human nature. He argues that common sense revolution may be viewed as an essential way of influencing people’s behaviors but it has no empirical validity. Several programs aimed at enforcing use of commonsense like boot camps are cited by Goddard to be ineffective yet it is a common practice. He points out other common sense programs such as Scared Straight, in which prison life exposure has extreme threatening effects on at-risk adolescents.
He also argues that behaviorism violates human intuition because it has lacked acceptability. Moreover, behaviorism is accused of promoting situation centered responses. For example, students who are conditioned to classroom situations have a tendency of giving classroom related responses even if the questions asked are no classroom related. Therefore, Goddard argues therefore the human intuition is significantly violated by behaviorism. As such, behaviors may arise outside introspective awareness although veridical introspective understanding may be considerably irrelevant. Therefore, human intuition is likely to be significantly affected by the concept of behaviorism.
Goddard also suggests that evolutionary psychology violates human intuition. He argues that the belief in evolution in the society has no empirical validity in terms of introspective awareness. The human malleability may be intuitively plausible whereas the universal human nature may be less plausible. Therefore, if the evolutionary nature of men is disqualified, it will not affect the validity of empirical outcomes in terms of experience and behavior.
In his work ‘Critical Psychiatry, Critical Psychology and the Behaviorism of B.F. Skinner’ he suggests that there is a great similarity between the critical psychiatry and critical psychology as they both share important epistemological similarities with the writings of Skinner. He points out that Skinners behaviorism emphasizes a functional level of analysis that may be compared with the mainstream psychology emphasis on the concept of essentialism. As such, intelligence is observed to be a relatively fixed quantity that individuals possess or rather a set of behaviors that arise given a particular set of organism-environment interaction. He argues that both Skinner’s behaviorism and mainstream psychology attribute behavior changes and development to the interaction between the organism and the environment. Moreover, Skinner’s radical behaviorism by extension involves psychological phenomena being intrinsically tri-polar by comprising of the organism, the environment and the behavior. Skinner’s focus, according to Goddard, focused on the environmental contributions to behavior hence advocating for human welfare which is a primary function of psychology. Critical psychology advocates often for cultural change and the steps involved in the process of cultural are similar to Skinner’s radical behaviorism.
Critical psychiatry emphasizes that emotional distress and disordered behavior is as a result of environmental factors. As such, this shows a striking similarity with Skinner’s radical behaviorism which emphasizes organism-environment interaction. Therefore, psychiatrists identify the desired behaviors and reinforce them through reward while employing negative reinforcement for behaviors considered undesirable. This shows the similarities between critical psychiatry and radical behaviorism as response-stimulus model is utilized. Therefore, according to Goddard, there are epistemological similarities between critical psychology, critical psychiatry and Skinner’s radical behaviorism.
In his article “On Certain Similarities Between Mainstream Psychology and the Writing of B.F. Skinner,” Goddard lays bare the similarities between the mainstream psychology with Skinner’s radical behaviorism. Goddard points out that Skinner’s Radical behaviorism supported five current topics in mainstream psychology such as the unconscious, human language , the role of dispositions in psychology, human perception of conformity and bias as well as mindfulness.
According to Goddard, Skinner agreed with the fact that human behavior may be extensively influence by variable the subject may not be aware of. This therefore shows agreement between the radical behaviorism and the mainstream psychology. Moreover, Skinner is sympathetic about the effect of psychoanalysis in defining a unified theory of man. Furthermore, Skinner acknowledges the influence of natural environment behavior just like the mainstream psychology. In his book ‘Beyond Freedom and Dignity. ’ Skinners acknowledges the controlling relations between the environment and behavior.
Current psychological research confirms Skinner’s radical behaviorism analysis on verbal behavior which was an extension of the operant conditioning theory. Skinner posited that an individual verbal behavior can be reinforced through rewards. Goddard agrees with this by indicating that indeed, an individual’s verbal behavior can be rewarded through an audience attention. Therefore, this is an agreement with the operant conditioning theory. Furthermore, Skinner appreciates the influence of disposition in psychology by confirming that indeed, dispositions are common in psychological theories as a result of different dimensions of observation. Moreover, Skinner’s work regarding Human perception of conformity and bias is supported by current research in the conscious cannot access the predominantly unconscious brain process involved in human behavior. Reinforcing mindfulness among individuals involves operant conditioning, a concept of radical behaviorism.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Skinner’s radical behaviorism epitomizes rich similarities with the works of Goddard regarding modern mainstream psychology. Their ideologies intersect across several points of significance. This underscores the wide applicability of behaviorism concepts long after Skinner discovered. Skinner’s Radical behaviorism supported five current topics in mainstream psychology such as the unconscious, human language, the role of dispositions in psychology, human perception of conformity and bias as well as mindfulness. According to Goddard, Skinner agreed with the fact that human behavior may be extensively influence by variable the subject may not be aware of. This therefore shows agreement between the radical behaviorism and the mainstream psychology. Moreover, Skinner is sympathetic about the effect of psychoanalysis in defining a unified theory of man. Furthermore, Skinner acknowledges the influence of natural environment behavior just like the mainstream psychology. Skinner acknowledges the controlling relations between the environment and behavior. Current psychological research confirms Skinner’s radical behaviorism analysis on verbal behavior which was an extension of the operant conditioning theory. Skinner posited that an individual verbal behavior can be reinforced through rewards. Therefore, the operant conditioning theory is still applicable in modern days because it has the potential of directly influencing the behavior of individuals. Therefore, positive behaviors can be reinforced in classroom or workplace using the learning theory by employing reinforcement techniques.
References
Altus , D., Morris , E. (2009). B. F. Skinner’s utopian vision: Behind and beyond
Walden Two . The Behavior Analyst, 32 , 319–335.
Murray, Goddard. ‘On certain similarities between mainstream psychology and the writings of B.F. Skinner,’ The Psychological Record , (2012), 62; 563-576
Murray, Goddard. ‘Critical psychiatry, critical psychology, and the behaviorism of B.F. Skinner,’ Review of General Psychology , (2014), 18(3); 208-215
Murray, Goddard. ‘The impact of human intuition in psychology,’ Review of General Psychology, (2009). 13(2); 167-174
Burgos, J. E. (2016). Antidualism and Antimentalism in Radical Behaviorism. Behavior & Philosphy, 431-37.
Burns, R., Burgos, J. E., Donahoe, J. W. (2011). Pavolvian conditioning: Pigeon nicitating membrane. Behavioral processes , 86 102-108. Doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2010.10.004
Malone, J. C. (2014). Did John B. Watson really “found” behaviorism?. The Behavior Analyst, 37 (1), 1-12. doi:10.1007/s40614-014-004-3
Catania , C. (2008). An orderly arrangement of well-known facts: Retrospective
review of B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior . International Journal of Psychology
and Psychological Therapy, 8, 279–285.
Bargh , J. A., Chen, M., Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct
effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 71 , 230–244.
Bargh , A., Ferguson, M. (2000). Beyond behaviorism: The automaticity of higher
mental processes. Psychological Bulletin, 126 , 925–945.
