Category: Behaviorism

The Appropriateness and Applicability of Behaviorism to Human Relations.
The theoretical conceptualities of behaviorism cover the prime angle of behavioral perspective in aim of explaining the motives of action, rationale of attitude, and prime associates of human dimensions. The school of behaviorism covers the therapeutic interventions guided by objective and empirical approach. The concepts of behaviorism envelopes the diverse and dynamic character of human behavior that aims to discover possible patterns and links that may further organize human actions.

Various theoretical frameworks that govern the behavioral concept have provided an approach to explain human actions. The theories that have aroused in this firm are Pavlov’s classical conditioning, Watson’s learned neuroses, and B. F. Skinner’s operant conditioning, which are the skeletal backbone of behavioral perspective. With further application of the said conceptual pattern, noted limitations have also been observed. Behavior involves gradual statutory progression, which can be learned and unlearned through suggested behavioral patterns.

By learning these behavioral cues, one may possess the capabilities of predicting the probable angles of action that enhances human relations. According to the theoretical framework of Ivan Pavlov, creatures including humans possess the capacity to form their behavioral pattern through reconditioning, which popularly known as the framework of classical conditioning. Pavlov has started his experiment on the behavioral paradigm, which clearly involves animal subjects and their cravings for their needs.
Nature justifies that creatures possess their necessities in order to maintain living, while classical conditioning proves that certain stimuli are triggered in response to these needs, and possess modifiability that depends on the dynamic nature. Another theoretical framework proposed is John Watson’s neuroses and behavioral modifications. Watson proposed that the possibility to induce phobias, fears and overall neuroses are even possible to the extent that it can be applied to an 11-month old infant. Furthermore, Watson has theorized that these behaviors can be further modified back into the negation or absence of the formed neuroses.
The conceptual model of Watson has provided distinct explanations among maladaptive behavior that may have been present to various people. As according to the theory, these behaviors are formed due to the instillation of psychological damage presented at age of vulnerability. Lastly, the most popularly utilized conceptual pattern involves the maximum use of operant conditioning, which holds that human beings are blank slates that obtain behavioral patterns through learning experiences. Behavior theory maintains that human actions are initiated and developed through learning experiences.
The major premise of behavior theory is that individuals change their behavior depending on the reactions it obtains from others: Behavior is supported by rewards and extinguished by negative consequences or responses. The condition of the learned behavior is strengthened by reward and avoidance of punishment or weakened by lack of reward and aversive stimuli. Whether a given behavior pattern persists depends on the differential reinforcement – the rewards and punishments attached to that behavior and the rewards and punishments attached to alternative behavior.
By the conceptual patterns of behaviorism school, the possibility of improving human relations could be present. As humans interact with each other, they utilize variant types of actions and attitudes that are primarily lead by their won behavioral aspect. Taking an example in the view of behavioral deviances, the conditioning of such deviant promotion modifies the personality of the person. These experiences include personally observing other individuals behaving erratically and aggressively to obtain some goal or watching people being rewarded for violent actions on television, movies or other media sources.
People learn to act aggressively when, as children, they model their behavior after the violent acts of adults. Later in life, these violent behavior patterns persist in social relationships. One example is a boy who sees his father repeatedly striking his mother with impunity is likely to become a battering parent and husband. As for human relations, the conditioning of behavior provides development of understanding on how people act and behave, which is essential especially in consideration of probable positive and negative actions.
Taking behavioral perspective in account, the possibility of predicting the rationale for action, comprehension of reasons for action, and understanding of the personality of the person are all possible; hence, reducing chances of conflicts, and probable improvements of behavior through modification and conditioning. However, such theories propose limitations especially in the perspective of every individual’s unique character; since, cultural, upbringing, and social environment varies among individuals. Human relation needs to consider as well other factors that influence behavior, such as physical, emotional, social, and cultural dimension.

The Appropriateness and Applicability of Behaviorism to Human Relations

B.F. Skinner and Radical Behaviorism.
B. F. Skinner, as he is known popularly, had made much contribution to psychology as he made confusions and debates. In delving into Skinner’s works, it is not surprising that researching about him and his ideas will overwhelm a student by the immense literature on Radical Behaviorism as well as will be lost in the confusion and humdrum of his “theory”. Thus, it is important in the narrative that it should be divided into smaller units as to delineate subjects about the whole topic. The first part will deal with a short biography of Skinner.

This will only trace his career but will also include some sketches of his life that may have contributed to his line of thought and thinking. Presented in the next section are some ideas about his Radical Behaviorism and a rather shallow understanding of it. The difficulty in here however is that as one goes deeper into Radical Behaviorism, the more it is complex and confusing that the brevity of this paper will not permit. The third part is the presentation of some of the influences Radical Behaviorism had made in other fields of study.

Many authors and many scholars would claim that Radical Behaviorism had influenced their fields, although only some of these fields will be presented. On the next section, a presentation be made on the criticisms on Radical Behavior. With a gigantic amount of literature written by B. F. Skinner, it is in no doubt that there will also be a great amount of published criticisms on Radical Behaviorism and only a few have made their way here. As a whole this paper will not be an ambitious research about B. F.
Skinner and Radical Behaviorism but just to answer on the surface as: (1) Who is B. F. Skinner? ; (2) What is Radical Behaviorism? ; (3) What are the fields of study influenced by Radical Behaviorism? , and; (4) What are the criticisms directed towards Radical Behaviorism and to B. F. Skinner in particular? Biography Burrhus Frederic Skinner was born in Susquehanna, Pennsylvania in March 20, 1904 (Hall, Lindzey & Campbell, 1998). His mother was an intelligent and strong housewife and his father, a modest lawyer practicing in the area (Vargas, 2004).
According to Hall, Lindzey & Campbell (1998) as well as Vargas (2004), Skinner lived his early life with much warmth and stability – his parents giving him much freedom on discovery and his inventiveness. As Skinner’s daughter, Julie S. Vargas (2004) would attest that her grandmother gave her father the freedom to discover things and to develop his abilities. On the other hand, she was also strict in social matters, such as etiquette, and the young man devised many things to help him remember his mother’s social controls (Vargas, 2004).
Nonetheless, the family gave emphasis on open debate over things and topics, although they have some conservative stance on certain things. With an interest on Literature, having been encouraged by Robert Frost, Skinner attended a small liberal arts school of Hamilton College where he majored in English, determined to become a writer (Hall, Lindzey & Campbell, 1998). He was not successful though in writing, then he left home for New York and went to Harvard University for graduate studies (Vargas, 2004).
In 1931, he received his Ph. D. and moved to the University of Minnesota in 1936 for an academic position, where for 9 years he would claim and establish a name as one of the most influential experimental psychologists of that time (Hall, Lindzey & Campbell, 1998). He then went to the University of Indiana for a short stay, in 1945 and returned to Harvard in 1948 to stay for the duration of his entire career until his retirement in 1974, where he would enrich all his ideas and theories (Vargas, 2004).
Finally, on March 18, 1990 one of the most celebrated and controversial psychologists of all time died of leukemia, leaving behind a “ripple effect of his life’s work” as the “Operant procedures have crated entire fields [of science]” (Vargas, 2004) Radical Behaviorism Radical Behaviorism is a term attributed to B. F. Skinner (Schneider & Morris, 1987), described as a distinction from the so-called Methodological Behaviorism and the “rest of psychology” (Malone & Cruchon, 2001). To contrast the two kinds of behaviorism, it is noteworthy to define both.
By definition, Methodological Behaviorism is the: …view that there is a distinction between public and private events and that psychology (to remain scientific) can deal only with public events … private events are ‘mental’ and, therefore, beyond our reach … the “arid philosophy of truth by agreement” (Skinner, 1945) [that] something is meaningful or objective only if at least two observers agree on its existence. (Malone & Cruchon, 2001) According to Skinner’s viewpoint, Radical Behaviorism is quite different because, “it does not distinguish between private and public events.
In so doing, it omits nothing commonly thought of as mental, but it treats ‘seeing’ as an activity similar in kind to walking (Malone & Cruchon, 2001). This is because Skinner “deny the mind/body dualism of the mentalists and the methodological behaviorists” (Malone & Cruchon, 2001). As an example, Malone and Cruchon (2001) succinctly described that: Thinking is something that we do, just as is walking, and we do not think mental thoughts any more than we walk mental steps. Personal experience is not necessarily ‘private’ experience.
That part of the world within our bodies is difficult to describe because society has a difficult time teaching us to name it. (Malone & Cruchon, 2001) In other words, Skinner departed from analyzing behaviour as actions affected by our thoughts rather he argued that thoughts are effects themselves to a degree from our actions (Malone & Cruchon, 2001). With the term behaviorism attached to his ideas, he was associated with the Stimulus-Response Theory, but he repudiated it (Hall, Lindzey & Campbell, 1998) because accordingly his study of behavior should be:
…redefined as studying the interactive relationship between an organism and the environment in which it behaves. The past and present environments provide the stimuli that set the occasion for behavior, and the organism’s actions operate (hence operant) on the environment. Actions have consequences, and these consequences shape the behavior of the organism. (Leahey, 2003) In addition, Skinner said that in Radical Behaviorism, it is not about the stimulus-response stance because:
Instead of saying that the organism sees, attends to, perceives, ‘processes,’ or otherwise acts upon stimuli, an operant analysis holds that stimuli acquire control of behavior through the part they play in contingencies of reinforcement. Instead of saying that an organism stores copies of the contingencies to which it is exposed and later retrieves and responds to them again, it says that the organism is changed by the contingencies and later responds as a changed organism, the contingencies having passed into history. (Skinner, 1987)
That is, “All operants and stimuli are members of classes of similar phenomena, defined by the environmental relations in which they participate. ” (Ritzer, 2005). This is further said in the article Evolution of Verbal Behavior as: …species-specific behavior did not evolve in order that a species could adapt to the environment but rather evolved when it adapted, so we say that operant behavior is not strengthened by reinforcement in order that the individual can adjust to the environment but is strengthened when the individual adjusts.
(Skinner, 1986) This is to say that Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism rests on the study of behavior in a sense that behavior is not caused by the stimuli but depends on the actions that a person reacts to in a certain setting (environment) resulting into another reaction, thus; “The environment not only triggered behavior, it selected it. Consequences seemed, indeed, to be more important than antecedents. ” (Skinner, 1987). Some Influences by Skinner’s Behaviorism
Surely, the influence of Radical Behaviorism in the applied fields has been proven by academic scholars in numerous research writings as part or a whole of some other fields in psychology. One such field is Human Geography, so called because it is “concerned with the spatial differentiation and organization of human activity and with human use of the physical environment” (Norton, 1997) and is concerned mainly of human behavior in an environment.
In here, Norton (1997) corroborated that Human Geography is related to Radical Behaviorism because the principle of cultural materialism as an approach to the study of the former is similar to latter as: Radical behaviorism is concerned with the identification of the principles of individual behavior and talks about reinforcers and punishers, while cultural materialism is concerned with group behavior and talks about benefits and costs. Both argue that behavioral responses to environmental variables precede mental rationalizations as to the reasons for responses.
” (Norton, 1997) Norton (1997) further adds that the research approach of Human Geography is “the analysis of behavior in landscape”, advocating the use of Radical Behaviorism. Secondly, it has also influenced the approaches of the analysis of Human Cognition as Barnes and Holmes (1991) would contend. This is because, they said that, “radical behaviorism does, on the contrary, and as opposed to earlier forms of behaviorism, direct considerable attention towards phenomena called ‘cognitive.
’” (Barnes and Holmes, 1991), giving credit to the importance of the “contextualistic perspective” in the analysis of human thought. Further, they said that, “its current burgeoning of interest in human behavior, and particularly language and symbolic control, have yet to be fully appreciated and explored” (Barnes and Holmes, 1991), such that Radical Behaviorism, “can play an important role in developing psychology into a fully formed science” (Barnes and Holmes, 1991). Third, as formulated by Skinner, one such field influenced by Radical Behaviorism is the analysis of Verbal Behavior and communication.
In the study conducted by Forsyth (1996) on the Language of Feeling, he identified Behaviorism as a good approach to such an analyses furthering understanding of the communication process. He said that “the functional analysis of verbal behavior has served as the cornerstone for behavior analytic research and theory about emotional behavior beginning with how people learn to label and describe their experience using language”, commending its use in clinical behaviour analysis.
Fourth, an interesting proposal of the use of Radical Behaviorism is the simulation or duplication of a community called Walden Two (Cullen, 1991), based on a novel by Skinner of the same title. The interesting part is that this proposal carried out for a community of disabled children having behavior deficits. This community was called Comunidad Los Horcones which was started in 1971 and has continued up to the present, followed the guiding rules based on the novel (Cullen, 1991).
Cullen (1991) argued that the guiding principles of Radical Behaviorism can sustain a community, nonetheless the presence o only a handful of these kinds of community make it less probable for practical use. In the outset, the promise that, “it might provide the basis for sensible planning in the lives of people with learning disabilities” (Cullen, 1991). Criticisms Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism came out into the academic arena without and exemption from criticisms.
According to Malone and Cruchon (2001), Skinner’s over-simplification of in his prose on the principles of Radical Behaviorism to gain public readership caused further criticisms because those who read it misunderstood it further. They said that these criticisms are, “attributable to the opacity of his prose and the excessiveness of his proposed applications” (Malone & Cruchon, 2001).
Thus, the writings of Skinner led to many misconceptions as well as misinterpretations of Skinner’s works (Ruiz, 1995). Skinner have regretted this himself later in his life as he “eventually complained at having to redress misconstructions in the literature” (Ruiz, 1995). On the other Ruiz (1995), argued that Radical Behaviorism attracted strong objections from feminist critics and listed the following points as basis for that criticism as misinterpretations that it is:
(a) a mechanistic stimulus-response psychology; (b) is primarily concertned with the behavior of small organisms in experimental chambers; (c) conceptualizes the organism as a passive recipient of external forces; (d) denies or ignores innate contributions to behavior in its extreme environmentalism; (e) requires that we fragment behavior down to elemental units of analysis; and (f) deals only with overt behavior and so denies or ignores subjective experience such as feelings and thought. ” (Ruiz, 1995)
Quite interestingly is that Skinner’s Radical Behavior, undoubtedly had been misconstrued with these “labels” and had been the source of fierce criticisms from many quarters (Ruiz, 1995). Furthermore, Ruiz’s (1995) first entry in the misinterpretation list about Radical Behaviorism as “a mechanistic stimulus-response psychology”, was also claimed by Hall, Lindzey and Campbell (1998). In the long run, Skinner suffered misinterpretation rather than the validity of his Radical Behaviorism as a science.
All three sources would agree that Skinner was misinterpreted and misunderstood (Malone & Cruchon, 2001; Ruiz, 1995; Hall, Lindzey & Campbell, 1998), because his readers and supporters as well as critiques always place labels on approaches, techniques or methods of analyses. Conclusion B. F, Skinner is a remarkable scholar of the 20th century, having to influence a handful of fields of study. In retrospect, Skinner started out with a humble beginning and his upbringing may have contributed to the immense power of thinking.
His Radical Behaviorism, was an attempt of Skinner to delineate his ideas from the whole of behaviorism and the rest of psychology. In such doing, a new breed of approach had taken shape. His ideas on Radical Behaviorism eventually influenced many other fields of study for application and as an approach to many experiments. On the other hand, with such a remarkable approach, B. F. Skinner and Radical Behaviorism had been attacked by numerous criticisms simply because of its complexity; Skinner himself often over-simplify his writings to cover a wider audience that also caused much confusion and labeling on Radical Behaviorism.
Nonetheless, many students and scholars also interpreted and cleared-out his ideas for better understanding such as Malone and Cruchon’s work (2001). Finally, Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism, according to most articles and proposition has a great promise to give for the science of psychology. While it is a fact, as many sources would say, that Skinner’s works are misinterpreted and confused, there is no way that in the subsequent debates and further studies on his Radical Behaviorism that it will shed more understanding to a wider audience.
Thus, it is only in the hands and minds of later scholars to interpret Skinner’s work more fully. References Barnes, D. , & Holmes, Y. (1991). Radical behaviorism, stimulus equivalence, and human cognition. Psychological Record, 41(1), 19. Cullen, C. (1991). Experimentation and planning in community care. Disability, Handicap and Society Volume 6, No. 2: 115-128. Carfax Publishing Co. Forsyth, J. (1996). The language of feeling and the feeling of anxiety: Contributions of the behaviorisms toward… Psychological Record, 46(4), 607. Hall, C. S. , Lindzey, G. & Campbell, J. B. (1998).
Theories of personality 4ed. New York, N. Y. : John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Leahey, T. H. (2003). Chapter 6. Cognition and learning in Irving V. Weiner’s Handbook of psychology volume 1: History of psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Malone, J. C. & Cruchon, N. M. (2001). Radical behaviorism and the rest of psychology: A review/precis of Skinner’s About Behaviorism. Behavior and Philosophy Vol. 29, 31- 57. Cambridge: Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies. Norton, W. (1997). Human geography and behavior analysis: An application of behavior analysis to the explanation of…
Psychological Record, 47(3), 439. Ritzer, G. (ed). (2005). Encyclopedia of social theory volume 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc. Ruiz, M. R. (1995). B. F. Skinner’s radical behaviorism: Historical misconstructions and grounds for feminist reconstructions. Psychology of Women Quarterly Volume 19: 161-179. EBSCO Publishing. Schneider, S. M. & Morris, E. K. (1987). A history of the term radical behaviorism: From Watson to Skinner. The Behavior Analyst Vol. 10, No. 1 27-39. Arkansas, AK: University of Arkansas Skinner, B. F. (1986). The evolution of verbal behavior.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Vol. 45, No. 1: 115-122. Skinner, B. F. (1987). Whatever happened to the rest of psychology. American Psychologist Vol. 42, No. 8: 780-786. American Psychological Association. Staats, A. W. (2003). Chapter 6. A psychological behaviorism theory of personality in Irving V. Weiner’s Handbook of psychology volume 5: Personality and social psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Vargas, J. S. (2004). A daughter’s retrospective of B. F. Skinner. The Spanish Journal of Psychology Vol. 7 No. 2: 135-140. Madrid, Spain: Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

B.F. Skinner and Radical Behaviorism

Behaviorism after the founding.
Behaviorism as the third force in psychology have started out as a theoretical proposition of John B. Watson when he came out with “Psychology as The Behaviorist Views It” and have been known as the behaviorist manifesto (Benjamin, 1997). Watson proposed that psychology is the study of behavior and have put forth four major assumptions that form the tenets of behaviorism as a school of thought. The first assumption is that of evolutionary continuity which means that the laws of behavior are applicable to all living organisms. This assumption has substantiated the behaviorist’s use of animals in the study of human behavior.

The second assumption is that of reductionism, this refers to the behaviorist’s belief that all behaviors have a physiological basis and that behavior is the body’s reaction to a stimulus. The third assumption is determinism, behaviorists support the idea that animals respond to external stimuli in specific ways and are inherently programmed into one’s brain from birth. The last assumption is empiricism which is one of the cornerstones of behaviorism and that it is the contention that only overt actions or behavior are measurable and observable and lend itself to the scientific method.

Thus, to the behaviorist, psychology should be the study of overt behavior. B. F. Skinner was a self-confessed convert to behaviorism after reading Watson’s monograph; he was also influenced by the experimental studies of Ivan Pavlov (Bjork, 1997). Skinner developed a theory that was based on the classical conditioning paradigm of Pavlov and integrated it with his own definition of behaviorism. Skinner’s major work is his theory of operant conditioning, wherein he said that behavior can be conditioned through reinforcement and behavior diminishes when it is not reinforced.
He borrowed from Pavlov the basic idea of conditioning, but instead of limiting it to a stimulus-response paradigm, he incorporated the importance of rewards and punishment, which means that behavior is not only exhibited as a response to a stimulus but also as a form of association between the reinforcement given after the behavior. Skinner’s theoretical position made it obvious that he deviated from Watson’s radical behaviorism, because conditioning a she defined it involves cognition which Watson has strongly eradicated from his propositions.
Moreover, the emphasis given to reinforcements and punishments hint at the need to acknowledge mental processes in the study of behavior. Skinner’s work was well received by the academic community much even that Watson’s initial paper was and this have spurned the interest of like minded psychologists who did support the methodological implications of behaviorism but was not receptive of the radical arguments of Watson. Skinner’s ideas made more sense because it did not advocated the idea that men are not thinking beings and were more able to capture how man behaves.
Skinner’s kind of behaviorism somehow married the opposing views of mind and behavior and also gave importance to how environmental experiences and influences shape human behavior. Moreover, operant conditioning was applicable in a number of areas most notably education, child rearing and animal training (Skinner, 1966). Skinner’s behaviorism has also influenced other psychologists to study and conceptualize psychological phenomena using the principles of operant conditioning and indeed was the kind of behaviorism that has flourished for the last century or so in the field of psychology.
Contemporary behaviorism have been identified as the study of social learning, wherein a behavior is learned through socialization and socialization is the process by which behavior is rewarded or punished by society (Smith & Woodward, 1996). The evolution of behaviorism from Watson to Skinner and to the present has been made possible by the vast research and theoretical models developed by psychologists who adhere to contemporary behaviorism. One of the hallmarks of behaviorism is the use of animals to study human behavior.
Animal research has proven to be useful in understanding how man learns or can be trained to exhibit a certain type of behavior (Benjamin, 1997). Although animal behavior is limited, it nonetheless becomes necessary for behavioral scientists because ethical considerations in using a human subject in risky experiments are not permitted. For example, doing a research on the effect of light illumination to sleep deprivation is probably unethical to do on humans.
Although animals are not exactly anatomically similar to humans, animal physiology and anatomy have been well studied and documented that tracing the reactions of mice to light will be easier and scientifically sound. The generalizations made based on this study is however limited but is an acceptable margin of error. Moreover, animals can be easily manipulated and subjected to experiments than humans because they operate on an instinctual level and do not have to process the information given to them.
The knowledge gained in studying animals is numerous but especially have been concentrated on learning and behavior and to some extent how drugs affect the brain or the body. Animal research can help us understand human behavior better because to some degree we share with them basic drives that are necessary for our existence and hence, learning how animals react to stress or hunger can give us the information needed to adequately explain behavior. Animals exhibit simple behaviors which humans share and have grown in complexity over the years but if analyzed is based still on simple behaviors.
References Benjamin, L. (1997) A History of Psychology: Original Sources and Contemporary Research 2nd ed. New York: McGraw –Hill. Bjork, D. (1997) B. F. Skinner: A Life. Washington: American Psychological Association. Skinner, B. F. (1966). The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis. 7th printing. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Smith, L. & Woodward, W. (1996). B. F Skinner and Behaviorism in American Culture. London: Lehigh University Press

Behaviorism after the founding

Behaviorism Time Line and Today’s World.
Introduction Behaviorism, as a theory evolved from around 1930 and fell out of favor around 1960. Here the topic will look at the linear existence of behaviorism in reference to the discipline of psychology, as well as the main influential persons that raised the theory from its infancy to its heights as to the contributions each made. In conclusion, relevance to what is still in use to day as residual as well as what differences have happened: what has changed and what has stayed the same.
This investigation of the actual time line in comparison with the various groupings of the base theory as it evolved into various sub-groupings will be looked at particularly. Behaviorism Time Line and Today’s World To have an idea of the theories involving behaviorism, it becomes crucial to know and understand the vocabulary and background of the terms and theories of the topic being discussed. This is a brief introduction of the theory of behaviorism, as it will be discussed and dissected here in.
The evolution of this theory as well as contributions by its various champions will be looked at in a sort of time line to see what has been retained and what has been discarded over time. Behaviorism is the idea of all learned behaviors find genesis in specific conditioning; and that this conditioning occurs with interaction with the environment (Cherry, 2009). Behaviorism also purports systematic and observable study with little or no consideration of internal mental states (Cherry, 2009). Behaviorism can be broken into two distinct areas, being: classical and operant conditioning (Cherry, 2009).

Classical conditioning consists of pairing a naturally occurring stimulus with a response, followed by the transference of the relationship to a formerly neutral stimulus, thus causing the reaction to the newly transferred stimulus relationship (Goodwin, 2008). Operant conditioning on the other hand consists of the relationship of either a reward or consequence regarding certain behaviors (Goodwin, 2008). This is also referred to as instrumental conditioning and revolves around the consequences of actions taken.
Behaviorism can trace its roots to the empiricism idea of classical association pioneered by John Locke and David Hume as an idea loosely tossed about shortly before the 20th century in consideration of learning in animals and humans linking mental states and perceptual influences (O’Donell, 1986). The earliest reference to behaviorism as an idea in consideration though comes from 1863 when Ivan Sechenov published a paper titled Reflexes of the Brain, where a concept of the mind’s responses being inhibited in the central nervous system instead of the brain itself occurs (Cherry, 2009).
Even with this evidenced, the solidification of behaviorism would occur with the publication of the behavioral manifesto by John Watson in 1913 ushered in the realm of behaviorism that flourished from around 1930 until 1960, when it fell out of favor (O’Donell, 1986). The time line genesis is associated with Watson’s manifesto, but other prominent scientists had pending works in place before, such as Pavlov with his classical conditioning research, officially starting around 1910 (Babkin, 1949).
This researcher worked with canines in reference to classical conditioning and behavior modification in Russia, and then the Soviet Union as it fell to socialism, which seemed the lesser of two evils: the other being Nazi Germany (Babkin, 1949). His work was bolstered by the bolshevik regime at this time, who thought it would be a good tool for controlling their massive population to keep them in order and so funded Pavlov’s research lavishly (Babkin, 1949). Edward Thorndike published his work Animal Intelligence, which lead to the theory of operant conditioning later in the realm of behaviorism (O’Donell, 1986).
Thorndike also went on to carry out the first major scientific study of the adult learner and the learning process used by adults in 1928, and so formulating his theory of learning (Odonell, 1986). Kurt Lewin developed his theories on group behavior in 1946, working with T-groups in research with mob behavior and how it occurs, forming experimental theories still in use today by most counts (Lewin, 1964). Lewin worked with prejudicial situations spurred by social normality and group behavior in terms of group-think and mob behavior (Lewin, 1964).
The ways groups interact and process as individual entities were the specialty he followed in his theories and assumptions, and became a pivotal expert in the situations of the 1960s with Negro aggression, warfare revolts, and the rights movements to name a few of the situational events of the time (Lewin, 1964). Later, Skinner worked on the theory of operant behavior, with its schedules of reinforcement: fixed ratio schedule; variable ratio schedule; fixed interval schedule; and variable interval schedule (Cherry, 2009).
Skinner was best known for his idea that the consequences of a behavior determine the probability of its recurrence (O’Donell, 1986). In 1948, he published Walden 2, in which he described a behaviorist principally based utopian society, and in 1971, he published again, arguing that free will is an illusion in his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity (Cherry, 2009). It becomes clear, the radicalism of Skinner in statements such as that the ultimate goals of behavioral psychology should be to predict and control behavior (Goodwin, 2008).
Operant conditioning was his realm of work, separating conditioning into S and R types, where S is Pavlovian conditioning and R is where a behavior is emitted and a reactive consequence it given as a reward or punishment (Goodwin, 2008). With a stricter methodology his schedules of reinforcement would be repeatable and so fall more into the scientific methods, which was a new way to proceed in psychology research to that time in eliminating explanatory fiction (Goodwin, 2008).
Edward Tolman was a cross of the empirical research and the logical positivism, using theory to form predictions to be vetted out in research (Goodwin, 2008). Being goal-directed in his research, Tolman ideally thought of his methods as paralleling the subject’s ultimate goals so he was able to follow in same (Goodwin, 2008). In this pursuit though, things happen to influence these goals, and Tolman labeled these as intervening variables (Goodwin, 2008). Cognitive mapping was a contribution of Tolman; as was the downplay of latent learning (Goodwin, 2008).
He argued with the ideas of Clark Hull on nearly every point possible, believing in cognitive maps for children to influence their abilities to learn both academically as well as in the real world in terms of tools they could take and keep in their lives (Goodwin, 2008). A lot of these people can not really be placed on a linear time line because they contributed several points to the evolution of behaviorism. The contributions come from a standpoint of little background followed by research and data compilation in a collective knowledge base.
Behaviorism has been declining in popularity for several years, or even decades as the philosophy of the cognitive theory changes through experimentation and hypothetical ideas rendered based on observations and speculations alike. Behaviorism started as a method to understand the way actions are taken and why they are done so. Behaviorist psychologists tended to “mechanize” the process, taking out of the scope the free will affect as well as that of decision on the part of the participant or subject of studies (Kassin, 2008).
This can be seen in terms of either over-simplification of the mental processes or simplification of the tests for plausibility (Kassin, 2008). To this end, it can be seen how the testing apparatus put in place for conducting such experimentation holds true in its function and viability, so the actions and testing results are still affective, although interpreted differently as to data extracted from such experimentation (O’donell, 1986). The tests and ideas found and exemplified by these pioneers of behaviorism still ring true, and can be used today, but in different context.
The mechanistic procedures held strenuously at the time though are both outdated as the more complex background information is discovered as well as methodologies used in light of the neo-behaviorism that followed referencing some animal to human references (Roediger, 2010). The principles have stayed the same, but the application and reliance has changed due in part to diversity and the simple will to differentiate the various peoples of the world. Today, reflecting back on the age of behaviorism, we can still use some of the principles of behaviorism in terms of treatment of bad behavior as well as understanding why this occurs.
In the time of the behaviorists though, thoughts of utopian societies with everyone acting in unison, predicted and anticipated was just too mechanized for society to swallow, and guarantee freedom at the same time(Roediger, 2010). Today, behavior analysis is often used in various therapeutic techniques for all kinds of situations of behavioral situations such as to help children with autism with developmental delays to acquire new skills needed in the world for example.
Advances in medical science research tools as well as cognitive theories and treatment overshadow behaviorism as it has starting in the 1950’s from that of strictly observational to that of scientifically tested and verified facts in modern cognitive behavioral theories: simplistic boxes and pointers in references to thought processes of the day seem simplistic and abstract compared to today’s brain scans for mapping cognizant processes in the advance of science in the roles of psychology research (Roediger, 2010).
Behaviorism was never really proven wrong or accused of this, but rather drifted away due to its inability to modernize in relation to today’s research tools and abilities of examining what is really happening (Roediger, 2010). the learning history associated with behaviorism simply is not relevant to today’s cognizant theorists, and is either compartmentalized, or ignored all together as unimportant (Roediger, 2010). Babkin, B. P. (1949). Pavlov: a biography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cherry, K. , (2009). What is behaviorism? Retrieved May 15, 2010 from http://psychology. bout. com/od/behavioralpsychology/f/behaviorism. htm Goodwin, C. J. (2008). A history of modern psychology (3rd ed. ). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Kassin, S. (2008). Psychology in Modules-ORG 5002, Survey of Psychology II. Pearson Custom Publishing. Boston, MA. Lewin, K. (1964). T-group theory and laboratory method. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. O’Donell, J. (1986). Origins of behaviorism. New York University Press. Roediger, R. (2010). What happened to Behaviorism? Retrieved May 15, 2010 from http://www. psychologicalscience. org/observer/getArticle. cfm? id=1540

Behaviorism Time Line and Today’s World

Difference Between Behaviourism and Cognitism.
When the Cognitive Revolution overturned Behaviorism as the dominant paradigm of learning, many people believed cognitivism to be radically different than behaviorism as it tried to explain many of the characteristics of learning that behaviorism failed to account for. For example, behaviorism emphasized only the change in outward behavior, which they defined as learning. Behaviorism declares the mechanistic and deterministic views of the law of effect, classical and operant conditioning, and ultimately the explanation of learning due purely to biological factors.
Behaviorism considers factors such as reinforcement history and maturation levels in affecting the ability it learn, and emphasizes maintaining learned behavior through repeated reviews of expectations and schedules of reinforcement. Cognitivism, on the other hand, defines learning more broadly to include a change in thinking, beliefs, attitudes, and values. It emphasizes the role of the mind as a schematic network and recognizes the importance of prior knowledge in making new connections.
Ultimately, learning is compared to a computer model of processing information, which includes many processes that cannot be seen or measured. Cognitivism focuses on the role of memory in storing and retrieving knowledge. Transfer is seen as being the goal of acquiring knowledge so that people can apply that knowledge in new domains. Also, Cognitivism recognizes the influence of motivation on learning in encouraging people to learn things to a greater degree.

Cognitivism accounts for more complex forms of thinking and learning. Although these two theories have many significant differences, they also have some similarities. Although I feel the cognitive psychology went a lot further in explaining the nature of learning, it does not completely escape the criticisms of behaviorism as far as mechanism and determinism. According to Williams, even though the cognitive revolution tried to remedy the mechanistic and deterministic aspects of behaviorism, it did not succeed.
Both behaviorism and cognitivism are mechanistic and deterministic. In both behaviorism and cognitivism, people are seen as mechanical machines that react according to circumstance and behavior can be predicted based on either a Stimulus-Response or according to the information inputted into the computer machine. They are both missing significant factors of learning as far as accounting for learning in social contexts.
They also both have aspects of a “black box” in them that does not completely explain how or why the learning occurs. For behaviorism, the “black box” is the explanation between stimulus and response. In Cognitivism, it is how the central executive works, or what controls the working memory. Williams pointed out that theories just create homunculi that are like little men in our brains controlling what’s going on, but never really explaining anything more for us.

Difference Between Behaviourism and Cognitism

Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Considerativism.

My observation from the classroom demonstrated that true different learning theories we had in this three session such as behaviorism, cognitivism and considerativism all of them include strengths and weaknesses. I tried to explain my perception through this schools of thoughts.
Behaviorism
It focuses on two key factors stimulus and respons and disregards mental activities. Povlov, Watson, Thorndik and Skinner were the famous psychologists who widely promoted this theory. In classical conditioning a stimulus presented in order to get a response but in operant conditioning the response is made first then reinforcement follows. A noticeable weakness that I find in this method is that it can’t explain the recognition of new language patterns by children for which there has been no reinforcement mechanisms for example in Persian we have “koshtondam or pazondam”.

It neglects the consideration of genetics, heredity and personal perception. In order to control the class in this way teachers must apply positive and negative reinforcements to change students behavior and discourage disruptive behaviors.
Cognitivism
In cognitive theory the most important thing is internal mental process of the learner during the learning process. Against behaviorists that consider learning as a passive activity in this theory the role of learners is active and seeking meaning. J. piaget and L. vegotsky improved this theory. In this method teacher must create learning environment active and allowing students to apply previous knowledge.
Constructivism
In this theory learning is simply the process of adjusting our mental models accommodate new experiences in other word all new information linked to prior knowledge. The learners start with a complax problem and workout to discover the basic skills required to solve the problem. The role of instructors changes from teacher to facilitators. In this method theorists try to eliminate grades and testing. Teachers must provide engaging opportunities for students to make sense of the information via hand-on activities and discussions.
Conclusion:
There is no single best theory and each theory gas different aspect of teaching/learning process.

Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Considerativism

Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism.
We study about three psychological school of thought Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism. In this reaction paper I notice my opinion and attitude and personal analyze about them briefly.
One of the point that always think about it is that why some school of thought speak and focus on one factor of human being and deny many other factors of human nature as we see in BEHAVIORIST they believe that human nature like a tabula rasa and It assumes that each one behavior and acquisition either reflexes created by a response to sure stimulus within the environment.
They didn’t mention anything about inherited factors or inner of human obviously the environment, reinforcement and punishment play a great rule in acquisition but they ignore many aspect of human mind like creativity activity and looking a learner like automaton and passive creature. Radical Behaviorism maintain some important distinction with methodological form they acknowledge the view that organisms are born with innate behaviors, and also accept the role of genes and biological components in behavior. So it is more rational and moderate form of behaviorism.

Cognitive theories center around the conceptualization of understudies learning procedures and address the issues of how data is gotten, sorted out, put away, and recovered by the mind. Learning is concerned not such a great amount with what students do but rather with what they know and how they come to get it. Cognitivism focus on that part of learning which deny in Behaviorism, mental activities of human mind they consider previous acquired knowledge, experiences and different abilities of each learners.
They emphasize making learning significant furthermore, helping students sort out and relate new data to existing information in memory. The role of teachers in charge of helping students in sorting out that data in some ideal way. Originators utilize procedures, for example, advance coordinators, analogies, progressive connections, and grids to enable students to relate new data to earlier information. This school is more practical and flexible for considering the learner as active creature.
Constructivism focus on learner and different aspect of attitude in every subject that learners can gain it. Individual and personal learning has a great role in their school. The learners in active mental process of learning should analyze and understand past experiences and adding them more details and knowledge through new experiences. We live in a real world we need practical knowledge that useful for our life so activity, knowledge, concept, culture, context are essential factors of process of learning.
Plainly the focal point of constructivism is on making intellectual instruments which mirror the astuteness of the way of life in which they are utilized too as the bits of knowledge and encounters of people. There is no requirement for the mere obtaining of fixed, unique, independent ideas or subtle elements. Every different concept can be true and juxtaposition of individual ideas are gathering in social constructivism. In brief word we need all type of thinking in our world and combination of them are useful and meaningful to create more mature human being.
In conclusion we can not select the best school of thought. Sometime we need to drill accents by repeation in some case we need to find out individual ability and rational and pragmatic analyze of our students. So I myself think all of them are effective in different situation and it depends on age and level of leaners and goals of lecturers. Combination of them can help us make an attractive method for language learner. Differ ideas and situation can challenge the students and help us to find out which one better work on every individual or group of learner.

Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism

Behaviorism, Constructivism and ICTs for Education.
Education nowadays is not what it used to be around 50 years ago. The introduction and development of technology has taken education to an entirely different level then it was previously. These innovative tools are covered under the broad category of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). There has been research work on development of theoretical models that can facilitate educational learning. These theories and more additional helpful tools have not only facilitated the gaining of education but also improved the quality of education system.

Behaviorism and constructivism are two of these main revolutionary concepts in education. The three terms “behaviorism”, “constructivism” and “ICTs” would first be explained separately and then it would be seen that how they fall together in a picture and facilitate educational learning. Behaviorism Behaviorism is that school of thought which is of the opinion that it is learning process that inculcates learning by the acquisitions of new behaviors in surrounding of environmental conditions.

Behaviorists believe that learning does not regard any mental activities rather it can be achieved by behaviors which according to them are systematic and observable. They believe that the process of “conditioning” facilitates the acquisition of behavior which ultimately facilitates learning. Conditioning is categorized in classical and operant. Classical conditioning is the process in which the object is conditioned as such that it he would response in a specific manner to a certain stimulus. We see this often in educational setting in form of fear conditioning that children are so much fearful of failure in exams or tests.
Operant conditioning is the conditioning in which a response to a stimulus is reinforced by either rewarding or punishment. This concept is also very much applicable in educational setting as we see teachers rewarding and punishing to get desired behavior from students (On Purpose Associates n. d. ). Constructivism Contrary to behaviorism is the school of though of constructivism. They are of the opinion that knowledge is a consequence of one’s personal experiences. According to constructivists, humans generate knowledge and formulate their own understanding model through reflection of their experiences.
Human mentality makes sense of the experiences and therefore learning takes place when proper shape is given to these experiences in mentality. In educational setting, constructivism comes into play as it focuses on promotion of customized syllabus in accordance with student’s knowledge. This is achieved by giving students hand on problems. Apart from that, teachers conduct assessment in the form of assigning open ended questions to the students and conduct dialogues and debates amongst students which lead to the open mindedness of students.
The students are therefore able to conceive and manipulate information in a better way (Bruner n. d. ). ICTs ICT is acronym of Information Communication Technology. The three words are very meaningful and together they form ICT which has been the pulse of the developmental changes in all fields in years behind. The concept is very vast but in short we can say that ICT comprises of all innovative tools of digital technology which has helped in all the fields to save, extract, communicate and interpret the information in a digital manner.
This has been made possible by digital electronic aids such as computers, laptops, emails, robotic machines and many more. ICTs have enabled the people to come together and form intercultural and inter communal links to share ideas and experiences together. The ICTs have plenty scope and potential in education field. ICTs and its tools has facilitated education by coming up with tools and equipments that have improved both the earning and the teaching. ICTs focus is to create awareness in the students of the usage of computers and other technological devices that may enhance the acquisition of knowledge for them.
Learning by Doing Learning by doing as the name suggests is the way that a person learns any action or activity by actually doing it himself. There is always a first time but that has first time has to be DONE as only then a person learns and is able to see where he is faulty and through this he can learn. The examples can be given simply as when the child is learning how to walk, the parents are there just to support him and keep him out of danger. It is the child himself who tries again and again and learns how to walk. Similarly, a more business oriented example can be that of starting a new business.
The businessman approaches his business with his own ideas and therefore learns the business. The theories of behaviorism can come here that a person who will do an action comes across a negative consequence then he would still be learning and would avoid the repetition of the same incident again. Constructivism is applicable here to as they emphasize on experiences. When a person BEHAVES he does an activity i. e. he interacts with the environment and as a result conditioning takes place. This conditioning gives him an experience may it be good or bad.
Through these behaviors and experiences he is able to formulate his own understanding model. Therefore this shows that both behaviorism and constructivism are active when a person is learning by doing (Engines for Education 2008). Role of ICTs, Behaviorism and Constructivism in Education The use of ICTs has promoted the teaching and learning and made it superior. If we just take computer as an example of educational technology we see that it has been devised for students and humans to address to their needs and problems. ICTs address to the problems of both students and teachers.
Though the effects of the use of ICTs in schools and educational settings are good but we see that the facilities are inadequate. The effects of ICTs are good as they enable the students to use educational software through which they are able to get activity based learning in a better technologically equipped learning environment. This environment and educational software have given opportunities to the teachers to change their teaching ways and make it more comprehensive with the use of these tools. Effective teaching automatically ensures effective learning as well.
These tools of educational technology have enabled the teachers and students to identify systematic problems and then discover systematic solutions for it. Constructivism school of thought complements educational technology. They say that students should be taken away from the standardized curriculum and their thinking skills need to be developed by experiential learning. If the students are given a proper educational environment which hold high relevance then they would interact with the environment to generate the desired experiences.
These experiences take form of personal sets of meanings and information framework for a separate student. In educational setting, student gains knowledge either through interaction with environment or by the intervention of school in form of curriculum imposed on students. Usually the learning is resultant of mix of both these sources. Constructivism also focuses on bringing out prior knowledge of students out. Effective use of ICT by the students would give teachers an opportunity to know the prior knowledge of the students (Newhouse 2002).
There are many different types of ICTs and tools which are helpful in educational setting and can explain how people learn through them and how teachers effectively use them for teaching. One example can be Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs). This device is operated with the help of a projector and a PC. This board is placed in the front center of the class and is connected to the PC and projector. Through equipments like keyboard, mouse, pencil and other devices students are able to achieve interaction with it.
It facilitates the teacher to teach the whole class easily keeping in view the discipline of the class along with teaching. The research has proven that the introduction of IWBS have enhanced the thinking of the students, facilitated the teaching methods of teachers and therefore ultimately lead to effective learning (Newman n. d. ). We see that both Behaviorism and Constructivism do not apply similarly in every learning environment. It varies. In some environment which is behavior oriented and which requires high motivation level of people then we see that behaviorism is in action.
Such environment has the need of people to be reinforced and requires there behavior to be aligned for efficient performance. In learning environment that promotes learning through experiences and acquisition of skills through interaction with environment, constructivism is in action. This rationale is well justified but usually we see that successful schools and educational settings take both the approaches together along with ICTs. Conclusion Education has revolved with the development in technology. Tools of ICTs facilitate the acquisition of education.
There have been many theories that have also supported educational cause. Two main theories are Behaviorism and Constructivism. They are both used contrary to each other. Behaviorism believes in learning through conditioning whereas Constructivism focuses on experiential learning. We see that these theories apply with the ICT tools and they result in effective learning and teaching system. References Bruner, J. n. d. , Constructivist Theory. Viewed July 15, 2010, retrieved from http://tip. psychology. org/bruner. html Engines for Education, 2008, Learning By Doing. Viewed July 15, 2010, retrieved from http://www.
engines4ed. org/hyperbook/nodes/NODE-120-pg. html Newhouse, C. Paul 2002, Literature Review: The Impact of ICT on Learning and Teaching. Viewed July 15, 2010, retrieved from http://www. det. wa. edu. au/education/cmis/eval/downloads/pd/impactreview. pdf Newman, n. d. , Types of ICT: Interactive Whiteboards. Viewed July 15, 2010, retrieved from http://www. newman. ac. uk/Students_websites/~shugufta. nazir/typeict. htm On Purpose Associates, n. d. , About Learning: Behaviorism. Viewed July 15, 2010, retrieved from http://www. funderstanding. com/content/behaviorism

Behaviorism, Constructivism and ICTs for Education

What is Behaviorism?.
In the United States, there are two conflicting psychology schools of thought. The first is the introspective psychology which has also been considered as speculative psychology and the other being behaviorism psychology, which is also considered as objective psychology. Although introspective psychology has long been accepted in the field of psychology, behaviorism has not only begun to gain more ground among psychologists but it has also begun to contest and question the premise of introspective psychology and their method of analysis and research.

It was only during the 19th century that development of the field of psychology began to become evident through the efforts of Wundt who is considered to be the father of experimental psychology. Wanting to find a solution on the mind-body problem, Wundt decided in 1879 to develop psychology as a science rather than a field of study associated with philosophy. He substituted the term “soul” with the concept of the “consciousness” and eventually developed the introspective approach in the study of psychology.

According to this approach to the study of psychology, the consciousness of the individual is the primary subject matter of psychology which led to psychologists such as William James to define psychology as the study aimed to describe and explain the various states of an individual’s consciousness. In order to do this, psychologists observe the consciousness through catching it as it occurs. This school of thought had become highly accepted that it had reached the United States from Germany and became the dominant form of psychological analysis in American universities.
Among the most noted introspective psychologists in the United States were E. B. Thchener of Cornell University and William James of Harvard University. In 1912, a new group of psychologist emerged. These were the behaviorists or behavioral psychologists. They began to see the shortcomings of introspective psychology. As a result, behavioral psychologists decided that the information being discovered and disseminated are no longer sufficient and they began to create their own methods for the study of psychology.
The first thing done by behavioral psychologists was to change the subject matter of the field of psychology. Because the consciousness is deemed to be unobservable, they began to search for some characteristic or trait of individuals that could be observed. It was then that they began to observe the behavior of individuals which has been defined as what an individual says or does. Hence, this approach of the study of psychology as the behaviorism school of psychology. Behaviorism has also been considered as the objective approach to the study of psychology.
This is because behavioral psychologists gather facts about an individual’s behavior and analyze the data through the use of logic and mathematics. This is why behaviorism has been defined as a natural science that is interested in the adjustments done by individuals through the study of changes in the physiological conditions of the individual which they termed as the stimuli and the response the individual would have as a result of the stimulus presented. Based on the studies done by behavioral psychologists, there are four kinds of responses exhibited by individuals.
The first kind of response is classified as overt or external responses. These responses are those responses that the individual in consciously aware of such as the act of sitting, standing or walking. The second kind of response is termed as internal or implicit responses. These responses are more difficult to observe since they involve responses that occur within the body of the individual such as digestion in the stomach of the individual after the individual takes in food. The third type of response is the unlearned response which refers to instinctive responses to stimuli such as breathing.
The last form is classified as learned response which includes the habits done by the individual such as observed when an individual sits, facial reactions and hand gestures while communicating. Analysis Up to the 1900s, the study of the human psyche was hindered by the teachings of religion. Even today, people remain to be apprehensive if the new information that is presented is contrary to the generally accepted belief. Back then, it was the teachings of the Church that provided answers and explanations to life and the universe.
This is why despite the desire of Wundt to establish psychology as a branch of science, the influence dualism had on him while he was growing up provided him a subject matter that cannot be observed. As a result, all the observations done and the theories conceptualized based on these observations were viewed as speculative and were frequently contested by fellow psychologists. Behaviorism psychology developed as a result of a group of psychologists who realized that the only their theories would not be susceptible to much speculation from their peers is by substantiating these theories with verifiable data and results.
This could only be done if their subject matter could be observed. Seeing that they would be able to observe the behavior of individuals, these psychologists broke away from the accepted notion that the consciousness of the individual is the basis of the study of psychology and instead viewed that it is the behavior, and not the consciousness, of the individual that is the prime subject of study of psychology.
Today, it is clear to see that behaviorism has superseded introspective psychology as the practiced school of psychology with the association of the field of psychology as the field of science that is associated with the study of an individual’s behavioral patterns and the causes for such behavioral patterns to arise. This does not mean to say that introspective psychologists failed to contribute to the current accepted school of psychology. On the contrary, introspective psychologists paved the way for psychology to develop as it is known today.
Through the introduction of the introspective school of psychology, men in the field of neurology and the other sciences were presented a field of study that would allow them to understand the human psyche and the human mind more comprehensively. Being men of science, they would eventually find loopholes to a theory or finding made by one of their peers. This would result to them further studying the human mind. It was through this process that behavioral psychologists were able to determine the shortcoming of this field of science.
As a result, behaviorism through the scientific method used to validate assumptions may be able to determine just how close the speculations stipulated by the introspective psychologists were in their assumptions about the human mind and psyche. Finally, the development of behaviorism shows that psychology is continuously evolving. This is because the subject matter being studied is the human mind, which is considered as the most complex body part of one of the most complex, if not the most complex, organisms on this planet.

What is Behaviorism?

Behaviorism and Gender.
Making everyday decisions is an inevitable course of our daily existence. The choices we do concerning our diet, outfits, daily hygiene, companions and others seem as a normal daily routine. Thus, most of the time we seldom contemplate on the process by which we have accomplished our daily decision-making tasks. Meanwhile, different psychological theories supported the notion that every human behavior is shaped and propelled by motives and rewards such as food, money, status, and prestige (Howard and Hollander 43).

Humans behave in ways for the attainment of their goals and avoidance of negative events and consequences that bring pain and suffering (Howard and Hollander 43). In this connection, humans shape their personalities in parallel with societal expectations so as to gain social acceptance (Howard and Hollander 43). In this way, the attainment of goal and avoidance of negative experiences are much assured. Hence, the development or acquisition of gender, a societal sexual perspective, is greatly influenced by psycho-sociological factors (Howard and Hollander 43).

In the early historical period of psychological disciplines, behaviorism became the backbone of psychological studies on human behavior (Howard and Hollander 43). Although contemporary theories have gone beyond the postulates of behaviorists like Skinner and Pavlov, their psychological principles served as the bases for intensive and advanced studies in the field of psychology (Howard and Hollander 43). Through studies on animal behaviors, behavioral psychologists made assumptions on perception, motivation, and learning of every individual (Howard and Hollander 43).
They scrutinized every factor that affects behavioral attributes of the subject animal then applied it on their observational studies on humans (Howard and Hollander 43). Classical Conditioning Ivan Pavlov’s notion about “conditioned reflex” is a result of his studies on animal digestion (Elliot et al. 203). In his experiments, he observed that dog produces saliva in anticipation of food. The flow of saliva in dog’s mouth was observed in response not only on the sight of food dish but also upon hearing the attendant’s sound during feeding.
The dog was conditioned that seeing the attendant or hearing a bell is a signal of giving food (Elliot et al. 203). Thus, the dog salivated either in the sight of the attendant or upon hearing the bell. Pavlov called each signal as “conditioned stimulus”. He explained that the food is the “unconditioned stimulus” that elicited salivation as a response (Elliot et al. 203). At first, salivation was induced upon the sight of food. Then, the food was given simultaneously with metronome. After sometime, the metronome alone caused dog’s salivation (Elliot et al. 203). Classical Conditioning and Gender
In child rearing practices, at very young age children are conditioned on the choice of garments and toys appropriate to their sexes. This conditioning as absorb by the child can possibly be applied on different settings. For instance, the choice of toys based on sexes such as Barbie doll for a girl and plastic gun for a boy, would lead to the child’s discretion on the type of game or playmates he or she will involved into. This is called “stimulus generalization” wherein the conditioned behavior, the choice of toys, affected the preference for games or playmates.
On the other hand, if the initial conditioning did not affect other preferences, the child then learned the process of discrimination. Through discrimination, the child has limited his or her behavior only on the “conditioned stimulus” which is the toy selection in this case. Also, the extinction of loss of conditioned stimulus’ effect on one’s behavior is possible. In Pavlov’s experiments, after several trials of presenting food to the dog without the metronome, the metronome alone did not elicit salivation when presented (Elliot et al. 203).
Hence, a child as days pass-by may lose the conditioned stimulus toy selection on his or her mind. Operant Conditioning B. F. Skinner made refinements on the principles of classical conditioning and applied his psychological ideas on different human endeavors (Elliot et al. 208). He proposed the importance of reinforcement in eliciting a desired behavior and that environment has great influence in one’s behavior. In his operant conditioning, he emphasized that environment reinforces or terminates one’s behavior, thus, has the key role in understanding behavior (Elliot et al. 208).
According to Skinner, behavior is a product of a three-connective processes; operation performed by the organism, inner condition, and behavioral response (Elliot et al. 208). Skinner elicited desired behaviors among his subject animals such as rats and pigeons through his operant chamber (Mayers). Later on, researchers tested the different reinforcers and scheduling of such to facilitate the shaping of desired behavior. They found that the acquisition of desired behavior although less through partial reinforcement schedules as compared with continuous reinforcement, but produced more extinction resistance (Mayers).
Moreover, punishment applied to achieve the desired behavior or to terminate a particular behavior, even though has negative consequences, but effective when immediately and consistently given (Mayers). Operant Conditioning and Gender Behavioral theorists suggested that every creature regardless of race, societal status, sex and profession is governed by the same behavioral principles (Howard and Hollander 44). In terms of behaviorism, the development of gender could be possibly explained by making a notion that gender differences and similarities are behavioral consequences (Howard and Hollander 44).
Experiments can be designed to elicit gender behavioral patterns of both males and females through different reinforcement pattern. In behavioral perspectives, men and women could be either aggressive or nurturing if they are awarded or punished in such behavior (Howard and Hollander 44). Then, through field studies, behaviorists can assess environmental factors influencing men or women and yield plausible explanation for the behavioral effects of these factors (Howard and Hollander 44). Through conditioning process, the gender can be imparted into the child’s mind either unconsciously or purposively.
The type of garments or toys given to the child may embark into his or her mind some restrictions on the things he or she can be used. In addition, some parents either directly or indirectly, inculcate a male child to imitate his father’s behavior, action, and style while a female child to be like her mother. By conforming to these parental expectations, the child gains positive reinforcements from his or her parents that strengthen his or her behavior. With these, the child may form his or her early conceptions of gender role and stereotypes. Criticisms on Conditioning Theory
Even though many studies have been conducted to support the conditioning theory of gender development, these are mostly conducted with animals (Naik). In 1984, K. Boulding contended the Skinner’s generalization about the applicability of the principles drawn from animal studies into complex behavior of humans (Naik). He suggested that more studies with human participants must be conducted in order to prove the validity of Skinner’s postulates. While Skinner’s operant conditioning has been recognized in neurosis and phobia therapy, but still insufficient to explain complex human attributes such as language and memory (Naik).
In line with this, M. E. P. Seligman proposed that aside from classical and operational conditioning, genetic preparedness has a crucial role in the development of behavioral characteristics (Naik). This third factor associates a particular reinforcer or stimulus to a certain response. He further argued that most behaviorist have utilized unprepared sets of stimulus like shock and light, provided less input for the association process, then created generalization of unprepared behavioral output applicable to general cases (Naik).
Therefore, even if the behaviorist’s principles are valid with respect to their sets of unprepared stimulus in laboratory experiments, but still insufficient to provide plausible explanations for prepared behaviors (Naik). Nonetheless, Seligman cited the work of Rozin and Garcia (1971) wherein rats were given with sweetened water as flash of lights and noise were applied simultaneously (Naik). Then, the subjects were treated with X-rays to induce illness and nausea. After several hours, rats became ill and develop aversion with sweetened water but not with noise or light (Naik).
According to Seligman genetic predispositions led to the aversion of rats with anything that may cause illness on their part (Naik). Conditioned Emotional Reactions The Little Albert Study In 1920 John B. Watson and Rosalie Rayner tested the following in their experimental study: developing and conditioning an infant to fear an animal through loud and fearing sound; the possibility to develop fear to other animals or objects through the conditioned fear; and the time duration of the conditioned fear (Brain 135). Waston and Reyner selected a healthy and unemotional, around nine-month old child named Albert B.
as subject of their study (Brain 135). At the start, Albert has no fear in dealing with animals and other objects. When a metal bar is struck by a claw hammer behind him, Albert develops fear. After two-month observation with Albert, Watson and Reyner conditioned him to develop fear with a white rat by a loud clanging sound, produce by the metal bar and claw hammer, as he touches the rat (Brain 135). After seven trials of rat and noise pairing, fear was developed with Albert as the rat was presented alone (Brain 135).
Then, after five days, the rat, a rabbit, a sealskin coat, the heads of Watson and his assistants, a shorthaired dog, a Santa Claus mask, a package of white cotton, and wooden blocks were presented to Albert. He showed strong fear with the rat, sealskin coat, dog and rabbit, and a mild fear response with cotton (Brain 136). On the other hand, Albert did not develop fear with the mask, Watson’s hair, and wooden blocks (Brain 135). Five more days later, the rat, dog, and rabbit each paired with a loud noise were again presented to Albert but he has only showed slight reaction for each stimulus (Brain 136).
Finally, after thirty-one days, the rat, dog, rabbit, sealskin coat, and Santa Claus mask were again presented to Albert. Watson and Reyner found out that although Albert still showed fear on these things, he manifested tendency to touch each object (Brain 136). Evaluation and Criticisms The “Little Albert Study” provided an empirical basis for Watson’s theory on the development of emotion and behavior (Brain 137). Watson proved through this experiment that emotional responses can be conditioned and learned.
He concluded that phobias are conditioned responses that probably an original fear with a particular stimulus which has been transferred to another object in the duration of time (Brain 137). Similarly with Sigmund Freud, Watson believed that adult personality is significantly influenced by childhood early experiences (Brain 137). However, his work was criticized on the ground that emotional responses are qualitative attributes that can be hardly measured (Brain 137). In addition, since they only have a single subject in their experiment, principles that are valid for general cases may not plausibly be drawn from the results of their study.
Since, there was no follow-up studies after Albert has leaved the hospital, the effects on conditioning made were not determined, thus, Watson’s notion on early childhood experiences and behavioral development lacked definite proof (Brain 137). Moreover, ethical issues have been imputed with Watson’s works for he manipulated Albert by purposively creating fearing situations (Brain 137). He failed therefore to consider the spontaneous development of behavior through natural settings. Analysis and Conclusion
Behaviorists were criticized for their notion that every organism follows similar norms as dictated by their conditioning principles (Mayers). At present, it is an accepted psychological truth that conditioning principles are governed by cognition and hindered by biological factors (Mayer). In Pavlov’s classical conditioning, the subject animal learned to anticipate for an “unconditioned stimulus” however, animals have biological attributes in learning associations like recognition of poisonous food through smell association (Mayers).
Thus, behavior is not only elicited through external stimulus such as bell (Mayers). Behaviorists found that animal behavior can be shaped through reinforcement or the association of a response behavior with eliciting positive or negative stimulus (Howard and Hollander 44). They suggested that this principle as applied on humans could possibly provide clear behavioral explanations (Howard and Hollander 44). As applied on humans, behavioral theorists proposed that consequences of actions could provide understanding of the behavior of an individual (Howard and Hollander 44).
This could be done by relating an action with the consequences of a similar action done in the past. Further, behaviorists believed that if in the past experiences, actions of an individual created rewards and punishments (Howard and Hollander 44). Actions that were rewarded are tended to be repeated in the present time while actions associated with punishments are avoided (Howard and Hollander 44). However, behavioral theorists have only considered behavior and neglected thoughts and emotions.
According to them, thoughts, emotions or feelings are not behavioral determinants but are just by-products of the environmental effects on one’s behavior (Howard and Hollander 44). Cognitive and constructive psychologists criticized Skinner for he has given value on the external control of behavior and underestimated the cognitive and biological precepts (Mayers). For instance, contemporary studies on learning and motivation revealed the crucial role of cognition and physiological brain processes.
Nevertheless, operant principles were deemed to control people, thus, led to ethical issues (Mayers). Nowadays, Skinner’s psychological notions are applied for success reinforcement in different fields (Mayers). Through operant conditioning, a desired behavior is produced by giving positive reinforcements while a behavior is terminated by applying punishing stimulus. Based on the above discussions, the process of socialization has a crucial role on gender acquisition and development. Through socialization process, an individual learns the societal norms and mores.
The agents of socialization such as family, educational institution, peers, and media reflect and even dictate conditioned gender stereotypes that an individual must conform with; otherwise leads to societal ridicule. In line with this, gender stereotypes shaped masculinity as an individual’s ability to control themselves on emotional situations whenever necessary especially within the workplace and even in their sexual relationships (Lothstein 212-214). Thus, has influenced male behaviors as being competitive, assertive, independent, assertive, confident, tough, often angered and violent.
With these characteristics on hand, males must keep in mind to evade having feminine characteristics such as being expressive on their thoughts, emotional, vulnerable and intimate in avoidance of societal ridicule (Lothstein 212-214). In the society, being feminine is traditionally described as “nurturing, supportive, and assigning high priority to one’s relationships” (Lothstein 212-214). Also, females are expected to avoid manly behaviors like being competitive, assertive and often angry and violent (Lothstein 212-214).
Therefore, behaviorism views may not suffice to provide a plausible explanation for the development and acquisition of gender. Unlike the subjects of the behavioral psychologists in their laboratory experiments, humans are exposed to the different socio-cultural factors that spontaneously affect behavioral attributes. Hence, behavioral theories should be incorporated with other contemporary theories on gender such as psychoanalytic, psychosocial, social-cognitive, biological, and schema theory for a better perspective on gender acquisition and development. Works Cited
Brain, Christine. “Advanced Subsidiary Psychology: Approaches and Methods. ” UK: Nelson Thornes, 2000. Elliot, Stephen N. , Kratochwill, Thomas R. , Cook, Joan Littlefield, and Travers, John F. “Educational Psychology: Effective Teaching, Effective Learning, 3rd Ed. ” Boston, MA: McGraw Hill, 2000. Howard, Judith A. and Hollander, Jocelyn. “Gendered Situations, Gendered Selves: A Gender Lens on Social Psychology. ” Lanham, Maryland: Rowman Altamira, 1997. Lothstein, Leslie Martin. “Female-to-Male Transsexualism. ” Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul plc, 1983
Mayers, David G. “Psychology, 8th Ed. ” 2006. Worth Publishers. 9 January 2009 <http://bcs. worthpublishers. com/myers8e/pages/bcs-main. asp? s=08000&n=00030&i=08030. 01&v=chapter&o=|00510|00520|00530|00540|00550|00560|00570|00580|00590|00600|00610|00620|00630|00640|00650|00660|00010|00020|00040|00050|00060|00070|00080|00090|00100|00110|0&ns=0&uid=0&rau=0>. Naik, Payal. “Behaviorism as a Theory of Personality: A Critical Look. ” August 1998. Personality Papers. 9 January 2009 < http://www. personalityresearch. org/papers/naik. html>.

Behaviorism and Gender