The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 1–8 | Cite as

Convergences with Behavior Analysis: Recommendations from the Rhetoric of Inquiry

  • J. Czubaroff
Article

Abstract

This analysis speculates on reasons why behavior analysis has not had the professional impact it desires, and suggests that increased contact with non-behavior-analytic research traditions and increased research in the area of verbal behavior may reverse the profession’s fortunes. Behaviorists have accrued a number of advantages from constituting themselves as a separate school in psychology. Nonetheless, school status can lead to isolation from other research traditions and can restrict communicative encounters with outside scholars to efforts to attack their research programs and defend one’s own. Efforts to counteract these tendencies should help bring behavior analysis into the mainstream of contemporary social science research. In addition, if behavior analysts reconsider some of their assumptions about verbal and nonverbal behaviors and some of their methodological assumptions about how verbal behavior is to be studied, and if they place verbal behavior research on center stage, they may make substantive contributions to the contemporary multidisciplinary study of language.

Key words

verbal behavior methodology research assumptions communication schools 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andresen, J. T. (1990). Skinner and Chomsky 30 years later. Or: The return of the repressed. Historiographia Linguistics 171, 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Audi, R. (1976). B. F. Skinner on freedom, dignity, and the explanation of behavior. Behaviorism, 4(2), 163–186.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  4. Bernstein, R. J. (1983). Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics, and praxis. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  5. Catania, A. C. (1984). Learning (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Catania, A. C. (1991). The gifts of culture and of eloquence: An open letter to Michael J. Mahoney in reply to his article, “Scientific Psychology and Radical Behaviorism.” The Behavior Analyst, 14, 16–72.Google Scholar
  7. Cerutti, D. T. (1989). Discrimination theory of rule-governed behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 259–276.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Chance, P. (1990). The sky is falling. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  9. Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Verbal Behavior by B. F. Skinner. Language, 35, 26–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Czubaroff, J. (1991). Value issues in scientific discourse: Skinner’s use of the evolutionary analogy. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  11. Folger, J. P., & Poole, M. S. (1984). Working through conflict: A communication perspective. Dallas, TX: Scott, Foresman, and Co.Google Scholar
  12. Gergen, K. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40, 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glenn, S. S. (1992). Contingencies and metacon-tingencies: Relations among behavioral, cultural, and biological evolution. In P. A. Lamal (Ed.), Behavior analysis of societies and cultural practices (pp. 39–73). Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  14. Hagstrom, W. O. (1965). The scientific community. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  15. Hayes, S. C. (1984). Making sense of spirituality. Behaviorism, 12, 99–110.Google Scholar
  16. Hayes, S. C. (1987). Upward and downward continuity: It’s time to change our strategic assumptions. Behavior Analysis, 22, 3–6.Google Scholar
  17. Hineline, P. N. (1983). On terms: When we speak of knowing. The Behavior Analyst, 6, 183–186.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Hineline, P. N., & Wanchisen, B. A. (1989). Correlated hypothesizing and the distinction between contingency-shaped and rule-governed behavior. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp. 221–268). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hocker, J. L., & Wilmot, W. W. (1985). Interpersonal conflict (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.Google Scholar
  20. Knapp, M. L., & Miller, G. L. (Eds.). (1985). Handbook of interpersonal communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  21. Lacey, H. (1980). Psychological conflict and human nature: The case of behaviourism and cognition. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 10(3), 131–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee, V. L. (1988). Beyond behaviorism. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  23. Leigland, S. (1989). On the relation between radical behaviorism and the science of verbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 7, 2541.Google Scholar
  24. Littlejohn, S. W. (1989). Theories of human communication (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  25. MacCorquodale, K. (1970). On Chomsky’s review of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 83–99.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Mahoney, M. J. (1989). Scientific psychology and radical behaviorism: Important distinctions based in scientism and objectivism. American Psychologist, 44(11), 1372–1377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Michael, J. (1984). Verbal behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 363–376.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Neuringer, A. (1991). Humble behaviorism. The Behavior Analyst, 14, 1–13.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Proctor, R. W., & Weeks, D. J. (1990). There is no room for scientism in scientific psychology: A comment on Mahoney. American Psychologist, 45(10), 1177–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sidman, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal classes. In T. Thompson & M. D. Zeller (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213–245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  32. Sidman, M. (1990). Equivalence relations: Where do they come from? In D. E. Blackman & H. Lejeune (Eds.), Behaviour analysis in theory and practice: Contributions and controversies (pp. 93–114). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  33. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  35. Skinner, B. F. (1979). The shaping of a behaviorist. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  36. Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Czubaroff
    • 1
  1. 1.Communication Arts DepartmentUrsinus CollegeCollegevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations