Edward K. Morris

Contextualism: The World View of Behavior Analysis.

Abstract The thesis of this paper is that contemporary behavior analysis—and the behavior analysis of child development in particular—is contextualistic in world view, in contrast to its traditional characterization as being mechanistic. The contextualistic character of behavior analysis is introduced by presenting some material on the fields historical background. This material, though, is not presented in the manner of the standard account, but rather in a revised account with respect to such movements as empiricism, associationism, positivism, operationism, and pragmatism. The thesis is then developed more fully by comparing and contrasting the contextualism of behavior analysis with mechanism, both of which are analyzed with respect to five core developmental issues: (a) elementarism versus holism, (b) development as response-based change versus structural change, (c) causal versus functional analysis, (d) continuity versus discontinuity, and (e) the passive versus active nature of development. Finally, the importance of “context” in contextualism is examined and organized according to current behavior-analytic practices. Concluding commentary focuses on the salutory effects of having both behavior analysis and mainstream developmental psychology be commensurable in world view, especially with regard to such issues as cognition.

Comments on cognitive science in the experimental analysis of behavior

Arguments are increasingly being made for the inclusion of cognitive science in the experimental analysis of behavior (TEAB). These arguments are described, and a critical analysis of them is presented, especially in regards to the logic of objective inference and the renewed use of cognitive intervening variables. In addition, one particular defining feature of cognitive processes (i.e., the absence of an immediate controlling stimulus) is described, along with alternative points of view stressing molar-molecular levels of analysis and historical causation. Finally, comments are made on the use of cognitive concepts and language in the behavioral sciences. On all of these issues, counter-arguments are based on available material in behavior analysis metatheory, concepts, and experimental practices.

Misconception and miseducation: Presentations of radical behaviorism in psychology textbooks.

Behavior analysts have recently expressed concern about what appear to be misrepresentations of behaviorism in psychology textbooks. This paper presents an analysis of currently used textbooks in the areas of introductory, social, cognitive, personality, and developmental psychology that confirms this. Topics on which behavior analysis is most often misrepresented relate to the role of animal learning research, environmentalism, the “empty organism,” language, and the overall utility of the approach. Because textbooks are often a major medium of interaction between the public and behaviorism, behavior analysts must work to correct these errors and to prevent possible negative consequences of widespread misunderstanding. Several potential solutions to these problems are presented that take into account current publishing practices and the monetary contingencies which support them.

A history of the term radical behaviorism: From Watson to Skinner.

This paper describes the origins and evolution of the term radical behaviorism. John B. Watson’s coining of behaviorism in 1913 is presented first, followed by a discussion of the uses of “radical” within psychology during these early years. When the term radical behaviorism first emerged in the early 1920s, its referent was Watson’s behaviorism, most specifically his stance on consciousness. In the 1930s, B. F. Skinner described his own position with the term radical behaviorism in an unpublished manuscript, and then in 1945 first referred in print to his views as such. Today, radical behaviorism is generally applied to Skinner’s views alone. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of a similarity in Watson’s and Skinner’s positions on consciousness, which seems a possible historical and philosophical connection between their respective radical behaviorisms.

Public information, dissemination, and behavior analysis

Behavior analysts have become increasingly concerned about inaccuracies and misconceptions in the public, educational, and professional information portraying their activities, but have done little to correct these views. The present paper has two purposes in this regard. First, the paper describes some of the conditions that have given rise to these concerns. Second, and more important, the paper surveys various procedures and programs for the dissemination of public information that may correct inaccuracies and misconceptions. Special consideration is also given to issues involving (a) the assessment of the problem, (b) the content and means of dissemination, (c) the possible contributions of behavior analysts to current misunderstandings, and (d) relationships between behavior analysts and the media. The dissemination of accurate and unbiased information constitutes an important new undertaking for behavior analysis. The future of the field may depend in part on such activity.

Behavior analysis and mechanism: One is not the other.

Behavior analysts have been called mechanists, and behavior analysis is said to be mechanistic; that is, they are claimed to be aligned with the philosophy of mechanism. What this means is analyzed by (a) examining standard and specialized dictionary and encyclopedia definitions and descriptions of mechanism and its cognates and (b) reviewing contemporary representations of the mechanistic worldview in the literature on the philosophy of psychology. Although the term mechanism and its cognates are sometimes an honorific (e.g., “natural science”), their standard meanings, usages, and functions in society, science, psychology, and philosophy do not aptly characterize the discipline. These terms mischaracterize how behavior analysts conceptualize (a) the behavior of their subjects and the individuals with whom they work and (b) their own behavior as scientists. Discussion is interwoven throughout about the nature of terms and definitions in science.

«Superstitious» behavior in children

The behavior of 12 preschool children was examined for the emergence of superstitious behavior under response-independent, fixed-time (FT) schedules of reinforcement. Three experimental phases were conducted: (a) two 8-min baseline sessions, (b) six 10-min experimental sessions of FT 15- or 30-sec marble delivery, and (c) two final 8-min baseline sessions. Sessions were videotaped and scored; mean interobserver agreement ranged from 80.0 to 98.6%. Results showed that responding emerged on the FT schedules for seven of the children, increasing in probability towards the end of the intervals; five children either displayed responses having no discernible temporal pattern or they had no specifiable dominant response. A test of the reinforcing function of the marbles showed that they generally functioned as reinforcers. Discussion focused on the fixed-time length, the behavioral processes involved, methodological qualifications, and the nature of the responding engendered.

Some Historical and Conceptual Foundations of Ecobehavioral Analysis

As the behavioral sciences approach the next millenium, the leading edge of theory, research, and application will become increasingly ecological and contextualistic in world view. As a participant in the behavioral sciences, behavior analysis has already begun to evolve in these important new directions and has done so in each of its three main branches: the conceptual analysis of behavior, the experimental analysis of behavior, and applied behavior analysis.

The premack principle, response deprivation, and establishing operations.

This paper describes response deprivation as an establishing operation. In this context, we review the concept of establishing operation, in particular, its reinforcer-establishing and evocative effects; we place response deprivation in the literature on the reinforcing effects of behavioral activity, wherein response deprivation subsumes the Premack principle; we describe the reinforcer-altering and evocative effects of response deprivation; and we address a methodological concern about the evocative effect. In closing, we discuss some conceptual and empirical implications of the foregoing analyses.

B. F. Skinner's Contributions to Applied Behavior Analysis.

Our paper reviews and analyzes B. F. Skinner’s contributions to applied behavior analysis in order to assess his role as the field’s originator and founder. We found, first, that his contributions fall into five categorizes: the style and content of his science, his interpretations of typical and atypical human behavior, the implications he drew from his science for application, his descriptions of possible applications, and his own applications to nonhuman and human behavior. Second, we found that he explicitly or implicitly addressed all seven dimensions of applied behavior analysis. These contributions and the dimensions notwithstanding, he neither incorporated the field’s scientific (e.g., analytic) and social dimensions (e.g., applied) into any program of published research such that he was its originator, nor did he systematically integrate, advance, and promote the dimensions so to have been its founder. As the founder of behavior analysis, however, he was the father of applied behavior analysis.