Abstract
Some have suggested that the definition of verbal behavior offered by B. F. Skinner (1957) fails to capture the essence of language insofar as it is too broad and not functional. In this paper, I argue that the ambiguities of Skinner’s definition are not an indictment of it, and that suggestions to the contrary are problematic because they suffer a critical error of scientific reasoning. Specifically, I argue that (a) no clear definition of verbal behavior is possible because there is no natural distinction between verbal and nonverbal behavior; (b) attempts at an immutable definition are essentialistic; and (c) Skinner’s functional taxonomy of language is in no way affected by the particulars of any definition of verbal behavior.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Buss, A. H. (1961). The psychology of aggression. New York: Wiley.
Hayes, S. C., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). Relational operants: Processes and implications: A response to Palmer’s review of Relational Frame Theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 82, 213–224.
Hayes, S. C, Blackledge, J. T., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2001). Language and cognition: Constructing an alternative approach within the behavioral tradition. In S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & B. Roche (Eds.), Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition (pp. 3–20). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Leigland, S. (1997). Is a new definition of verbal behavior necessary in light of derived relational responding? The Behavior Analyst, 20, 3–9.
Mayr, E. (1988). Toward a new philosophy of biology: Observations of an evolutionist. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
Moore, J. (2008). Conceptual foundations of radical behaviorism. Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan.
Palmer, D. C. (2004a). Data in search of a principle: A review of Relational Frame Theory: A Post-Skinnerian Account of Human Language and Cognition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 81, 189–204.
Palmer, D. C. (2004b). Generic response classes and relational frame theory: Response to Hayes and Barnes-Holmes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 82, 225–234.
Palmer, D. C (2008). On Skinner’s definition of verbal behavior. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 8, 295–307.
Palmer, D. C, & Donahoe, J. (1992). Essentialism and selectionism in cognitive science and behavior analysis. American Psychologist, 47, 1344–1358.
Salzinger, K. (1970). Language behavior. In A. C. Catania & T. A. Brigham (Eds.), Handbook of applied behavior analysis (pp. 275–321). New York: Irvington.
Salzinger, K. (2003). On the verbal behavior of Relational Frame Theory: A Post-Skinnerian Account of Human Language and Cognition. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 19, 7–9.
Schlinger, H. D. (2008). Listening is behaving verbally. The Behavior Analyst, 31, 145–161.
Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Sundberg, M. L. (2007). Verbal behavior. In J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, & W. L. Heward (Eds.), Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed., pp. 526–547). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Sundberg, M. L., & Michael, J. (2001). The value of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior for teaching children with autism. Behavior Modification, 25, 698–724.
Vollmer, T. R., Progar, P. R., Lalli, J. S., Van Camp, C. M., Sierp, B. J., Wright, C. S., et al. (1998). Fixed-time schedules attenuate extinction-induced phenomena in the treatment of severe aberrant behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 529–542.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Normand, M.P. Much ado about nothing? some comments on B. F. Skinner’s definition of verbal behavior. BEHAV ANALYST 32, 185–190 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392182
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392182