The Psychological Record

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 41–59 | Cite as

An Interbehavioral Approach to Operant Analysis

  • Ronald V. Kidd
  • Luiz Natalicio
Article
First Online:

Abstract

By means of a review of some aspects of major works of B. F. Skinner and J. R. Kantor, a rapprochement between radical behaviorism and interbehavioral psychology is posited. In particular an analytic field approach is described as paradigmatic for this reconciliation. The experimental analysis of behavior is presented not as atomistic and deterministic but as analytic and probabilistic. Interbehavioral psychology is extracted from its potentially reifiable biological physicalistic linguistic strictures and is presented as the verbal behavior of the experimentalists as they operate on the data fields produced by their structured behavioral environments.

The rapprochement is described as an interbehavioral approach to operant analysis in that events, their iterations (their reproduceability or replicability), and their successive iterations (the experimental program) form interbehavioral fields in which operant analysts function. When products of experimental analyses become part of the data field for other analysts, an interbehavioral field approach to experimentalists’ behavioral products may be undertaken. Hence, an iterative analysis of these products may allow the establishment of an interbehavioral program by which experimentalists’ studies become self-correcting since each becomes “no more than behavior,” not dissimilar from that which they purport to study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BOURNE, L.E., JR., & RESTLE, F. 1959. Mathematical theory of concept identification. Psychological Review, 66, 278–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BRIDGMAN, P.W. 1927. The logic of modern physics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. BRONSON, R.W. 1970. The effects of four contingencies of reinforcement on joint responding of human subjects. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  4. CATANIA, A.C. 1969. Editorial: On the vocabulary and the grammar of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 845–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. DAY, W.F. 1969a. Radical behaviorism in reconciliation with phenomenology. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 315–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DAY, W.F. 1969b. On certain similarities between the Philosophical Investigations of Ludwig Wittgenstein and the operationism of B.F. Skinner. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 489–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DEWS, P.B. (Ed.). 1970. Festschrift for B.F. Skinner. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  8. FERSTER, C.B., & SKINNER, B.F. 1957. Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FRANKLIN, C.W., Jr. 1970. Toward a clarification of operant principles in human interaction. The Psychological Record, 20, 489–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. HERRNSTEIN, R.J. 1970. On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. KANTOR, J.R. 1959. Interbehavioral psychology. Granville, Ohio: Principia Press.Google Scholar
  12. KANTOR, J.R. 1970. An analysis of the experimental analysis of behavior (TEAB). Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 101–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. KANTOR, J.R. 1929. Language as behavior and as symbolism. Journal of Philosophy, 26, 150–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. KENDLER, H.H. 1970. The unity of psychology. The Canadian Psychologist, 11, 30–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. KOCH, S. 1964. Psychology and emerging conceptions of knowledge as unitary. In T.W. Wann (Ed.), Behaviorism and phenomenology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. KRANTZ, D.L. 1971. The separate worlds of operant and non-operant psychology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. LICHTENSTEIN, P.E. 1971. A behavioral approach to “phenomenological data.” The Psychological Record, 21, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. NATALICIO, L.F.S., & KIDD, R.V. 1971. A conceptual shift: An operant approach to human interaction. The Psychological Record, 21, 521–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. RACHLIN, H. 1971. On the tautology of the matching law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15, 249–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. RYCHLAK, J.F. 1968. A philosophy of science for personality theory. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. SCRIVEN, M. 1956. A study of radical behaviorism. In H. Feigl & M. Scriven (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. 1). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  22. SKINNER, B.F. 1938. The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  23. SKINNER, B.F. 1945/1961. The operational analysis of psychological terms. In B.F. Skinner, Cumulative Record. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, pp. 272–286. (Originally published in Psychological Review.)Google Scholar
  24. SKINNER, B.F. 1948. Waiden two. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  25. SKINNER, B.F. 1950/1961. Are theories of learning necessary? In B.F. Skinner, Cumulative Record. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, pp. 39–69. (Originally published in Psychological Review.)Google Scholar
  26. SKINNER, B.F. 1957. Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. SKINNER, B.F. 1966. What is the experimental analysis of behavior? Journal of the Experimental A nalysis of Behavior, 9, 213–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. SKINNER, B.F. 1968. The technology of teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  29. SKINNER, B.F. 1969. Contingencies of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  30. SKINNER, B.F. 1971. Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  31. SPENCE, K.W. 1957. The empirical basis and theoretical structure of psychology. Philosophy of Science, 24, 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. TRABASSO, T., & BOWER, G. 1968. Attention in learning: Theory and research. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  33. TURNER, M.B. 1967. Philosophy and the science of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts.Google Scholar
  34. WANN, T.W. (Ed.). 1964. Behaviorism and phenomenology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. WINOKUR, S. 1971. Skinner’s theory of behavior. An examination of B.F. Skinner’s Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15, 253–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. ZURIFF, G.E. 1970. A comparison of variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 369–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. ZURIFF, G.E. 1971. Philosophy as epiphenomenon. Contemporary Psychology, 16, 559–561.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald V. Kidd
    • 1
  • Luiz Natalicio
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Educational PsychologyThe University of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA

Personalised recommendations