Works Cited

Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y, & Cullinan, V. (2000).  Relational frame theory and Skinner’s Verbal behavior: A possible synthesis.  The Behavior Analysis, 23, No. 1, 69-84.

Boring, E. G. (1929).  A history of experimental psychology. New York: Century.

Boring, E. G. (1950).  A history of experimental Psychology  (2nd ed.).  New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Bridgman, P. W. (1927).  The logic of modern physics.  New York: Macmillan.

Catania, A. C., & Harnad, S. (Eds.). (1988).  The selection of behavior--the operant behaviorism of B. F. Skinner: Comments and consequences.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cronkhite, G. (1997).  Cognitive representation of rhetorical situations.  In J. L. Owen (Ed.), Context and communication behavior (pp. 218-228).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Day, W. F. (1969a).  Radical behaviorism in reconciliation with phenomenology.  Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 315-328.

Day W. F. (1969b).  On certain similarities between the Philosophical investigations of Ludwig Wittgenstein and the operationism of B. F. Skinner.  Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 489-506.

Day, W. F. (1976a).  Analyzing verbal behavior under the control of private events.  Behaviorism, 4, 195-200.

Day, W. F. (1976b).  The case for behaviorism.  In M. H. Marx & F. E. Goodson (Eds.), Theories in contemporary psychology (2nd ed., pp. 534-545).  New York:  MacMillan.

Day, W. F. (1980).  The historical antecedents of contemporary behaviorism.  In R. W. Rieber & K. Salzinger (Eds.), Psychology: Theoretical-historical perspectives (pp. 203-262).  New York: Academic Press.

Day, W. F. (1983).  On the difference between radical and methodological behaviorism.  Behaviorism, 11, 89-102.

Guerin, B. (1997).  Social contexts for communication: Communicative power as past and present social consequences.  In J. L. Owen (Ed.), Context and communication behavior (pp. 133-179).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Harzem, P. (1995).  Searching in the ruins for truth; the life and works of John B. Watson: A review of modern perspectives on John B. Watson and Classical behaviorism. The Behavior Analyst, 18, 377-384.

Harzem, P., & Miles, T. R. (1978).  Conceptual issues in operant psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Hayes, L. J. (1991).  Substitution and reference.  In L. C. Hayes, & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Dialogues on verbal behavior (pp. 3-18).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Hayes, L. J. (1992).  Equivalence as process.  In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 97-108).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Hayes, S. C. (1993).  Analytic goals and the varieties of scientific contextualism.  In S. C. Hayes, L. J. Hayes, H. W. Reese, & T. R. Sarbin (Eds.), Varieties of scientific contextualism (pp. 11-27).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Hayes, S. C. (1994).  Relational frame theory: A functional approach to verbal events.  In S. C. Hayes, L. J. Hayes, M. Sato, & K. Ono (Eds.), Behavior analysis of language and cognition (pp. 9-30).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001).  Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishing.

Hayes, S. C., & Brownstein, A. J. (1986).  Mentalism, behavior-behavior relations, and a behavior-analytic view of the purpose of science.  The Behavior Analyst, 9, 175-190.

Hayes, S. C., & Grundt, A. M. (1997). Metaphor, meaning and relational frame theory.  In C. Mandell & A. McCabe (Eds.), The problem of meaning: Behavioral and cognitive perspectives (pp. 117-146).  Netherlands: Elsevian Science B.V.

Hayes, S. C., Hayes, L. J., Reese, H. W., & Sarbin, T. R. (Eds.). (1993).  Varieties of scientific contextualism.  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Hineline, P. N. (1988).  What, then, is Skinner’s operationism.  In A. C. Catania & S. Harnad (Eds.), The selection of behavior (pp. 183-184).  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hull, C. L. (1943).  Principles of behavior: An introduction to behavior theory.  New York: Appleton-Century.

Leigland, S. (1989).  A functional analysis of mentalistic terms in human observers.  The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 7, 5-18.

Leigland, S. (1993).  The case against physicalism in the analysis of behavior.  The Behavior Analyst, 16, 351-355.

Leigland, S. (1996).  The functional analysis of psychological terms: In defense of a research program.  The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 13, 105-122.

Leigland, S. (2000).  A contingency interpretation of Place’s contingency anomaly in ordinary conversation.  The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 17, 161-165.

MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. (1948).  On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables.  Psychological Review, 55, 95-107.

Mach, E. (1915).  The science of mechanics: A critical and historical account of its development.  Chicago: Open Court.

Matlon, R., & Ortiz, S. (Eds.). (1997).  Index to journals in communication studies through 1995.  Annandale, VA: National Communication Association.

Moore, J. (1975).  On the principle of operationism in the science of behavior.  Behaviorism, 3, 120-138.

Moore, J. (1980).  Behaviorism and private events.  The Psychological Record, 30, 459-475.

Moore. J. (1981).  On mentalism, methodological behaviorism, and radical behaviorism.  Behaviorism, 9, 55-77.

Moore, J. (1984).  On privacy, causes, and contingencies.  The Behavior Analyst, 7, 3-16.

Moore, J. (1985).  Some historical and conceptual relations among logical positivism, operationism, and behaviorism.  The Behavior Analyst, 8, 53-63.

Moore, J. (1991).  A retrospective appreciation of Willard Day’s contributions to radical behaviorism and the analysis of verbal behavior.  Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 9, 97-104.

Moore, J.  (1995).  Some historical and conceptual relations among logical positivism, behaviorism, and cognitive psychology.  In J. T. Todd & E. K. Morris (Eds.), Modern perspectives on B. F. Skinner and contemporary behaviorism (pp. 51-74).  Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Moore, J. (2000).  Words are not things.  The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 17, 143-160.

Moore, J. (2002).  Behavioral tutorial.  http://server.bmod.athabascau.ca/html/Behaviorism

Owen, J. L. (1989).  Interpersonal surrogates and communication theory (a behavioral view).  Communication Reports, 2, (2) 48-50.

Owen, J. L. (1990a).  A closer look at the behaviorists’ agenda.  Communication Reports, 3, (2), 109-113.

Owen, J. L. (1990b).  Resolved:  That phenomenological surrogates for behavior offer no improvement over the observations themselves.  Debate, first affirmative constructive speech, National Speech Communication Association, annual conference, Chicago, IL.

Owen, J. L. (1993).  On contextual interpretations of behavior.  In S. C. Hayes, L. J. Hayes, H. W. Reese, & T. S. Sarbin (Eds.), The varieties of scientific contextualism (pp. 222-225).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Owen, J. L. (Ed.). (1997a).  Context and communication behavior.  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Owen, J. L. (1997b).  World views as context for communication studies.  In J. L. Owen (Ed.), Context and Communication behavior (pp. 17-39).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Owen, J. L. (1997c).  A referent is not a thing: It’s a process.  In L. J. Hayes & P. M. Ghezzi (Eds.), Investigations in behavioral epistemology (pp. 236-239).  Reno, NV: Context Press.

Place, U. T. (1997).  Contingency analysis applied to the pragmatics and semantics of naturally occurring verbal interaction.  In J. L. Owen (Ed.), Context and communication behavior (pp. 369-385). Reno, NV: Context Press.

Rogers-Warren, A. (1977).  Planned change: Ecobehaviorally based interventions.  In A. Rogers-Warren & S. F. Warren (Eds.), Ecological perspectives in behavior analysis (pp. 197-210).  Baltimore: University Park Press.

Russell, B. (1927).  Philosophy.  New York: Norton.

Schneider, S., & Morris, E. (1987).  A history of the term radical behaviorism: From Watson to Skinner.  The Behavior Analyst, 10, 27-39.

Sidman, M. (1971). Reading and auditory--visual equivalences.  Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 5-13.

Skinner, B. F. (1938).  The behavior of organisms.  New York: Appleton-Century-Croft.

Skinner, B. F. (1945).  The operational analysis of psychological terms.  Psychological Review, 52, 270-277.

Skinner, B. F. (1957).  Verbal behavior.  New York:  Appleton-Century-Croft.

Skinner, B. F. (1974).  About behaviorism.  New York:  Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

Skinner, B. F. (1976).  Particulars of my life.  New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Skinner, B. F. (1988).  The operational analysis of psychological terms.  In A. C. Catania & S. Harnad (Eds.), The selection of behavior (The operant behaviorism of B. F. Skinner: Comments and consequences) (pp. 150-164).  Cambridge:  Cambridge University press.

Skinner, B. F. (1989).  Recent issues in the analysis of behavior.  Columbus:  Merrill.

Spence, K. W. (1948).  The postulates and methods of behaviorism, Psychological Review, 55, 67-78.

Stevens, S. S. (1939).  Psychology and the science of science, Psychological Bulletin, 36, 221-263.

Stewart, I., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2001).  Understanding metaphor: A relational frame perspective.  The Behavior Analyst, 24, No. 2, 191-199.

Thorndike, E. L. (1898).  Animal intelligence.  An experimental study of associative processes in animals.  Psychological Review, Monographic Supplement, 2, No. 8, 1-16.

Tolman, E. C. (1932).  Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: Century.

Watson, J. B. (1913).  Psychology as the behaviorist views it.  Psychological Review, 20, 158-177.

Watson, J. B. (1924).  Behaviorism.  New York: W. W. Norton.

Acknowledgements:

I would like to thank several people who made important contributions to this paper: Dr. Stephanie Coopman, Editor, for her encouragement and helpful suggestions; Dr. Norman Clark, Editor, for his technical formatting assistance; the two anonymous ACJ reviewers for their insightful responses to an earlier version of this paper; and finally, to Dr. Jay Moore, expert on all matters behavioral, for his in-depth critique of the near-final version of this paper.

Tables

Table #1

Basic Features of Three Major Behaviorisms

 

Classical

Behaviorism

Methodological

Behaviorism

Radical

Behaviorism

Philosophical Influences

 

Anticipates logical positivism:

Presumes objective observers.

Logical positivism:

Presumes objective observers.

Pragmatism:

Presumes observer’s reports are a function of one’s interaction with natural/social contingencies.

 

Locust of Explanatory Appeals

Environment:

Environment impacts passive organism.

 

Environment determines behavior.

Organism:

Inferred covert attributes mediate overt behaviors.

 

Mediational events determine behavior.

Interaction:

Organism operates on natural or social environments and experiences the consequences.

 

Organisms and environments co-determine each other.

 

Focus of Learning Theory

Classical conditioning operations:

The paired presentation of unconditioned and conditioned stimulus events.

 

No learning theory:

Its perspective is open to the construction of all types of mediational theories.

Operant learning operations:

Organisms operate on the environment and are influenced by the consequences.

Type of Knowledge Generated

Statements about: Learned associations among directly observable overt events.

Statements about: The influence of inferred covert attributes on other attributes or on overt behaviors.

Statements about: Learned functional relations among directly observable covert and/or overt events.

 

Truth Criterion

Implicitly truth by agreement:

Anticipates logical positivism.

Truth by agreement:

Truth is achieved through agreement among “objective” observers who share an “objective” language.

Truth by workability:

Truth is achieved as one or more people gain experience with how something works; i.e., how it functions in a particular setting.

 

 

Table #2

Behavioral Treatments of Human Language

 

Classical

Behaviorism

Methodological

Behaviorism

Radical

Behaviorism

Perspective on Language

 

Monistic:

Presumes that language is a form of learned behavior.

Dualistic:

Language and behavior occupy different domains. Symbolic activities are separate from ways of behaving.

Monistic:

Everything we do or say is behavior.  Symbolic activity is a specialized form of social behavior.

 

 

Perspective on Language and Meaning

Implicitly referential:

The meaning of a language event is acquired through its “association” with another event.  Eventually, words come to “signal” or “signify” those other events.

 

Referential:

The meaning of a language event is discovered by identifying the thing to which it refers.  Words refer to things; they “denote,” “describe,” or “signify.”

 

Contextual:

The meaning of a language event is discovered by identifying the natural and/or social contingencies that occasion its use.  Words refer people to things.  They “frame” things relationally.

 

Operational Definitions

Implicitly structural:

Anticipates conventional operationism. Overt events are defined in terms of their topographical features.

 

Structural:

Inferred covert/ observable overt events are defined in terms of their topographical manifestations/ features.

Functional:

Directly observable covert/overt events are defined in terms of their functional relatedness to other events in a specific setting.  Talk is relational framing.