Elephant in the room? Of course the muddiness of such concepts says nothing about the scientific/theoretical value of Behaviorism? I always found them to have a kind of practical value....
G.L. (Gary) Peterson,Ph.D Psychology@SVSU On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:55 AM, Paul Brandon <pkbra...@hickorytech.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > When this behaviorist taught schedules of reinforcement, I characterized them > as a factor involved in the nature of multiply determined behavior (e.g., one > can see evidence of the effects of both interval and ratio contingencies in > the behavior of catching a bus (or a bass ;-)). > Similarly -- pure fixed schedules are uncommon in the real world (and hard to > achieve even in the lab!). So again, it's a question of do we see the post > reinforcement pauses characteristic of fixed schedules, accompanied by a > fairly narrow range of variation, or is the response rate even enough to > characterize the example as a variable schedule. > > And one can see the effects of an operant contingency even if the details are > too messy to ascribe a specific schedule. The most one may be able to > determine as a response rate differential. > > And of course teaching ALL the schedules of reinforcement would be a graduate > seminar starting with Ferster and Skinner (1957) updated by the subsequent > literature. > > ALL science involves simplification; isolating variables. > The identification of the Higgs Boson is the ultimate simplification. > > And finally, simplification becomes oversimplification when relevant > variables are left out without being identified; misinformation when > inaccurate predictions result. > And the above is an oversimplification, but not misinformation ;-) > > > On Oct 25, 2013, at 8:39 AM, Mike Palij wrote: > >> I always cringe when someone suggests a "real life" example of operant >> conditioning because life is not a "Skinner box" where the "Grand >> Researcher" maintains a particular schedule of reinforcement for specific >> behaviors or chains of behaviors. Trying to explain why a behavior >> occurs or is maintained requires one to know *all* of the schedules >> of reinforcement that are operating and in real life these schedules can >> be quite complex, possibly with concurrent schedules with variable >> modes (i.e., ratio and interval) of reinforcement. I can understand >> why some people might want to oversimplify situations and to present >> it as a simple example but this would be misleading. I suggest taking >> at look at the following article for an example of the issues involved: >> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1901/jeab.1992.57-317/abstract >> And one can get the article here: >> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1323233/pdf/jeabehav00010-0080.pdf >> >> I leave it to Tipsters to decide when "oversimplification" becomes >> "misinformation". >> >> -Mike Palij >> New York University >> m...@nyu.edu >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 05:51:00 -0700, Rick Froman wrote: >> I agree but I would choose to take the illustration a bit further, even for >> intro students, to note that what might be intended as extinction can, when >> it >> fails, produce a more extinction-resistant strain of reinforcement. >> Rick >> >> Proverbs 14:15 "A simple man believes anything, but a prudent man gives >> thought >> to his steps." >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Britt [mailto:mich...@thepsychfiles.com] >> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 7:14 AM >> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) >> Subject: Re: [tips] Funny Example of Extinction >> >> It seems that whenever a post appears on TIPS about behavioral principles - >> such as my own regarding the Family Guy YouTube video - there is a back and >> forth about which aspect of behavioral theory the idea represents. It makes >> you want to not post anything on TIPS that is behaviorally related just to >> avoid these kinds of back and forths in which, in the end, it's hard to know >> what to think anymore (I'm sure there's an example of a behavioral principle >> at >> work right there - but I don't want to go into that). >> >> So let me ask this: can we agree that the video >> (http://youtu.be/aOLxQGLJouI) >> could be used in an introductory psychology class as an example of how a >> mother >> who wants to take a nap is attempting to extinguish her child's interruption >> behavior by not responding to it (i.e, reinforcing it)? >> >> Yes, her attempt fails in the end when she clearly and understandably loses >> patience with the child, but that just shows how difficult the extinction >> process can be. >> >> Could the video serve as a (funny) illustration of the extinction process? >> >> Remember - we're talking about introductory psychology students - many of >> whom >> will not go on to become psychology majors. > > Paul Brandon > Emeritus Professor of Psychology > Minnesota State University, Mankato > pkbra...@hickorytech.net > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: peter...@svsu.edu. > > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13445.e3edca0f6e68bfb76eaf26a8eb6dd94b&n=T&l=tips&o=29096 > > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > > or send a blank email to > leave-29096-13445.e3edca0f6e68bfb76eaf26a8eb6dd...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > > > > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=29100 or send a blank email to leave-29100-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
