BEHAVIOURISM
Learning approaches: the behaviourist approach, including classical conditioning and Pavlov’s research, operant conditioning, types of reinforcement and Skinner’s research
THE BEHAVIOURIST APPROACH - LEARNING THEORY
IN A NUTSHELL:
Explanation of Behaviour: Behaviorism seeks to explain human behaviour without involving conscious evaluation of costs or benefits. It focuses on observable behaviours and their underlying mechanisms rather than on subjective experiences or internal mental processes.
Unconscious Learning: Behaviorists believe that much of human learning occurs unconsciously and reflexively. Individuals acquire behaviours without necessarily being aware of the learning process.
Associative Learning: One of the central concepts in behaviourism is associative learning, where behaviours become associated with specific outcomes. Behaviors that lead to pleasant outcomes (rewards) or the termination of unpleasant experiences (punishments) are more likely to be repeated.
Power of Reinforcement: The passage suggests that the power of reinforcement (rewards or punishments) can be so strong that it can override conscious desires. In other words, even if an individual consciously wants to restrain certain behaviours, the learned associations can lead to those behaviours being performed.
Tabula Rasa (Blank Slate): Behaviorists believe humans are born as "blank slates," meaning they do not have innate behaviours or predispositions. Instead, all behaviour is learned from the environment through experiences and associations.
In summary, behaviourism emphasises the role of learning through associations and reinforcement in shaping human behaviour. It posits that human behaviour can be understood and predicted by studying observable actions and consequences without delving into conscious thoughts or motivations. This perspective has significantly influenced psychology, particularly in the study of conditioning, behaviour modification, and learning theories.
INTRODUCTION
To behaviourists, observation is one of the cornerstones of science because you can only be objective about things you actually see with your own eyes; everything else is conjecture. As a result, they chose to focus exclusively on observable behaviours.;i.e., what they could see an animal actually do after they had trained it in some way or as applied to humans, watching their behaviour after modifying the environment - and yes, that is the same but more about that later.
According to behaviourists, scientific matter has to be observable through direct observation rather than argument or belief and methods that run counter to the observable fact should be disregarded. Scientists should gather information about the world around them, record these observations as data, and use it to support theories. This contrasts with methods that rely on pure reason or subjectivity, e.g., philosophy, structuralism (Wundt), Functionalism (James) and psychoanalytic theory (Freud).
BLACKBOX PROBLEM NUMBER TWO: The denial of conscious experience
Behaviourism is not concerned with the brain or its internal events (the black box), such as thoughts and emotions, as they see them as immaterial to understanding behaviour. Skinner said, “What goes through people’s minds is irrelevant. With this stimulus, they have learned to have their particular thoughts under these circumstances. What is important is understanding the relationships between input (stimulus) and output (response) through the “black box.” Behaviourists deem internal brain processes such as thought, attention, memory, and language unconnected to understanding human behaviour. They judge the “Black box” as passive and shaped from infancy upwards. It only changes by learning from environmental stimuli.
BEHAVIOUR IS THE RESULT OF STIMULUS-RESPONSE CONDITIONING
Because behaviourists see internal processes as unimportant to understanding human behaviour and impossible to measure (e.g., introspection), they are never a feature of their research. Instead, behaviourists believe you can understand an organism by selectively presenting stimuli to their black box and observing their responses, e.g., what the organism has learned. To the behaviourist, all behaviour, no matter how complex, can be reduced to a simple stimulus-response association).
Watson described the purpose of psychology as: “To predict, given the stimulus, what reaction will take place; or, given the reaction, state what the situation or stimulus is that has caused the reaction.”
THERE IS LITTLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LEARNING THAT TAKES PLACE IN HUMANS AND THAT IN OTHER ANIMALS
Behaviourists regard their use of animals for research as non-problematic as they believe the results can directly be extrapolated to human behaviour. As the blackbox is unimportant, there's no fundamental (qualitative) distinction between human and animal behaviour. You get the same results whether you study with lab rats, lions in the desert or humans in an urban city. Therefore, research can be carried out on animals and humans (i.e., comparative psychology). Consequently, rats and pigeons became the primary data source for behaviourists, as their environments could be easily controlled.
ALL BEHAVIOUR IS LEARNED FROM THE ENVIRONMENT: People are born blank slates, it’s all nurture and no nature.
Behaviourists believe that an individual’s personality and behaviour develop through interacting with the organism and the environment. Generally, behaviourists believe that humans are born with “blank slate" brains (tabula rasa), they disregard the role that biological factors may have on personality development such as genes, natural selection and hormones. To the early behaviourists, it’s all about nurture and the environment. Nature is irrelevant.
“Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in, and I’ll guarantee to take anyone at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select—doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors. (Watson, 1930).”
BEHAVIOURISTS BELIEVE THAT PSYCHOLOGY SHOULD BE SEEN AS A SCIENCE
In 1913, John Watson wrote an article entitled 'Psychology as the behaviourist views it,' which set out several underlying assumptions regarding this new approach:
“Psychology as the behaviourist views it, is a purely objective experimental branch of natural science. Its theoretical goal is the prediction and control of behaviour. Introspection forms no essential part of its methods, nor is the scientific value of its data dependent upon the readiness to lend themselves to interpretation in terms of consciousness.” The behaviourist, in his efforts to get a unitary scheme of animal response, recognizes no dividing line between man and brute. The behaviour of man, with all of its refinement and complexity, forms only a part of the behaviourist's total scheme of investigation” - WATSON, 1913
Essentially, behaviourism revamped the methodology and ideology of the time and during this process, basically ended up creating empiricism, i.e., the scientific method that psychologists and other scientists use today. Scientific methods include systematic theory construction (e.g., The components of a theory should be as simple as possible); objective and operationalised terms (defining variables in terms of observable, measurable events); control of extraneous variables; the ability to replicate findings; the ability to falsify the hypothesis and a nomothetic approach so findings can be generalisable to the population.
SCHOOLS OF BEHAVIOURISM
Methodological Behaviourism: Watson (1913) and classical conditioning. The belief is that the mind is a tabula rasa (a blank slate) at birth and that biological factors don’t matter.
Radical Behaviourism: BF Skinner (1938), operant conditioning. In contrast with methodological behaviourism, radical behaviourism accepts the view that organisms are born with innate behaviours and thus recognises the role of genes and biological components in behaviour.
THE TWO TYPES OF BEHAVIOURISM.
There are two types of behaviourism: classical and operant conditioning. Both of these are types of associative learning. i.e., learning that takes place because of conditioning. Learning by association is classical conditioning and learning by consequence is operant conditioning.
CLASSICAL CONDITIONING
Classical conditioning is learning through association and was discovered by Pavlov, a Russian physiologist. It is a form of learning whereby a conditioned stimulus (CS) becomes associated with an unrelated unconditioned stimulus (US) to produce a behavioural response known as a conditioned response (CR). The conditioned response is the learned response to the previously neutral stimulus. In simple terms, two stimuli are linked together to produce a new learned/conditioned response in a person or animal. Classical conditioning is one of those introductory psychology terms that gets thrown around. Many people have a general idea that it is one of the most basic forms of associative learning, and people often know that Ivan Pavlov's 1927 experiment with dogs has something to do with it, but that is often where it ends.
The most important thing to remember is that classical conditioning involves automatic or reflexive responses, and not voluntary behaviour (that's operant conditioning). What does this mean? For one thing, that means that the only responses that can be elicited out of a classical conditioning association rely on responses that are naturally made by the animal (or human) that is being trained. Also, it means that the response you hope to elicit must occur below the level of conscious awareness - for example, salivation, nausea, increased or decreased heart rate, pupil dilation or constriction, or even a reflexive motor response (such as recoiling from a painful stimulus). In other words, these sorts of responses are involuntary.
NEUTRAL STIMULUS (NS): A neutral stimulus evokes no reaction. It’s a person, place or thing that has no particular, personal backstory to the individual. Thus, If you don’t smoke, seeing a box of matches might go unnoticed. If you are a puppy and somebody rings a bell, it’s just random noise.
AN UNCONDITIONED STIMULUS (UCS): A stimulus you innately react to, such as seeing food, hearing loud noises, smelling fire, touching heat, seeing vampires, etc.
AN UNCONDITIONED RESPONSE (UCR): A response you innately (naturally) give, such as salivating over food, getting anxious after hearing a loud noise, or cowering when faced with ninjas. This is not conditioned it happens naturally.
A CONDITIONED STIMULUS (CS): A conditioned stimulus evokes a learned reaction to a person, place or thing. The object or concept has a particular, personal backstory to the individual. Thus, If you do smoke, you will notice the box of matches, because you always light your cigarettes with matches. If you are a puppy of Pavlov, then you will notice that bell ring. In other words, the reaction to the previously neutral stimulus has now become conditioned, and the unconditioned response has become conditioned.
A CONDITIONED RESPONSE (CR): Because the object/concept now has a particular, personal backstory to the individual. There will be learned reactions to it. . These are called conditioned responses. For example, as you now smoking, regularly, matches are no longer meaningless. Matches now remind you of a nicotine hit, and you physically need a cigarette. If you are the puppy, you now salivate when you hear a bell as you have learned an association between the bell ringing and food, so you now expect dinner. Or if you get stuck in a lift, the sight of the lift evokes fear because the lift has become a conditioned stimulus and the fear a conditioned response.
CLASSICAL CONDITIONING APPLIED TO DRUG ADDICTION
“It has been observed that dopamine activity occurs in addicts not just when the drug activity is taking place, e.g. not only when actually snorting cocaine but well before the consumption begins. For instance, it has been observed that Cocaine addicts’ reward systems respond when merely offered a snort, watching a video of someone using Cocaine or even looking at photographs of white lines on a mirror. Likewise, similar findings have been found in cigarette users, e.g., dopamine neurons firing in response to lighters, videos of smokers, etc. and when gamblers see fruit machines. According to Claridge and Davis (2003), these examples strongly suggest that the reward pathway in the brain has been classically conditioned, e.g. this is a passive form of learning where two stimuli become associated/linked with each other. In this way, the individual has learned cues that provoke a similar response as the actual drug. Once this happens, drug-seeking behaviour becomes driven by habit, almost reflex. This is how a drug user becomes transformed into a drug addict.”
Example of how a behaviour is acquired through classical conditioning:
Initial Neutral Stimulus: Before classical conditioning occurs, the cues (mirrors, credit cards) are considered neutral stimuli (NS) because they do not elicit a response related to drug use.
Unconditioned Response (UCR): The unconditioned response (UCR) refers to the natural, unlearned response to a stimulus. In this case, the UCR is the euphoric feeling experienced when taking the drug (e.g., cocaine).
Unconditioned Stimulus (UCS): The unconditioned stimulus (UCS) is the stimulus that naturally triggers the unconditioned response. Here, it's the drug itself (e.g., cocaine).
Conditioned Stimulus (CS): Through repeated association with drug use, the previously neutral stimuli (mirrors, credit cards) become conditioned stimuli (CS). They acquire the ability to elicit a response.
Conditioned Response (CR): The conditioned response (CR) is the learned response to the conditioned stimulus. In this case, it's the craving or anticipation of the drug's effects triggered by the sight of mirrors or credit cards.
Craving and Addiction: As classical conditioning progresses, the drug addict can experience strong cravings and automatic, reflexive responses to the cues (CS) associated with drug use. These cues become powerful triggers for drug-seeking behaviour.
In summary, classical conditioning plays a significant role in drug addiction by associating neutral stimuli (cues) with the pleasurable effects of the drug. Over time, these cues can elicit strong cravings and lead to drug-seeking behaviour, even in the absence of the drug itself. This process demonstrates how learned associations can contribute to the transformation of a drug user into a drug addict.
ADDICTS REACT TO THINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR ADDICTION IN A SIMILAR WAY TO THE ACTUAL ADDICTION ITSELF
In classical conditioning, a stimulus that precedes or occurs simultaneously as a learned stimulus (such as a drug) may become a secondary reinforcer, deriving its influence only by association. Addicts react to things associated with their addiction in a similar way to actual addiction itself.
OBJECTS THAT WERE NEUTRAL A STIMULUS BECOME CONDITIONED STIMULUS, E.G.,
Smoking Cues:
Matches, Lighters, Cigarette Boxes, Ashtrays: These objects, initially neutral, become associated with the act of smoking. Smokers may experience cravings or a conditioned response when they see or handle these items.
Smoking Buddies: People with whom an individual often smokes become associated with smoking behaviour. Simply being around these friends can trigger cravings or the desire to smoke.
Feeling Stressed Areas: Specific environments or situations where an individual typically smokes, especially when feeling stressed, become powerful cues. Being in these areas can lead to cravings.
Gambling Cues:
Betting Slips/Shops, Gambling Odds in Newspapers, Casinos: These locations and materials become associated with gambling activities. Seeing a betting slip or being in a casino can trigger the urge to gamble.
Adverts: Advertisements related to gambling, whether on TV, online, or in print, serve as cues. They can lead individuals to think about gambling and may even prompt them to engage in the behaviour.
Playing Cards: Objects like playing cards are associated with gambling games. Handling playing cards can evoke thoughts of gambling and the desire to gamble.
These cues, once they have become conditioned stimuli (CS), have the power to elicit conditioned responses, such as cravings or the urge to engage in addictive behaviours, even when the actual addictive behaviour is not occurring. This phenomenon highlights the role of learned associations and classical conditioning in addiction, where cues in the environment become powerful triggers for addictive behaviours.
OPERANT CONDITIONING
Operant conditioning is a method of learning that occurs through positive and negative reinforcement and punishment of behaviour. Through operant conditioning, an individual associates a particular behaviour and a consequence (Skinner, 1938). While classical conditioning is a form of learning that binds external stimuli to reflexive, involuntary responses, operant conditioning involves voluntary behaviours. It is maintained over time by the consequences that follow those behaviours.
The tools used in operant conditioning are known as positive and negative reinforcement and positive and negative punishment.
Let’s break them down
Positive: means to add something, as in mathematics, it means addition, +
Negative means to minus or withdraw something, as in mathematics, it means subtraction, -
Reinforcement: Means to encourage a behaviour to continue by reinforcing it
Punishment: Means to discourage or stop a behaviour from continuing by punishing it
Individuals change their behaviour in response to rewards and punishments. These rewards (proper name - reinforcement) and punishments can bring about changes in mood and material changes (e.g. money).
Reinforcement: when behaviour leads to pleasant consequences, it is more likely to be repeated.
Reinforcement can be positive + and negative) –
Positive Reinforcement –gaining something pleasant increases the behaviour: When behaviour leads to pleasant consequences it is more likely to be repeated. E.g. smoking may gain you a cool reputation and get you accepted in certain social groups that you see as trendy and desirable. Or it may be winning a tenner on a fruit machine.
Negative Reinforcement – losing something unpleasant increases the behaviour: When behaviour stops something unpleasant, the behaviour is more likely to be repeated. e.g. if a teenager notices that people in the ‘in-crowd” stop ignoring her when she starts smoking, she will be more likely to smoke again. This is what we mean by negative reinforcement. It increases the behaviour because we remove something unpleasant, e.g., being ignored.
Reinforcement can be continuous, e.g. a reward given every time a behaviour happens or intermittent a reward is only given sometimes. Variable ratio schedule rewards are an example of intermittent rewards, such as when you go fishing or gambling. You never know when you are going to hit the big one!
Punishment: when behaviour leads to negative consequences it is less likely to be repeated.
Punishment: Can be positive + and negative)
Positive Punishment - when behaviour leads to unpleasant consequences it is less likely to be repeated. If an individual behaves in an undesirable way, you present or add an unpleasant thing, such as giving chores, giving lines, phoning parents, smacking, insulting, giving detention, giving fines, giving prison sentences, executing, expelling, suspending, barring, hurting, ignoring, firing. You have now made it less likely that the individual will behave that way again. This is called positive punishment.
Negative punishment: Losing something pleasant due to engaging in certain behaviours means the behaviour is less likely to be repeated. If an individual behaves in an undesirable way, a valuable thing can be removed to extinguish the conduct., e.g., taking away confectionery and privileges, removing smartphones, PlayStation, TVs, liberty, toys, sex, affection, etc. You will then have made it less likely that the individual will behave that way again. This is a negative punishment. I used to remove my daughter’s lightbulb if she was naughty!
It’s worth noting that Skinner argued that reinforcement is more effective than punishment in modifying behaviour.
It can be very confusing. Just remember that when you use positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement the behaviour increases. When you use punishment, either positive or negative, the behaviour will decrease, if not diminish.
Remember that positive means giving the subject something, either a pleasant thing or a negative thing and that negative means taking away something from the subject, either a pleasant thing or a negative thing.
A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS:
If a stimulus is pleasing or rewarding, your psych textbooks might call it "appetitive." If the stimulus is unrewarding or unwanted, it might be called "aversive."Positive reinforcement and negative punishment involve appetitive stimuli. Positive punishment and negative reinforcement involve aversive stimuli.
Chaining is how complex behaviours are taught. Chaining refers to a method of teaching a behaviour using behaviour chains. Behaviour chains are sequences of individual behaviours that, when linked together, form a terminal behaviour. When teaching a behaviour using chaining, the first step is to complete a task analysis. Task analyses serve the purpose of identifying all of the smaller, teachable units of behaviour that make up a behaviour chain.
SUMMARY
The power of the consequence is what makes operant conditioning so successful. Operant conditioning has everyday practical applications. Merely nodding at someone and maintaining eye contact shows you are listening. This is a positive reinforcer, suggesting that what that person is saying is interesting. Schools use gold stars, merits, and prize giving as positive reinforcers and detention and exclusion as punishments. Parents and the government also use operant conditioning techniques to control and train us. Watch Super Nanny. She is an operant conditioner, as sitting naughty kids on the stairs for time out is a positive punishment.
REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULES IN OPERANT CONDITIONING
Reinforcement schedules in operant conditioning determine when and how often a behaviour is reinforced or rewarded. There are several types of reinforcement schedules, each with its effects on behaviour. Let's simplify these schedules with examples:
Continuous Reinforcement Schedule:
Definition: Reinforcing the desired behaviour every time it occurs.
Example: Giving a dog a treat every time it successfully sits on command.
Fixed Ratio (FR) Reinforcement Schedule:
Definition: Reinforcing the behaviour after a fixed number of responses.
Example: Provide a reward for every five completed math problems.
Variable Ratio (VR) Reinforcement Schedule:
Definition: Reinforcing the behaviour after an unpredictable number of responses, with the average number known.
Example: Playing a slot machine where you don't know when you'll win, but statistically, you win every 10th try on average.
Fixed Interval (FI) Reinforcement Schedule:
Definition: Reinforcing the behaviour after a fixed amount of time has passed.
Example: Check your email every 30 minutes to see if you've received any new messages.
Variable Interval (VI) Reinforcement Schedule:
Definition: Reinforcing the behaviour after an unpredictable amount of time has passed, with the average time known.
Example: Checking social media for updates, where new posts appear randomly but, on average, every 15 minutes.
Now, let's discuss the effects of these schedules on behaviour:
Continuous Reinforcement is useful for initial learning, but the behaviour may be extinguished quickly if the rewards stop.
Fixed Ratio (FR) leads to high, steady response rates. People or animals tend to work consistently when they know they must complete a certain number of actions to receive a reward.
Variable Ratio (VR) leads to the highest response rates and is resistant to extinction. The unpredictability keeps individuals engaged and motivated.
Fixed Interval (FI) results in a gradual increase in response rates as the time for reinforcement approaches, then a decrease after the reward. There's often a pause before the behaviour starts again.
Variable Interval (VI) leads to a steady, moderate response rate. Individuals don't know when the reinforcement will come, so they check periodically.
In summary, reinforcement schedules play a crucial role in shaping behaviour. They determine how often and under what conditions a behaviour is rewarded, which, in turn, affects the rate and persistence of that behaviour. Different schedules are used depending on the desired outcomes and behaviours being targeted for reinforcement.
CRITICAL EVALUATION OF BEHAVIORISM
THE PROBLEM WITH THE BLACKBOX
Behaviourism was the main approach in Psychology from the early part of the twentieth century until the 1960s. Its popularity was gradually diminished by the cognitive revolution, mainly because it believed in excluding internal, cognitive processes from the study of human behaviour. Cognitive psychologists believe that “what goes on inside the mind,” is integral to understanding human behaviour. But behaviourism portrays a mechanistic view- animals and humans are viewed as passive responders to the environment with little conscious insight into their behaviour.
Other approaches, e.g. social learning and cognitive psychology, emphasise internal mental processes; they suggest the processes between stimulus and response suggest humans play a more active role in learning, e.g. mediational processes, self-efficacy and motivation. Moreover, cognitive psychologists stress how the mediational processes that occur between stimulus and response might explain why two people given the same stimulus may have different outcomes., which behaviourism fails to account for. Essentially, the behaviourists ignored the black box (the brain) and couldn’t explain how processes such as memory, language, perception, attention and consciousness shape behaviour. In any case, despite extensive research, the very existence of unconscious learning in humans remains much debated. Scepticism arises chiefly from the difficulty in assessing the level of awareness of the complex associations learned in classical implicit learning paradigms.
Paradoxically, recent research from the field of cognitive neuroscience has shown that the human brain makes up its mind up to ten seconds before an individual is cognisant of a decision. The neuroimaging of participants making decisions revealed that researchers could predict what choice people would make before the subjects were even aware of having made a decision. So perhaps Skinner and the other early behaviourists were right, after all, and maybe the blackbox isn’t that relevant.
REDUCTIONISM
Behaviourism has been criticised for being reductionist. It focuses only on learning as an explanation for behaviour and ignores other causes of behaviour, such as genes, hormones, etc. Research from neuroscience has clearly shown how chromosomes, neurotransmitters and hormones (emotions) influence our behaviour. Biological psychologists believe that most behaviour has a physical/organic cause. They emphasise the role of nature over nurture. Moreover, important factors like biological sex, drugs, disease accidental damage and their effect on behaviour are not considered. Accepting a behaviourist explanation could prevent further research from another perspective that could uncover important factors.
For what it is worth, the psychodynamic approach (Freud) also criticises behaviourism as it does not consider the unconscious mind’s influence on behaviour, and instead focuses on externally observable behaviour. Freud also rejects the idea that people are born a blank slate (tabula rasa) and states that people are born with instincts (e.g., Eros and Thanatos).
NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
Methodological behaviourists like Watson denied that genes either exist, interact or get transformed (epigenetics) by environmental events, starting in the womb. They avoid any references to the biology of the human body.
But the traditional nature-nurture argument is pretty much dead. Now. Even Skinner, a radical behaviourist, believed that both nature and nurture were relevant, And there is research evidence to support both biological and behavioural influences. We only need to look at conformity to social rules and cultural norms to appreciate the effect of operant conditioning. And the relevance of classical conditioning is reliably measured in the advertising industry where it makes companies big bucks.
The traditional nature v nurture debate has now been reduced to arguments over percentages regarding which side has the most muscle. Modern estimates suggest genetic heritability accounts for 50% of the psychological differences between people which leaves 50% for the environment.
According to Robert Plomin of King’s College London, research shows that most of that 50% is not actually attributable to environmental influence, because it is really an expression of genetics. He argues that conditioning and environment have very little effect on development. He spins a different interpretation on behaviour normally considered to be the result of conditioning, for example, a good illustration of his logic is the belief genes dictate the environment a person ends up living in and not the other way around, e.g. the environment shapes personality. So, if you lived in squalor as a child, that was down to your parent's low IQ, which is ultimately the result of nature (genes). Therefore, squalor can't cause deprivations like low IQ only heritable traits can.
But Plomin forgets how important learning is to the developing, neonatal brain and how missing the critical period can have catastrophic effects on brain development. Human babies are born without many neural networks because they are effectively born prematurely. The architecture of the baby’s brain develops in response to the environmental stimuli it receives, and then that gets hard-wired into the brain.
PLASTICITY
In any case, there is evidence that associative learning (operant and classical conditioning), creates neural networks in the brain that change through growth and reorganisation. Examples of this neuroplasticity include circuit and network changes that result from learning a new ability, environmental influences, and practice. This means the effects of operant and classical conditioning are continually hardwired into the brain,
Thus, at least to some degree, the nurture v nurture conundrum is solved as clearly not only does nature affect nurture, but they are also inextricably and reciprocally connected.
OBSERVATION IS SUBJECTIVE TOO
Another of the major criticisms of behaviourism is that it only provides an account of human behaviour that can be objectively viewed. It could also be argued that scientists study things such as gravity, which in itself is not an observable phenomenon but is still considered to be scientific. There are various flaws in this with believing that all matter must be observable, and one of them is illustrated by a well-targeted joke. Two Behaviourists spend a night passionately making love. In the morning, one says to the other, “It was good for you. How was it for me?” In other words, it is ridiculous to suggest that a person cannot self-reflect on their behaviour.
To be fair, at the time behaviourism originated, there were no tools to explore internal thought (e.g., fMRI, PET, etc), scientists are only as good as their tools remember; nevertheless, many behaviourists would not have studied the black box had the tools been available as it was deemed irrelevant to an understanding of humanity.
EXTERNAL VALIDITY
Behaviourism solely relies on laboratory experiments with animals. This means that much research can lack ecological validity which means that results may not be a true reflection of real-life behaviour. Humans and animals are very different because they have evolved under different selective pressures, so extrapolating may be invalid. Moreover, although animal studies have allowed a high degree of control to be maintained, it has drawn attention to ethical issues e.g. animals were exposed to stressful conditions which could also affect how they reacted in the experiment, so the research may have additional issues of low validity due to 'unnatural' behaviour
*Humanists like Carl Rogers reject the scientific method of using experiments to measure and control variables because they believe that research should value the private, subjective, conscious experience of a person. They argue that objective reality is less important than a person's subjective perception and understanding of the world. Because of this, Rogers and Maslow placed little value on scientific Psychology, especially the use of the scientific laboratory to investigate both human and other animal behaviour - *I hate humanism, so this is a cheap point to make because it is discrediting an amazing theory with one that is little more than pseudoscience. All of the textbooks do it, though, which I think is counter to learning good analytical skills, but I thought I’d stick it here anyway as a discussion point.
DETERMINISM
Behaviourism has often been criticised as being deterministic. Form of environmental determinism- sees all behaviours as determined by past experiences and ignores free will, this implies that when something happens, the past conditioning determined the outcome, not our free will, which is an extreme position that ignores the influence of conscious decision making and free will processes on behaviour. This can be seen in Watson & Raynor's research, where Little Albert could not choose whether or not to feel fear when he saw a white rat - the fear response was created in him through conditioning. Humanistic Psychology assumes that humans have free will (personal agency) to make their own decisions in life and do not follow the deterministic laws of science.
ON THE PLUS SIDE
There are many plus sides to behaviourism, and despite the many well-deserved criticisms outlined above, it is still a very relevant approach to understanding some aspects of human behaviour; it is just not the whole story. Associative learning, including classical conditioning and operant conditioning, is regarded as the most fundamental type of learning for mammals. Humans clearly do learn many things in an unconscious stimulus-response fashion. Perhaps this is because the brain is continually bombarded with sensory input, and it would be impossible to consciously attend to all the stimuli it is confronted with.
Learning theories provide a basis for understanding how people learn and a way to explain, describe, analyse and predict learning. In that sense, behaviourism helps us make more informed decisions around the design, development and delivery of learning.
BEHAVIOUR MODIFICATION
Most of society is built around the concept of reinforcement or punishment. Behaviour modification is defined as "the alteration of behavioural patterns through the use of such learning techniques such as classical conditioning and positive or negative reinforcement and punishment. Or biofeedback. Principles of conditioning have many positive applications: psychiatry and penal system problems e.g. the token economy in prisons, where prisoners can exchange tokens earned from good behaviour for rewards. These treatments are good for people who lack insight into their condition and cannot discuss their problems.
Behaviour modification can be used to try and decrease or increase a particular type of behaviour or reaction. Parents use this to teach their children societal norms and right from wrong. Therapists use it to promote healthy behaviours in their patients, e.g., the principles of classical conditioning in their treatment. Animal trainers use it to develop obedience between a pet and its owner. Individuals even use it in their relationships with friends and significant others. Workers and students are encouraged to continue working hard by grades, money, wages, certificates, etc.
RULES, LAWS AND ANARCHY
Thus, behaviourism has many applications in real life through the use of conditioning strategies, such as positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment. This point has both disadvantages and advantages depending on your politics! But who would obey rules and laws without punishments to control them? The world would fall apart without operant conditioning, laws would be broken, and anarchy would exist. Children would have no incentives or punishments.
However, some individuals see behaviour modification as a form of social control. Society accepts the rules, laws, and norms made by authorities. Behavioural psychologists provide the techniques that can be used to control and shape people by authorities, institutions and businesses. For example, the institutions of school and work require certain behaviours to function well, e.g., obedience, timekeeping, compliance, and a high work rate. If schools and work punish behaviours that undermine these principles, then they can be prevented or eradicated. Soviet dissidents were people who disagreed with certain features in the embodiment of Soviet ideology and who were willing to speak out against them; they underwent behaviour modification to change their unacceptable behaviour.
BEHAVIOURISM APPLIED TO ADVERTISING
The advertising industry has been utilising classical conditioning for quite some time. Behaviourism and consumerism, two ideologies that achieved tremendous power in the twentieth century, are cut from the same cloth. The shopper, the student, the worker, and the voter are all seen by consumerism and behaviourism in the same way: passive, conditionable objects. Pair a scantily clad attractive woman with some random beer, and condition men to sexually salivate to the sight of the beer, and they might buy it.
RESEARCH METHODS
Behaviourism gives Psychology scientific credibility and status as it focuses on the careful measurement of observable behaviour in a controlled setting; it emphasises the importance of scientific processes, e.g. objectivity and replication. Many see that an obvious advantage of behaviourism is its ability to define behaviour clearly and to measure changes in behaviour. According to the law of parsimony, the fewer assumptions a theory makes, the better and the more credible it is. Behaviourism, therefore, looks for simple explanations of human behaviour from a very scientific standpoint. These methodological innovations can be considered as major contributions to behaviourism in the field of psychology.