Limitations of Skinner's concept of an ‘operant’: A theoretical note

Abstract

It is argued that even if an operant can be defined formally as the “interrelationships among SD, R, and Srein”, specific operants require delimitations of emitted behaviour and stimuli in terms of specific sets of contingencies of reinforcement. It is argued that the class membership of operant responses can be determined neither by reference to SD, response topography, SR, nor the supposed interrelationships among these, the contingencies of reinforcement. Functional analysis seems to require knowledge rejected by radical behaviourists. It is argued that operant behaviouristic analyses of human behaviour presuppose a common‐sense understanding of actions, which–until explicated and shown to be reducible to a technichal behavioural language–must be taken as the point of departure in these analyses.

Operants and contingencies of reinforcement: A comment

“…However, the definition of a functional operant is always an empirical question, which can be answered only after simultaneous monitoring of several responses under conditions of non-reinforcement and reinforcement of one response, hypothesized to belong to that class. Thus, our conclusion on this point parallels the argument by Lee (1981), who contributed a rejoinder to the Rein & Svartdal (1979) paper. Lee (1981) distinguishes between the operation-and effect-aspects of reinforcement by the terms descriptive and functional operants (cf.…”

“…But there is no way of knowing that just from the knowledge that a certain topography occurred and was consequated, or from the effect on the consequated response. Thus, topography cannot be used as the sole definitional datum for an operant class; a conclusion which is in agreement with Rein & Svartdal (1979).…”

“…In their insistence that the reinforcement contingency is insufficient for definitional purposes, Rein & Svartdal's (1979) analysis becomes questionable. If a certain response, e.g.…”

On the depth and fit of behaviorist explanation

“…However, as pointed out by several authors (e.g. Rein & Svartdal 1979;Schick 1974) circularity may arise when behavior is identified by a reinforcer and a reinforcer cannot be identified until a change in the probability of a certain kind of behavior has been demonstrated.…”