Mentalism And Radical Behaviorism Phrases
Mentalism And Radical Behaviorismphrasesmentalistic Or Behavioristicex
Mentalism and Radical Behaviorism Phrases Mentalistic or behavioristic Explanation If mentalisitic, provide an alternative Bobby dropped his pencil and got out of his seat to retrieve it each time the teacher asked him to write his name. Ava was very happy at school today. Her teacher stated that she loved playing with other children at school. Stacy calls to make an appointment at her doctor’s office, because she knows she has the flu. Dana ate cake after having a long day to uplift her emotions. Every time the instructor asks Johnny to wash his hands, he walks to the sink, turns the water on, and washes his hands. Elizabeth follows her mother’s directions, because she knows she will be rewarded for appropriate behavior when she does. Kevin broke his pencil, because he was frustrated with the questions on his math test. Each time the buzzer sounds, the rat approaches the lever and presses it. When this occurs, a food pellet is produced. It is observed that each time the light is on, the rat presses the lever and a food pellet is delivered. Alicia got a 100% on her exam, because she is smart. Analyze how the behavioristic approach is different from most other psychology fields: (be sure to include references.)
Paper For Above instruction
The distinction between mentalism and radical behaviorism constitutes a foundational debate in psychology, particularly concerning the explanation of human and animal behavior. Mentalism attributes behavior to mental states, intentions, or consciousness, often implying the existence of internal mental events as causes of observable actions. Conversely, radical behaviorism, a perspective championed by B.F. Skinner, emphasizes that behavior is a function of environmental stimuli and learned responses, without recourse to internal mental states or explanations invoking consciousness (Skinner, 1953).
In the examples provided, behaviors such as dropping a pencil to retrieve it when asked or following a teacher’s instructions for rewards exemplify a behavioristic perspective. Specifically, Johnny’s washing hands upon command and Elizabeth following directions to obtain reinforcement can be understood through operant conditioning mechanisms—stimulus-response associations reinforced over time (Skinner, 1938). These behaviors are shaped by environmental contingencies, rather than by internal mental states like intentions or beliefs. For instance, Johnny's response to the teacher's instructions is driven by the expectation of reinforcement (handwashing leads to praise), aligning with the behavioristic emphasis on observable and measurable behavior.
In contrast, mentalistic explanations would interpret such behaviors as resulting from internal mental states. For example, attributing Ava's happiness to her internal emotional state, or Kevin breaking his pencil because of frustration—implying an internal emotional process—is characteristic of mentalism. However, radical behaviorism refrains from invoking such internal states as explanations and instead focuses on antecedents and consequences of behavior.
The behavioristic approach relies heavily on observable data and experimental procedures. For instance, the rat pressing a lever resulting in food can be explained entirely by stimulus-response links strengthened through reinforcement schedules (Thorndike, 1898). The causal chain involves environmental stimuli and learned responses, not internal mental representations. Skinner (1938) demonstrated that complex behaviors could be shaped by operant conditioning without any reference to mental states.
The key difference between radical behaviorism and most other psychology fields lies in its rejection of internal mentalist concepts as causal factors. While cognitive and psychoanalytic frameworks often invoke internal mental processes or unconscious drives, radical behaviorism treats behavior as entirely accountable through environmental contingencies (Baum, 2017). This approach enhances scientific rigor by emphasizing empirical measurement and falsifiability, avoiding unobservable mental constructs.
Furthermore, radical behaviorism considers internal events as private behaviors that are also subject to analysis within the same behavioral framework, but it does not treat them as causes of behavior (Baum, 2017). Instead, internal events are viewed as behaviors themselves influenced by environmental stimuli, part of the behavioral repertoire that can be analyzed scientifically.
In conclusion, the primary difference between behaviorism and mentalism is the latter’s reliance on mental explanations for behavior, which are intangible and non-measurable, versus behaviorism’s focus on observable environmental interactions. By emphasizing environmental determinants and observable data, radical behaviorism provides a parsimonious, scientifically rigorous account of behavior that avoids unobservable mental states as explanatory entities (Skinner, 1953; Kazdin, 2019).
References
- Baum, W. M. (2017). Understanding behaviorism: Behavior, culture, and evolution. Wiley.
- Kazdin, A. E. (2019). Behavior modification in applied settings. Routledge.
- Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. Appleton-Century.
- Skinner, B. F. (1953). Scientific analysis of behavior. Macmillan.
- Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the association of stimuli and responses. Psychological Review, 5(4), 551-555.