B. F. Skinner and Radical Behaviorism

the key points of what was later to become known as radical behaviorism:

Stimulus-response relationships, or reflexes, include only a narrow

range of behavior; classical, or Pavlovian, conditioning could not account

for the development of new behavior or the complexity of human behavior;

behavior does show lawful relationships with the environment; the consequences

immediately following a behavior determine the future strength of

that behavior; new behavior can be acquired by the process of shaping

(from existing behavior, elemental forms can be strengthened by consequences

which follow the step-by-step approximations until the new behavior

is present); once acquired, behavior is maintained by a particular arrangement

of environmental consequences; and certain events are present

when a behavior is strengthened. Often, one of those antecedent events is,

by design, especially correlated with the behavior and the consequence that

makes that behavior stronger in the future. At a later time, the presence of

that antecedent event by itself will make the behavior more likely to occur.

Skinner named the process that he used to investigate these behaviorenvironment

relationships operant conditioning. He called the behavior in

this process operant behavior because it operates or acts on the environment.

In operating, or acting, on the environment, the behavior produces

consequences, or changes, in the environment. Consequences in turn affect

the behavior for the future. Skinner was able to detect this relationship between

present consequences to the behavior and their later effect on behavior

by the method that he used for his research. This method, used initially

with rats and later with pigeons, allowed him to observe and measure the behavior

of interest continuously and over long periods of time. Not only was

the behavior observed at the time that the consequence to it occurred, but it

was also observed continuously subsequent to the consequence.

Skinner observed two effects of consequences on the future strength of

behavior. Some consequences resulted in stronger behavior (reinforced the

behavior), while other consequences resulted in weaker behavior (punished

the behavior). For Skinner and his followers, the consequent events to

behavior that serve as reinforcers or punishers are defined only in terms of

their effects on the future strength of some behavior. Events or things in

themselves are not reinforcers or punishers. For example, a harsh command

to a learner in the classroom (“Sit down and get to work!”) is assumed

by many teachers to “punish” wandering around the room and inattentive

ness to seatwork. In countless instances, however, the teacher’s consequence

ness to seatwork. In countless instances, however, the teacher’s consequence

serves only to strengthen or maintain the learner’s wandering and inattentiveness.

In this case, the teacher’s remarks function as a reinforcer, irrespective

of what the teacher believes.

Skinner also showed that once a behavior had been acquired and was

maintained, the occurrence of the behavior could be made more or less

probable by the presentation or removal of events that preceded the behavior.

These antecedent events—for example, the ringing of a telephone—

have been reliably present when one picks up the telephone and says

“Hello.” If one picks up the telephone and says “Hello” when the telephone

has not rung, the voice of another person responding to the greeting is extremely

unlikely. The term for this process is “stimulus control,” defined as

the effect that events preceding a behavior can have on the likelihood of

that behavior occurring. Stimulus control comes about because of the presence

of particular events when a behavior is reinforced.

serves only to strengthen or maintain the learner’s wandering and inattentiveness.

In this case, the teacher’s remarks function as a reinforcer, irrespective

of what the teacher believes.

Skinner also showed that once a behavior had been acquired and was

maintained, the occurrence of the behavior could be made more or less

probable by the presentation or removal of events that preceded the behavior.

These antecedent events—for example, the ringing of a telephone—

have been reliably present when one picks up the telephone and says

“Hello.” If one picks up the telephone and says “Hello” when the telephone

has not rung, the voice of another person responding to the greeting is extremely

unlikely. The term for this process is “stimulus control,” defined as

the effect that events preceding a behavior can have on the likelihood of

that behavior occurring. Stimulus control comes about because of the presence

of particular events when a behavior is reinforced.