Skinner 's Behavioral Approach On Analyzing Myself

One of the most influential members of the behaviorist movement, as well as among psychologists who study human development was B.F. Skinner (Diessner, 2008, p. 134). Skinner was notable for his description of the acquisition of new behavior through the use of reinenforcement and punishment called operant conditioning (Diessner, 2008). Skinner also contributed his behaviorist explanation of language development through his concept of verbal behavior (Diessner, 2008).

Behaviorism has been a topic of many controversies in the early stages of developing. This paper will present a synthesis of several articles discussing behaviorisms and its development through various schools of theories, in addition known researchers and conclusions. The first article that illustrates behaviorism is, “Behaviorism at 100” by Ledoux (2012), which details the last 50 years of the study of behaviorism. The next article is “Behaviorism” by Moore (2011), maps the beginning of behaviorism with B.F.Skinner and addressing functionalism and structuralism. The article named “Psychology as the behaviorist views it”, written by Watson (1913) put his emphasis the aspects of psychology and how behaviorist view introspection. Green (2009) article “Darwinian Theory functionalism and the First American psychological revolution”, is very adamant to have is readers to know that functionalism was the foundation that behaviorism was built. Clark (2004) article “The classical origins of Pavlov’s conditioning”, give insight into classical conditioning abroad and in the United States. The last article named “Little Albert’s alleged neurological impairment” written by Digdon , Powell and Harris (2014), focus on ethical concerns and that may have been overlooked. The synthesis paper will provide behaviorism and conclusions that can draw overall messages from the articles mentioned above.

Such findings and the current state of the emerging field of behavioral genetics are summarized by the distinguished academics Cynthia Coll, Elaine Bearer and Richard Lerner, editors of the compendium Nature and Nurture: The Complex Interplay of Genetic

In the nurture side of the debate we believe that genes have nothing to do with the child's behaviour and it is all in the choices the kid makes. I was told of a specific case in the Nature versus Nurture debate, in the studies a set of twins with an alcoholic mother that could care less about her children and a father that was hardly around. One twin grew up to be an amazing mother and go on a completely different path then he was taught when he was younger, the other twin followed exactly in the footsteps of his mother. By gathering this research we can conclude that it is all in the child’s choices and how that child would like to live the rest of his or her life.

“A born devil on whose nature nurture can never stick,” says Prospero in Shakespeare’s play The Tempest(Smallman). Even Shakespeare questioned what traits came from nature and nurture. This argument goes back hundreds of years ago where famous philosophers such as John Locke, Francis Galton, and Thomas Hobbes have researched nature vs. nurture, and no one can seem to agree on one answer. Behavior Genetics is one of the most talked about subjects in Psychology. Most of the world knows it as the debate of Nature vs. Nurture. Now psychologists are not arguing about which side is right, they are arguing about which side influences characteristic traits more. The question is, does

Illegal drug use may be explained by a Skinnerian behaviorist as a maladaptive response that is significantly reinforced more than adaptive responses. For example, a Skinnerian behaviorist might say, a person who uses illegal drugs is constantly pressured by their peers to use illegal drugs and is not enough in contact with those who would reinforce non-drug use. As a result, illegal drug use becomes more reinforced than not.

A question that many psychologists ponder is “What determines your personality and behavior: nature or nurture?” There have been countless studies and experiments that attempt to prove one side or the other. From twin studies to evidence of breaking the cycle of abuse, it can be seen that personality and behavior are due to nurture, not nature.

There has been an ongoing debate within psychology circles as to what makes greater impact on a person’s behavior – one’s genetics and inheritance or upbringing and surrounding. There are numerous proponents on both sides.

Behaviorism is by far one of the most interesting fields of psychology in my opinion. B.F. Skinner’s view on behaviorism was that a person’s actions are controlled by rewards and punishments. Relating this to a real life situation, a great example of this would be a parent and a child.

Human characters and traits can be shaped by heredity or environmental factors; in other words, it can be the result of genes and or the result of life experiences. Genes play a big role in determining our physical appearances like heights and colors, but the important question is: do the same genes that determine our genotype, tendencies toward traits such as humor, violence, likes and dislikes, hyperactivity and homosexuality. This debate has been One of the biggest debates in psychology; It’s The nature-nurture controversy; heredity vs. environment. In mental development science, there is a solid suggestion that nature and nurture interact to produce every specific trait; no characteristic develops as an exclusive response to either nature

Is behavior learned? It is inborn? What of aggression, intelligence, and madness? There is a crucial relationship between the behavior of humans toward their own kind and the view of life they hold. Interest in behavioral genetics depends on wanting to know why people differ. According to Jack R. Vale, in Genes, Environment, and Behavior, recognition of the importance of hereditary influence on behavior represents one of the most dramatic changes in the social and behavioral sciences during the past two decades. A shift began toward the more balanced contemporary view that recognizes genetic as well as environmental influences on behavior. Behavioral genetics lies in its theory and methods, which consider both genetic and

Biosocial theory consists of a collection of ideas, that obtain a multi-disciplinary approach, as a means to explain crime and antisocial behavior based on the assumption that human behavior is shaped by biological factors, that interact with the environment (Lilly, Cullen, & Ball, 2015). These theories can be classified into three overlaying groups: evolutionary psychology, neuroscience, and genetics (Lilly et al., 2015). Evolutionary psychology focuses on the identification of psychological traits, as they relate to adaptations that contribute to survival, and are transmitted throughout generations (Lilly et al., 2015, p.380). The neuroscience approach contends that learning and conditioning behavior occurs differently within each individual due to the neurological and biological distinctions affected by the environment

The question of why people behave as they do was one that puzzled Skinner and one that consumed his professional career. He began his search for an answer by developing a series of ways to study behavior in people, starting with simply observing behavior and attempting to discover patterns or "organizing principles in the structure of behavior." ("About Behaviorism," Part 1) Once this was undertaken and the observation of behavior was scientifically developed, "a program of methodological behaviorism became plausible"¦" ("About Behaviorism," Part 1) This program discovered the importance of the environment in shaping behavior and would culminate in the development of "radical behaviorism," or the idea that behavior could be influenced through external reinforcement.

Is how aggressive an individual is determined only by his or her genes? Whether psychological and behavioral traits are purely determined by genetics, solely influenced by socialization, or a combination of both has been a highly debated topic within the field of psychology known as the “nature-nurture issue.” Today, although still disputed, a good number of psychologists and other scientists concur that genetics and the environment mutually influence and intermingle with one another (Myers, 2015). We can partially credit this fizzling-out of the nature-nurture debate to the discoveries made in twin studies. Twin studies are used to help delineate the genetic components of behavior and the socially and culturally influenced components (Myers, 2015). This type of study enables researchers to examine the extent to which genetics and environment have an effect on the development of traits and behavior. For example, in lecture, we learned that a common and natural experiment used in twin studies is to examine a set of twins who grew up in the same household and a set twins who grew up in separate households (K.W. Brown, personal communication, August 29, 2017).

The brain is formed based on genetic information inherited from parents, and since the brain and the central nervous system are the cause of behaviour and experiences, personality is influenced by this genetic information. According to the biological approach, genes as a result of evolution, plays a very important role on the outcome of personality or behavioural characteristics a person will develop (Zuckerman, 2005). This approach supports the nature side of the ‘nurture-nature argument’.