A Citation Analysis of the Influence on Research of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior

McPherson, Adair; Bonem, Marilyn K.; Green, G; Osborne, J. Grayson

doi:10.1007/bf03391898

Cited by 42 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(45 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At least two citation analyses of Verbal Behavior have been conducted in the past 25 years. one, concluded in 1984, examined the Social Science index and the Science Citation index and found that between 1966 and 1983 Verbal Behavior had been cited 836 times (McPherson, Bonem, Green, & osborne, 1984). A more recent analysis by Dymond, o'Hora, Whelan, and o'Donovan (2006) Figure 2).…”

Section: Verbal Behavior Is Alive and Wellmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Long Good-Bye: Why B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior is Alive and Well on the 50Th Anniversary of Its Publication

Schlinger

2008

Psychol Rec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Verbal Behavior Is Alive and Wellmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Long Good-Bye: Why B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior is Alive and Well on the 50Th Anniversary of Its Publication

Schlinger

2008

Psychol Rec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Language and communication are frequently studied empirically (e.g., R. Brown, 1970;Klima & Bellugi, 1979;Lennenberg, 1967;Vygotsky, 1978;Walker & Blaine, 1991) but rarely in the context of the experimental analysis of behavior (McPherson, Bonem, Green, & Osborne, 1984;Oah & Dickinson, 1989). The verbal self-report exemplifies this state of affairs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Signal‐detection Properties of Verbal Self‐reports

Critchfield

1993

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The bias (B'11) and discriminability (A') of college students' self-reports about choices made in a delayed identity matching-to-sample task were studied as a function of characteristics of the response about which they reported. Each matching-to-sample trial consisted of two, three, or four simultaneously presented sample stimuli, a 1-s retention interval, and two, three, or four comparison stimuli. One sample stimulus was always reproduced among the comparisons, and choice of the matching comparison in less than 800 ms produced points worth chances in a drawing for money. After each choice, subjects pressed either a "yes" or a "no" button to answer a computer-generated query about whether the choice met the point contingency. The number of sample and comparison stimuli was manipulated across experimental conditions. Rates of successful matching-to-sample choices were negatively correlated with the number of matching-to-sample stimuli, regardless of whether samples or comparisons were manipulated. As in previous studies, subjects exhibited a pronounced bias for reporting successful responses. Self-report bias tended to become less pronounced as matching-tosample success became less frequent, an outcome consistent with signal-frequency effects in psychophysical research. The bias was also resistant to change, suggesting influences other than signal frequency that remain to be identified. Self-report discriminability tended to decrease with the number of sample stimuli and increase with the number of comparison stimuli, an effect not attributable to differential effects of the two manipulations on matching-to-sample performance. Overall, bias and discriminability indices revealed effects that were not evident in self-report accuracy scores. The results indicate that analyses based on signal-detection theory can improve the description of correspondence between self-reports and their referents and thus contribute to the identification of environmental sources of control over verbal self-reports.

show abstract

“…verbal behavior. Although Verbal Behavior has been widely cited (Knapp, 1992;McPherson, et al 1984), it has not spawned a great deal of research (e.g., Hake, 1982;Oah & Dickinson, 1989;Dougherty, 1994;McPherson, et al, 1984;Sundberg, 1991 Branch, 1991). Answering questions of the sort raised here may require a broader array of methods, including descriptive studies of naturally occuring verbal practices (e.g., see Moerk, 1990) and creative experimental approaches to teasing apart the influences on existing verbal behavior.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A thoroughgoing empirical evaluation of Skinner's analysis has been slow in coming. Much has been written about the relative scarcity of empirical investigations involving Skinner's "primary verbal operants" (e.g., Hake, 1982;Oah & Dickinson, 1989;Dougherty, 1994; McPherson, Bonem, Green & Osborne, 1984;Sundberg, 1991) Skinner's (1957) analysis in mind (e.g., Holz Salzinger & Salzinger, 1967) and, although numerous, these studies demonstrate a fairly limited range of effects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential latency and selective nondisclosure in verbal self-reports

Critchfield

1996

Analysis Verbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several previous studies have examined the correspondence between self-reports and the delayed identity match-to-sample performance they supposedly described. The present two experiments used similar procedures to explore different characteristics of the self-reports. In both studies, match-to-sample responses were successful (earned points) if they were both correct and faster than a time limit. Following each response, a computer-presented query asked whether the response had been successful, and subjects replied by pressing a "Yes" or "No" button. Experiment 1 analyzed self-report latencies from a previously-published study (Critchfield, 1993a). Latencies generally were longer for self-reports of failure than for selfreports of success. In Experiment 1, a "Yes" or "No" self-report was required to advance the session. In Experiment 2, self-reports were optional. In addition to "Yes" and "No" buttons, subjects could press a third button (a "nondiscdosure" option) to remove the self-report query without providing a "Yes" or "No" answer. Across a range of conditions, nondisclosures always occurred more frequently after match-to-sample failures than after successes (i.e., under conditions in which a self-report of failure would be appropriate). The effects observed in the two experiments are consistent with a history of differential punishment for uncomplimentary self-reports, which casual observation and some descriptive studies suggest is a common experience in United States culture. The research necessary to explore this notion should produce data that are of interest to psychologists both within and outside of Behavior Analysis.Skinner's (1957) Verbal Behavior may be most commonly viewed as an attempt to delineate relations unique to verbal behavior, but the analysis it contains rests firmly on the assumption that verbal relations reflect the same fundamental principles as other (primarily nonverbal) behavior that has been studied extensively in the laboratory. A thoroughgoing empirical evaluation of Skinner's analysis has been slow in coming. Much has been written about the relative scarcity of empirical investigations involving Skinner's "primary verbal operants" (e.g

show abstract

A Citation Analysis of the Influence on Research of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior

Cited by 42 publications

References 49 publications

The Long Good-Bye: Why B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior is Alive and Well on the 50Th Anniversary of Its Publication

The Long Good-Bye: Why B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior is Alive and Well on the 50Th Anniversary of Its Publication

Signal‐detection Properties of Verbal Self‐reports

Differential latency and selective nondisclosure in verbal self-reports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About