Advertisement

Abstract

The goals of this chapter are threefold: (a) to characterize selectionism as a general approach to understanding complex phenomena as products of relatively simple processes acting over time, (b) to identify conceptual impediments to the acceptance of selection by reinforcement as the central process by which complex behavior emerges, and (c) to outline a program for a new modern synthesis for the selection of complex behavior through reinforcement that parallels the early history of evolution through natural selection.

Keywords

Natural Selection Experimental Analysis Complex Behavior Behavior Analysis Conditioned Reinforcer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agassiz, L. (1874). Evolution and permanence of type. Atlantic Monthly, 33, 92–101.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. R. (1978). Arguments concerning representations for mental imagery. Psychological Review, 85, 249–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anonymous. (1860). Editorial. Eclectic Review, 3, 224. (as cited in Ellegård,1958)Google Scholar
  4. Baum, W. M. (1973). The correlation-based law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 20, 137–153.Google Scholar
  5. Baum, W. M. (1974). On two types of deviations from the matching law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 231–242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bersh, P. J., Whitehouse, W. G., & Mauro, B. C. (1982). Pavlovian processes and response competition as determinants of avoidance response-prevention effects. Learning and Motivation, 13, 113–134.Google Scholar
  7. Burgos, J. E. (1997). Evolving artificial neural networks in Pavlovian environments. In J. W. Donahoe and V. P. Dorsel (Eds.), Neural-network models of cognition: Biobehavioral foundations (pp. 58–79 ). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burns, R., & Donahoe, J. W. (1984). Unified reinforcement principle: Shock as reinforcer. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, San Antonio, TX. (described in Donahoe & Palmer, 1994 )Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, D. T. (1974). Evolutionary epistemology. In P. A. Schlipp (Ed.), The philosophy of Karl Popper (Vol. 14–1, pp. 413–463 ). LaSalle, IL: Open Court Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Carpenter, W. B. (1860). Review. National Review. (as cited in Hull, 1973 )Google Scholar
  11. Catania, A. C. (1971). Reinforcement schedules: The role of responses preceding the one that produces the reinforcer. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15, 271–287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Catania, A. C. (1995). Selection in behavior and biology. In J. T. Todd & E. K. Morris (Eds.), Modern perspective on B. F. Skinner and contemporary behaviorism (pp. 185–194 ). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  13. Darwin, C. (1859/1964). On the origin of species. A facsimile of the first edition. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Davison, M. & Baum, W. M. (2000). Choice in a variable environment: Every reinforcer counts. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  16. Dobzhansky, T. (1937). Genetics and the origin of species. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Domjan, M. (1980). Ingestional aversion learning: Unique and general processes. In J. S.Rosenblatt & M. Busnel (Eds.), Advances in the study of behavior (Vol. 11 ), New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  18. Donahoe, J. W. (1977). Some implications of a relational principle of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 341–350. 1980 ).Google Scholar
  19. Donahoe, J. W. (1983). A plausible analogy?: Reinforcement theory: Cognitive psychology:: Natural selection: Special creationism. Invited address presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
  20. Donahoe, J. W. (1984). Commentary: Skinner-The Darwin of ontogeny? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 287–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Donahoe, J. W. (1997). Selection networks: Simulation of plasticity through reinforcement learning. In J. W. Donahoe & V. P. Dorsel (Eds.), Neural-network approaches to cognition: Biobehavioral foundations. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science Press.Google Scholar
  22. Donahoe, J. W. (1999). Edward L. Thorndike: The selectionist connectionist. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72, 451–454.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Donahoe, J. W., Burgos, J. E., & Palmer, D. C. (1993). Selectionist approach to reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 17–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Donahoe, J. W., Crowley, M. A., Millard, W J., & Stickney, K. J. (1982). A unified principle of reinforcement: Some implications for matching. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & H.Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative Analyses of Behavior. II. Matching and maximizing accounts (Vol. 2, pp. 493–521 ). New York: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  25. Donahoe, J. W., &. Dorsel V. P. (Eds) (1997). Neural-network approaches to cognition: Biobehavioral foundations. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science Press.Google Scholar
  26. Donahoe, J. W., & Palmer, D. C. (1989). The interpretation of complex human behavior: Some reactions to Parallel Distributed Processing, edited by J. L. McClelland, D. E. Rumelhart, and the PDP Research Group. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 399–416.Google Scholar
  27. Donahoe, J. W., & Palmer, D. C. (1994). Learning and complex behavior. Boston: Allyn& Bacon.Google Scholar
  28. Donahoe, J. W., Palmer, D. C., & Burgos, J. E. (1997). The S-R issue in behavior analysis and in Donahoe and Palmer’s Learning and complex behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 67, 193–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Donahoe, J. W., & Wessells, M.G. (1980). Learning, language, and memory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  30. Ellegard, A. (1958). Darwin and the general reader: The reception of Darwin’s theory of evolution in the British periodical press, 1859–1872. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
  31. Epstein, R. (1983). Resurgence of previously reinforced behavior during extinction. Behavior Analysis Letters3,391–397. Google Scholar
  32. Estes, W. K., & Skinner, B. F. (1941). Some quantitative properties of anxiety. Journal of Experimental Psychology29,390–400. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fisher, R. A. (1930). The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  34. Frey, U. (1997). Cellular mechanisms of long-term potentiation: Late maintenance. In J. W.Donahoe & V. P. Dorsel (Eds.), Neural-network approaches to cognition: Biobehavioral foundations (pp. 105–105–128). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science Press.Google Scholar
  35. Galbicka, G. (1992). The dynamics of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 243–248.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gazzaniga, M. S. (2000). Cognitive neuroscience. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  37. Gerall, A. A., & Obrist, G. A. (1962). Classical conditioning of the papillary dilation response of normal and curarized cats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55, 486–491.Google Scholar
  38. Grice, G. R. (1948). The relation of secondary reinforcement to delayed reward in visual discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 1–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Haldane, J. B. S. (1931). A re-examination of Darwinism. (as cited in Haldane, 1966 )Google Scholar
  40. Haldane. J.B. S. (1966), The causes of evolution. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Hasselmo, M. E., & Wyble, B. P. (1997). Free recall and recognition in a network model of the hippocampus: Simulating effects of scopolamine on human memory function. Behavioral Brain Research, 89, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–266.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hintzman, D. L. (1980). Simpson’s paradox and the analysis of memory retrieval. Psychological Review 87398–410. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hintzman, D. L. (1993). Twenty-five years of learning and memory: Was the cognitive revolution a mistake? In D. L. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance 14: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 359–391 ). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  45. Hull, D. L. (1973). Darwin and his critics: The reception of Darwin’s theory of evolution by the scientific community. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
  46. Hutchison, W. R. (1997). We also need complete behavioral models. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 67224–228. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Huxley, T. H. (1908). Lectures and essays. London. (as cited in Ellegård,1958)Google Scholar
  48. Jenkin, F. (1867). Review. The North British Review. (as cited in Hull, 1973 )Google Scholar
  49. Jenkins, H. M., & Moore, B. R. (1973). The form of the auto-shaped response with food or water reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 20 ,163–181.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kamin, L. J. (1968). Attention-like processes in classical conditioning. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Miami symposium on the prediction of behavior (pp. 9–31 ). Miami, FL: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
  51. Kamin, L. J. (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention and conditioning. In B. A. Campbell & R. M. Church (Eds.), Punishment and aversive behavior (pp. 279–296 ). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  52. Lattal, K. A., & Gleeson, S. (1990). Response acquisition with delayed reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 1627–39. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lewes, G. H. (1860). Cornhill Magazine, 1, 443. (as cited in Hull, 1973 )Google Scholar
  54. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review, 55, 95–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mandler, G. (1981). What is cognitive psychology? What isn’t? Invited address Division of Philosophical Psychology American Psychological AssociationLos Angeles, CA. Google Scholar
  56. Mayr, E. R. (1942). Systematics and the origin of species. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Mayr, E. R. (1976). Typological versus population thinking. In E. Mayr (Ed).), Evolution and the diversity of life (pp. 26–29). Cambridge: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  58. Mayr, E. R. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Mayr, E. R. (1988). Toward a new philosophy of biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Meehl, P. E. (1950). On the circularity of the law of effect. Psychological Bulletin, 47, 1950, 52–75.Google Scholar
  61. Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. Behavior Analyst, 16, 191–206.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Mivart, St.-G. J. (1871). Darwin’s descent of man. Quarterly Review, 131, 47–90. (as cited in Hull, 1973)Google Scholar
  63. Morse, W. H., & Kelleher, R. T. (1977). Determinants of reinforcement and punishment. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 174–200 ). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  64. Müller, M. (1872). Report of lecture. Nature, 7, 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Neisser, U. (1982). Memory observed. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  66. Palmer, D. C. (1986). Chomsky’s nativism: A critical review. In P. N. Chase & L. J. Parrott (Eds.), Psychological aspects of language (pp. 49–60 ). Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas.Google Scholar
  67. Palmer, D. C. (2000). Chomsky’s nativism reconsidered. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 17, 51–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Palmer, D. C., & Donahoe, J. W. (1992). Essentialism and selectionism in cognitive science and behavior analysis. American Psychologist, 47, 1344–1358.Google Scholar
  69. Patriot. (1863). Editorial, Sept. 10, p. 594. (as cited in EllegArd,1958)Google Scholar
  70. Piaget, J. (1953). The origins of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan.Google Scholar
  71. Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
  72. Premack, D. (1959). Toward empirical behavioral laws: I. Positive reinforcement. Psychological Review, 66, 219–233.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II (pp. 64–99 ). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  74. Reynolds, G. (1961). Attention in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 203–208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). PDP models and general issues in cognitive science. In D. E. Rumelhart, J. L. McClelland, & The PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing (Vol. 1 ). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  76. Schoenfeld, W. N. (1969). “Avoidence” in behavior theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 669–674.Google Scholar
  77. Schultz, W. (1997). Adaptive dopaminergic neurons report value of environmental stimuli. In J. W. Donahoe & V. P. Dorsel (Eds.), Neural-network models of cognition: Biobehavioral foundations (pp. 317–335 ). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Schwartz, B. (1980). Development of complex, stereotyped behavior in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 33, 153–166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sedgwick, A. (1860). Objections to Mr. Darwin’s theory of the origin of species. The Spectator, April 7. (as cited in Hull, 1973)Google Scholar
  80. Shettleworth, S. J. (1972). Constraints on learning. In D. S. Lehrman, R. A. Hinde, & E. Shaw(Eds.), Advances in the study of behavior (pp. 175–198 ). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  81. Shimp, C. P. (1969). Optimal behavior in free-operant experiments. Psychological Review, 76, 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research: Evaluating experimental data in psychology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  83. Skinner, B. F. (1935). The generic nature of the concepts of stimulus and response. Journal of General Psychology12, 40–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Skinner, B. F. (1938). Behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  85. Skinner, B. F. (1948). “Superstition” in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology 38168–172. Google Scholar
  86. Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary?Psychological Review, 57, 193–216.Google Scholar
  87. Skinner, B. F. (1966). The ontogeny and phylogeny of behavior, Science, 153, 1203–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Skinner, B. F. (1974). About behaviorism. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  89. Smolen, P., Baxter, D. A., & Byrne, H. (2000). Modeling transcriptional control of gene networks-methods, recent results, and future directions. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 62, 247–292.Google Scholar
  90. Smolensky, P. (1986). Neural and conceptual interpretations of PDP models. In J. L. McClelland, D. E. Rumelhart, & The PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing (Vol. 2, pp. 390–431 ). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  91. Sober, E. (1984). The nature of selection: Evolutionary theory in philosophical focus. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  92. Staddon, J. E. R. (1983). Adaptive behavior and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  93. Staddon, J. E. R., & Ettinger, R. H. (1989). Learning: Introduction to principles of adaptive behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Google Scholar
  94. Staddon, J. E. R., Hinson, J. M., & Kram, R. (1981). Optimal choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior35, pp. 397–412. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Stein, L., & Belluzzi, J. D. (1989). Cellular investigations of behavioral reinforcement. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews13,69–80. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Stein, L., Xue, B. G., & Belluzzi, J. D. (1993). A cellular analogue of operant conditioning. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 6041–53. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Stickney, K., & Donahoe, J. W. (1983). Attenuation of blocking by a change in US locus. Animal Learning & Behavior 1160–66. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Thorndike, E. L. (1903). Elements of psychology. New York: A. G. Seiler.Google Scholar
  99. Timberlake, W., & Allison, J. (1974). Response deprivation: An empirical approach to instrumental performance. Psychological Review81,146–164. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Timberlake, W.,–Wozny, M. (1979). Reversibility of reinforcers between eating and running by schedule changes: A comparison of hypotheses and models. Animal Learning & Behavior, 7, 461–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Townsend, J. T. (1972). Some results on the identifiability of serial and parallel processes. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 25168–199. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Uttal, W. R. (1999). The war between mentalism and behaviorism: On the accessibility of mental processes. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. Google Scholar
  103. von Baer, K. E. (1873). The controversy over Darwinism. Augsburger Allegemeine Zeitung 1301986–1988. (as cited in Hull, 1973) Google Scholar
  104. Wallace, A. R. (1869). Review. Quarterly Review, 126, 391–393. (From A. Ellegård,1958.)Google Scholar
  105. Weimer, W. B. (1973). Psycholinguistics and Plato’s paradoxes of the Mena. American Psychologist, 28, 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Weismann, A. (1909). The selection theory. In A. C. Seward (Ed.) Darwin and modern science (pp. 1–12). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  107. Wollaston, T. V. (1860). Review of the Origin of Species. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 5132–143. Google Scholar
  108. Wright, S. (1939). Statistical genetics in relation to evolution. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • John W. Donahoe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Massachusetts at AmherstAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations