Abstract
The primary goal of this paper is to draw attention to the topic of behaviorism and explain its importance to the development of psychology in the long-term. The interest in the concept has reduced over the years, and many ideas are rejected by psychologists. However, the impact of behaviorism is frequently overlooked. Examination of the history of this field would help to get a better understanding of the subject matter. The most attention will be devoted to the works of authors that criticize behaviorism and provide an explanation of its limitations. Peer-review journals and books will be reviewed and analyzed. Findings will be summarized to prove the arguments and possible implications of research in his area will also be discussed.
Introduction
It is imperative to mention that behaviorism is a topic that has been actively discussed over the last few years, and has led to numerous disagreements. It can be described as an approach focused on the relationships between such factors as benefits, punishment, and human behaviors. It is suggested that there are two types of stimuli, and most scientists have focused on the measurement of response (Staats, 1996).
The exploration of the origins of behaviorism is critical in this case because it is much easier to keep track of the progress in the field, and the impact of particular trends also can be identified. Furthermore, it would be reasonable to review peer-reviewed articles and books on this subject matter to get a better understanding of various perspectives and areas where this concept is applied. The primary argument is that the critique of behaviorism was vital, and it has led to the research and caused a revolution in psychology.
Discussion
The understanding of the history of behaviorism is critical, and a piece of Staddon (2001) is worth reading. The book is well-organized and explores most of the ideas related to the concept. One of the limitations is that this work can be viewed as quite outdated because the research on this subject matter has expanded over the years. However, the author focuses on the crucial timeframe, and the analysis presented is convincing.
The comparison between teleological and theoretical behaviorism is especially interesting, and several intriguing claims were made. The author also criticizes the radical approach and believes that it should not be applied to social issues. He believes that the discipline has moved far away from science, and factual information needs to be prioritized. His analysis suggests that it cannot be taken seriously if such factors as consciousness are ignored or intentionally avoided.
The framework provided could be utilized by scholars that are interested in research in this area and would like to avoid common mistakes that are made. The author also disagrees with some of the principles of mentalism and believes that they should be avoided when analyzing situations. The discussion of such problematic areas as healthcare, the justice system, and others from the perspective of behaviorism is appropriate, and the analysis of related circumstances raises numerous questions.
The ideas of supporters and the opposition must be analyzed to make a conclusion and determine which position is the most reasonable. Mills (2000) evaluates the contribution of various researchers and the overall impact they had on the development of behaviorism. It is suggested that Pavlov, Watson, and Skinner have provided a comprehensive framework that was utilized by other researchers and the assessment from the perspective of psychology has increased the interest.
One of the aspects that should be highlighted is the difference in definitions. Some of them are rather broad, and others are too limited. The fact that there are so many branches indicates that many scholars were not able to reach the consensus on some of the points. The combination of discussion and criticism is one of the aspects that differentiate this work from others. The author acknowledges the influence that some of the figures had but provides a cogent critique at the same time.
Todd and Morris (1994) review the works of Watson and try to look at behaviorism from another perspective. They state that he is one of the originators of the concept and made several fascinating suggestions. The idea that any behavior can be viewed from the perspective of the stimulus and response was quite revolutionary at that time. His argument that any individual can be trained to become a professional in a particular area is rather questionable and is mostly based on assumptions.
One of the aspects that should not be overlooked is that the influence of heredity was frequently undervalued, and it can be viewed as one of the primary weaknesses. Watson also disregarded the impact of introspection and the comparisons with other branches of science are not reasonable in this case. The authors of the book argue that the publication of the manifesto had a limited impact, but further work of professor has changed the way behaviorism was perceived by scholars and the public.
Rilling (2000) is another author that focuses on the examination of Watson’s work. He suggests that the adoption of the concept of stimulus substitution and revision of classical conditioning are two factors that made the scientist so influential. He has shown astounding interest in psychopathology and provided explanations of various conditions. The exploration of phobic behaviors has helped to establish a connection between behaviorism and human responses to the stimuli.
The author also suggests that Watson’s books have changed the approach to psychology in America, and it started to devote much more attention to learning. He also argues that the field has provided instruments that could be used as alternatives to standard techniques. The empirical research of Watson was a deciding factor that has affected his beliefs. The methods he has invented could compete with approaches related to introspection and psychoanalysis.
The author of the article argues that the scientist was too confident and believed that he has changed the central points of psychology. However, it can be seen that many scholars have returned to the examination of consciousness. Overall, it is clear that Watson had two objectives, and he has managed to accomplish his goals. The first one was to increase the status of learning in the field, and the second one was to raise the interest in research because he believed that psychologists should not operate based on assumptions.
Malone & Cruchon (2001) are focused on the work of Skinner and the discussion of radical behaviorism. They devoted the most attention to the ways in which it is different from other approaches in psychology. It is suggested that it should be viewed as an outstanding alternative to standard practice. They acknowledge the fact that Skinner has abused extrapolation to increase the popularity of such views, but still, believe that some of the techniques suggested are reasonable.
They state that radical behaviorism was unfairly criticized, and it would be appropriate to look at some of the ideas from different perspectives. The idea that this approach is superior to others is rather controversial because many scientists have rejected most of the concepts suggested by Skinner, but his influence on the development of the field should not be overlooked. The inclusion of private events was crucial, but the idea that they are also affected by the environment could be criticized. He recognized that biology could be one of the most important factors, but still preferred to overlook it because it was not his specialty. Operant conditioning was an innovative scientific method at that time. A researcher used it to determine relationships between factors that lead to particular actions and possible consequences.
Morton (1996) highlights some of the disagreements related to the analysis of human behavior. The author criticizes the ideas promoted by behaviorists because he views them as unacceptable and draws attention to one of the essential conflicts of that era. Chomsky has provided a response to theories suggested by Skinner and has criticized many of his approaches. First of all, he has mentioned that most of them were not tested and are based on assumptions.
Additionally, the opponent argued that tests performed on animals are not sufficient to state that such reactions are also seen in humans. He suggests that the lack of evidence indicates that claims are not scientific and criticizes the vagueness of some statements. However, many scholars were not convinced and supported Skinner’s arguments. The pieces by different authors are provided, and it is much easier to evaluate the differences between their ideas. The analysis is not directly related to psychology, but it is still a useful source. Overall, the review is extremely influential and has changed the perspective on behaviorism.
Psychological behaviorism is a fascinating branch because scholars in this area seek solutions to associated problems and conditions. The central argument is that the psychology of an individual can be analyzed through behaviors that are observable. Staats (1996) has conducted extensive research to explore various perspectives and explained his position on this topic. His critique of radical behaviorism needs to be highlighted because some of the ideas are quite comprehensive.
He believed that the inclusion of such factors as learning is crucial, and the theory is insufficient if the importance of this aspect is not taken into account. The suggestion that there are several behavioral repertoires was revolutionary. The focus on learning was paramount because he believed that the concepts may be applied in practice and would lead to positive results in the long-term. A basic behavioral repertoire is a term that is rather intriguing, and it suggests that a human is born with a particular set of behaviors, and he or she may learn additional ones over the course of life.
It is quite evident that the theory suggested by Staats (1996) is much more developed because he has acknowledged the influence that the interactions between the personality and environment have on outcomes. The methods of learning that he has developed are comprehensive, and several pieces of evidence support his claim that early education could help children to be more successful when entering school.
Mahoney (1990) explores the work of Howard Rachlin and discusses the scientist’s unique view of behaviorism. One of the intriguing facts is that he suggests that it can be compatible with cognitivism, and researchers should combine available knowledge. The inclusion of other viewpoints was viewed as a radical measure by many, but he believed that the understanding of the opposition leads to progress in the field. His description of free will also need to be mentioned.
The suggestion that all the actions are influenced by the environment regardless of labeling is rather radical. Mahohey (1990) argues that the problem is that Rachlin has changed his views dramatically on numerous occasions, and many of his works should be analyzed with this factor in mind. Criticism is reasonable in this case, but it is important to understand that behaviorist has raised several interesting questions. His analysis of self-control is critical because he has focused on the ways in which harmful behaviors may be minimized or avoided. Overall, most of the points that the author makes are justified.
Crawford (2000) devotes a lot of attention to the ways in which the concepts of behaviorism can be applied to treat mental illnesses. He suggests that operant conditioning can be viewed as an incredibly efficient technique when individuals lack control over their actions and are not capable of making reasonable decisions. The author also argues that it is a useful approach that may be used to treat such issues as sexual disorders, addiction, and others.
The linkage between childhood traumas and the development of illnesses is an intriguing topic. The interest in this area must be discussed because the research of this subject matter is still lacking, but the author has identified that a relationship may be present. The book is quite outdated at this point, and psychology has made enormous progress over the years, but it highlights the fact that behaviorism has been helpful over the years and influenced many decisions related to mental health. The author states that behaviorism provides answers to some of the questions related to the behavior, but it must not be viewed as a single solution.
Findings
The analysis of available literature indicates that behaviorists had to deal with enormous amounts of criticism over the years. The way this concept is viewed by the public has also changed dramatically. The difference between some of the schools is rather significant and complicates the research on this topic. One of the challenges that professionals in this area had to deal with over the years is that it was hard to establish connections between variables, and many believed that approaches utilized are not scientific. The findings support the idea that the research in this field has helped to establish the credibility of psychology and methods used to achieve results.
The use of these concepts when treating mental illnesses is worth discussing. Many conditions were poorly understood at that time, but behaviorism has introduced frameworks that could be utilized to eliminate some of the difficulties when dealing with such patients. The analysis of available data also suggests that the overall development of psychology and other areas of science have led to the introduction of new branches of behaviorism. Scientists understood that original concepts have limitations, and they must be expanded to support the whole idea. Behaviorism was mixed with other systematic approaches to ensure that the best possible results are achieved in the long-term, but there are still disagreements on this topic.
Studies of the behavior of animals are intriguing and have led to fascinating discoveries. The most significant limitation is that the number of factors that affect the actions and thoughts of a human is much bigger, and it would be unreasonable to make such comparisons. The belief that similar concepts may be applied to humans is rather questionable. Reactions and actions of many individuals are hard to predict, and they are not driven by instincts.
Skinner was regarded as an outsider in this field, but the inclusion of internal factors was paramount because it has helped to get a better understanding of forces that shape the behavior of an individual. Chomsky’s critique was also vital to the development of the field because he identified the weaknesses of arguments and provided suggestions on how behaviorists may prove their positions.
The controversy surrounding behaviorism is justified because it can be seen that many scholars made claims without supporting evidence and were too focused on assumptions. Limitations of current research also should be acknowledged. It would be reasonable to consider the perspective of foreign writers. One of the issues is that behaviorism has several weaknesses. A possible objection that one may make is that the human mind is much more complex, and an individual may reject the influence of rewards and punishments. One may repeat actions regardless of the performance, and it goes against the concept of behaviorism.
The biggest problem at the moment that needs to be addressed is that the number of journals published in this field is currently limited because most scholars prefer other techniques and believe that some concepts of behaviorism are outdated. However, the fact that the interest in the systematic approach is still significant indicates that additional research is still necessary and could help to justify suggested concepts. Modern authors are much more rational and recognize the fact that behaviorists have overlooked critical factors in the past, and try to combine their ideas with current approaches in psychology.
Implications
It is hard to argue with the fact that research in this field is incredibly important for the development of psychology as a whole. Some of the ideas and concepts related to behaviorism were harshly criticized, and researchers started to focus on other areas. It can be seen that most authors acknowledge the fact that behavior could be influenced by other factors but devoted the most attention to the surrounding environment.
Some of the aspects of behaviorism are still poorly understood, but the development of new technologies will help to address current limitations. It is quite evident that the application of this concept in some areas is justified, but additional research would help to establish correlations and relationships between various variables. The study of human behavior is imperative because knowledge in this area may be utilized to improve the process of education and the discovery of new methods of treatment could also be disruptive and may change psychology as a whole. The research on this topic has been restricted because of various factors.
The biggest limitation is that many scientists had to conduct studies on animals, and did not consider dramatic differences between cognitive processes. The analysis of the influence of all the environmental factors on humans that can be monitored by researchers would be extremely helpful. On the other hand, one of the biggest barriers is that most believe that such studies would be unethical and are unacceptable. Such claims are reasonable and scholars had to consider other methods that would prove their claims. It is clear that behaviors that already were learned could affect the actions of an individual, but it is impossible to measure the influence of every variable.
It is evident that many behaviors can be enhanced even without reinforcement. The desire to imitate may overwhelm the logic and reasoning in some cases. Most of the techniques associated with behaviorism have proven to be efficient and are still commonly used, but they could be improved. One of the biggest problems is that behavior modification will be ineffective if an individual is aware of methods that are used or are determined not to change regardless of environmental factors. Another aspect that should be noted is that punishment does not necessarily lead to weakened behavior. History has shown that all humans are rather different, and the same methodology could produce vastly different results. Furthermore, the theory has glaring weaknesses that are not addressed.
Critique of behaviorism is justified most of the time, but it is hard to argue with the fact that some of the statements are reasonable. For instance, Staats was able to prove his position by conducting studies and measuring the impact of external factors on the development of a human being. Moreover, the application of similar concepts has helped in the development of therapies that were used to treat some of the psychological conditions. The effectiveness of such methods has varied, but many techniques are still commonly used. One of the challenges that behaviorists have to deal with is that they argue with the idea that individuals are in control of their behaviors.
The denial of free will is the point that is the most controversial and has led to many disagreements in the past. One may suggest that currently no sufficient evidence that would prove either perspective is currently available, but opponents of behaviorism have many more arguments that are reasonable and appropriate. Every individual may analyze the events in his or her life to determine the influence of the environment and individual events. Therefore, some of the claims made by behaviorists have merit. The problem is that the concept becomes unrealistic if a person intentionally rejects the impact of the environment and does not focus on the consequences of actions.
The focus on observable behaviors is one of the cornerstones of behaviorism. However, the development of new technologies has an enormous impact on the field because modern techniques can be utilized to scan internal processes. The progress that has been made is rather significant, and it is entirely possible that some of the findings will help to change the perception of this topic. On the other hand, some researchers are still focused on the influence that stimuli have on the behavior, and further research is necessary to make any conclusions. In summary, it is possible to state that the research and the number of works on this topic are impressive and has helped to enhance the understanding of human behaviors.
The popularity of behaviorism can be viewed as one of the reasons many scholars have focused on alternative ideas, and its impact on the overall development of psychology should not be disregarded. Nevertheless, it is necessary to understand that rejection of the need to assess internal factors was a dramatic limitation that hindered the research and reduced the overall scope of studies. The lack of agreement between scholars in this area also could be perceived as a disadvantage that has affected the opinion of the public. The utilization of some of the concepts of behaviorism could be incredibly helpful in practice, but ethical aspects also should be considered.
Behavior modification should be conducted only by trained professionals because it could lead to severe consequences. It is clear that the number of studies on this subject matter has reduced over the years because of reduced interest. The work of such authors as Staddon (2001) is crucial because they believe that behaviorism has potential that is not yet fully realized. The inclusion of elements of other areas of science is a necessary measure at this point and could renew the interest in the field.
Limitations of current research also should be acknowledged. It would be reasonable to consider the perspective of foreign writers and their experiences with behaviorism. The focus on the impact of behaviorism in the United States is appropriate, but it would be reasonable to explore other dimensions of this systematic approach. Moreover, factors that have affected the perception of behaviorism could be researched to enhance the overall understanding of the topic.
References
Crawford, M. (2000). An underview of mental illness. Lincoln, NE: iUniverse.
Mahoney, M. (1990). The changing mind of a behaviorist. Contemporary Psychology, 35(6), 543-544.
Malone, John C., & Cruchon, N. M. (2001). Radical behaviorism and the rest of psychology: A review/precis of Skinner’s “About behaviorism.” Behavior and Philosophy, 29(1), 31-57.
Mills, J. A. (2000). Control: A history of behavioral psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: NYU Press.
Morton, P. A. (1996). A historical introduction to the philosophy of mind: Readings with commentary. Calgary, CA: Broadview Press.
Rilling, M. (2000). How the challenge of explaining learning influenced the origins and development of John B. Watson’s behaviorism. The American Journal of Psychology, 113(2), 275-301.
Staats, A. W. (1996). Behavior and personality: Psychological behaviorism. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
Staddon, J. (2001). The new behaviorism: Mind, mechanism, and society. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Todd, J. T., & Morris, E. K. (1994). Modern perspectives on John B. Watson and classical behaviorism. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Publishing Group.