The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 17–26 | Cite as

Three Conceptual Units for Behavior

  • Roy Moxley
Article

Abstract

Three generic units for behavior are examined in terms of their background: an if-then unit for stimulus and response (S-R), a holistic unit for Kantor’s behavior segment, and an AB-because-of-C unit for Skinner’s three-term contingency. The units are distinguished in terms of their respective historical backgrounds, causal modes, advantages, and disadvantages. The ways in which these units may be compatible are discussed.

Key words

behavior analysis interbehavioral field mechanistic explanation S-R psychology three-term contingency conceptual units 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackoff, R., & Emery, F. E. (1972). On purposeful systems. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  2. Aristotle. (1970). Aristotle’s physics books I and II (W. Charlton, Trans.). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barker, R.G. (1968). Ecological psychology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Blurton-Jones, N. (Ed.). (1972). Etiological studies of child behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brethower, D. (1980, May). Integration of behavior analysis and systems analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Dearborn, MI.Google Scholar
  6. Bunge, M. (1979). Causality and modern science (3rd ed.). New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  7. Crombie, A. C. (1953). Robert Grosseteste and the origins of experimental science 1100–1700. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Darwin, C. (1877). A biographical sketch of an infant. Mind, 2, 285–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Darwin, C. (1959). The origin of species: A variorum text (Morse Peckham, Ed.). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. (Original work published 1859)Google Scholar
  10. Darwin, C. (1965). The expression of emotions in man and animals. Chicago: U. of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1872)Google Scholar
  11. Day, W. F. (1980). The historical antecedents of contemporary behaviorism. In R. W. Rieber & K. Salzinger (Eds.), Psychology: Theoretical-historical perspectives (pp. 203–262). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Day, W. F. (1983). On the difference between radical and methodological behaviorism. Behaviorism, 11, 89–102.Google Scholar
  13. Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. F. (1946). Interaction and transaction. The Journal of Philosophy, 43, 505–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Einstein, A. (1953). Geometry and experience. In H. Feigle & M. Brodbeck (Eds.), Readings in the philosophy of science (pp. 189–194). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Original work published 1923)Google Scholar
  15. Epling, W. F., & Pierce, W. D. (1986). The basic importance of applied behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst, 9, 89–99.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Fearing, F. (1970). Reflex action: A study in the history of physiological psychology. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press. (Original work published 1930)Google Scholar
  17. Furst, L. R. (1976). Romanticism. London: Methuen & Co.Google Scholar
  18. Hake, D. F. (1982). The basis-applied continuum and the possible evolution of human operant social and verbal research. The Behavior Analyst, 5, 21–28.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Hempel, C. (1960). Geometry and empirical science. In E. H. Madden (Ed.), The structure of scientific thought: An introduction to philosophy of science (pp. 71–80). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Original work published 1945)Google Scholar
  20. Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior: An introduction to behavior theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  21. Kantor, J. R. (1950). Psychology and logic (Vol. 2). Bloomington, IN: The Principia Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kantor, J. R. (1959). Interbehavioral psychology: A sample of scientific system construction. Granville, OH: The Principia Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kantor, J. R. (1981). Interbehavioral philosophy. Chicago: The Principia Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kendler, H. H., & Spence, J. T. (Eds.). (1971). Essays in neobehaviorism. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  25. Keller, F. (1973). The definition of psychology (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Kitchener, R. F. (1977). Behavior and behaviorism. Behaviorism, 5, 11–71.Google Scholar
  27. Leigland, S. (1984). Can radical behaviorism rescue psychology? The Behavior Analyst, 7, 73–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers (D. Cartwright, Ed.). New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  29. Meadowcroft, P. M., & Moxley, R. A. (1980). Naturalistic observation in the classroom: A radical behavioral view. Educational Psychologist, 15, 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miller, J. G. (1978). Living systems. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  31. Misiak, H., & Sexton, V. S. (1973). Phenomenological, existential, and humanistic psychologies: A historical survey. New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar
  32. Moore, J. (1975). On the principle of operationism in a science of behavior. Behaviorism, 3, 120–138.Google Scholar
  33. Moore, J. (1985). Some historical and conceptual relations among logical positivism, operationism, and behaviorism. The Behavior Analyst, 8, 53–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Morris, E. K. (1982). Some relationships between interbehavioral psychology and radical behaviorism. Behaviorism, 10, 187–216.Google Scholar
  35. Moxley, R. (1982). Graphics for three-term contingencies. The Behavior Analyst, 5, 45–51.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Moxley, R. (1984). Graphic discriminations for radical functional behaviorism. Behaviorism, 12, 81–95.Google Scholar
  37. Moxley, R. (1986). A functional analysis of reading. In P. N. Chase & L. J. Parrott (Eds.), Psychological aspects of language: The West Virginia lectures (pp. 209–232). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.Google Scholar
  38. Pavlov, I. P. (1960). Conditioned reflexes (G. V. Anrep, Trans.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1927)Google Scholar
  39. Peacocke, C. (1979). Holistic explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Peirce, C. S. (1931-1963). In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (6 vols.). Cambridge, MA: Belknap. (Original work published 1902)Google Scholar
  41. Pepper, S. C. (1970). World hypotheses: A study in evidence. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (Original work published 1942)Google Scholar
  42. Phillips, D. C. (1976). Holistic thought in social science. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pope, A. (1931). An essay on man. In H. W. Boynton (Ed.), The complete poetical works of Pope (pp. 137–155). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Original work published 1732)Google Scholar
  44. Putnam, H. (1981). Reason, truth and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Reese, H.W. (1986). Comments on Ribes’s paper. In P. N. Chase & L. J. Parrott (Eds.), Psychological aspects of language: The West Virginia lectures (pp. 80–87). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.Google Scholar
  46. Ringen, J. D. (1976). Explanation, teleology, and operant behaviorism: A study of the experimental analysis of purposive behavior. Philosophy of Science, 43, 223–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Scharff, J. L. (1982). Skinner’s concept of the operant: From necessitarian to probabilistic causality. Behaviorism, 10, 45–54.Google Scholar
  49. Schoenfeld, W. N. (1976). The “response” in behavior theory. The Pavlovian Journal of Biological Science, 11, 129–149.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Shimp, C. P. (1984). Cognition, behavior, and the experimental analysis of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 407–420.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  52. Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  54. Skinner, B. F. (1972). The concept of the reflex in the description of behavior. In Cumulative record (3rd ed.) (pp. 429–457). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Original work published 1931)Google Scholar
  55. Skinner, B. F. (1974). About behaviorism. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  56. Skinner, B. F. (1978). Are we to have a future? In Reflections on behaviorism and society (pp. 16–32). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. (Original work published 1973)Google Scholar
  57. Skinner, B. F. (1978). The experimental analysis of behavior (a history). In Reflections on behaviorism and society (pp. 113–126). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. (Original work published 1977)Google Scholar
  58. Skinner, B. F. (1981). Selection by consequences. Science, 213(4507), 501–504.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Skinner, B.F. (1984a). The evolution of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41, 217–221.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Skinner, B. F. (1984b). Author’s response: Some consequences of selection. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 502–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Skinner, B. F. (1986). Some thoughts about the future. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 229–235.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Thorndike, E. L. (1969). Human nature and the social order (G. J. Clifford, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1940)Google Scholar
  63. Turner, M. B. (1967). Philosophy and the science of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  64. Weiss, P. (1967). 1 + 1 = 2 (one plus one does not equal two). In G. C. Quarton, T. Melneuchuk, & F. O. Schmitt (Eds.), The neurosciences: A study program (pp. 801–821). New York: Rockefeller University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Werner, H., & Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol formation: An organismic-developmental approach to language and the expression of thought. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  66. Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus logico-philosophicus (C. K. Ogden, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  67. Young, R. M. (1970). Mind, brain and adaptation in the nineteenth century. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  68. Zuriff, G. E. (1985). Behaviorism: A conceptual reconstruction. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roy Moxley
    • 1
  1. 1.West Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA

Personalised recommendations