Rules, Culture, and Fitness
Tóm tắt
Behavior analysis risks intellectual isolation unless it integrates its explanations with evolutionary theory. Rule-governed behavior is an example of a topic that requires an evolutionary perspective for a full understanding. A rule may be defined as a verbal discriminative stimulus produced by the behavior of a speaker under the stimulus control of a long-term contingency between the behavior and fitness. As a discriminative stimulus, the rule strengthens listener behavior that is reinforced in the short run by socially mediated contingencies, but which also enters into the long-term contingency that enhances the listener’s fitness. The long-term contingency constitutes the global context for the speaker’s giving the rule. When a rule is said to be “internalized,” the listener’s behavior has switched from short- to long-term control. The fitness-enhancing consequences of long-term contingencies are health, resources, relationships, or reproduction. This view ties rules both to evolutionary theory and to culture. Stating a rule is a cultural practice. The practice strengthens, with short-term reinforcement, behavior that usually enhances fitness in the long run. The practice evolves because of its effect on fitness. The standard definition of a rule as a verbal statement that points to a contingency fails to distinguish between a rule and a bargain (“If you’ll do X, then I’ll do Y”), which signifies only a single short-term contingency that provides mutual reinforcement for speaker and listener. In contrast, the giving and following of a rule (“Dress warmly; it’s cold outside”) can be understood only by reference also to a contingency providing long-term enhancement of the listener’s fitness or the fitness of the listener’s genes. Such a perspective may change the way both behavior analysts and evolutionary biologists think about rule-governed behavior.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Alcock, J. (1993). Animal behavior (5th ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Allan, L. G., & Jenkins, H. M. (1983). The effect of representations of binary variables on judgment of influence. Learning and Motivation, 14, 381–405.
Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (1979). Judgment of contingency in depressed and non-depressed students: Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 441–485.
Baum, W. M. (1994a). John B. Watson and behavior analysis: Past, present, and future. In J. T. Todd & E. K. Morris (Eds.), Modern perspectives on John B. Watson and classical behaviorism (pp. 133–140). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Baum, W. M. (1994b). Understanding behaviorism: Science, behavior, and culture. New York: HarperCollins.
Blakely, E., & Schlinger, H. (1987). Rules: Function-altering contingency-specifying stimuli. The Behavior Analyst, 10, 183–187.
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cerutti, D. T. (1989). Discrimination theory of rule-governed behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 259–276.
Dawkins, R. (1989). The selfish gene (new ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dickinson, A., Shanks, D., & Evenden, J. (1984). Judgement of act-outcome contingency: The role of selective attribution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 29–50.
Glenn, S. S. (1988). Contingencies and meta-contingencies: Toward a synthesis of behavior analysis and cultural materialism. The Behavior Analyst, 11, 161–179.
Glenn, S. S. (1991). Contingencies and meta-contingencies: Relations among behavioral, cultural, and biological evolution. In P. A. Lamal (Ed.), Behavioral analysis of societies and cultural practices (pp. 39–73). New York: Hemisphere.
Harris, M. (1980). Cultural materialism. New York: Vintage Books.
Harris, M. (1987). Foodways: Historical overview and theoretical prolegomenon. In M. Harris & E. B. Ross (Eds.), Food and evolution (pp. 57–90). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Harris, M., & Ross, E. B. (1987). Death, sex, and fertility. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hayes, L. J., & Chase, P. N. (Eds.). (1991). Dialogues on verbal behavior. Reno, NV: Context.
Hayes, S. C. (Ed.). (1989). Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control. New York: Plenum.
Herrnstein, R. J. (1969). Method and theory in the study of avoidance. Psychological Review, 76, 49–69.
Hineline, P. N., & Wanchisen, B. A. (1989). Correlated hypothesizing and the distinction between contingency-shaped and rule-governed behavior. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp. 221–268). New York: Plenum.
Logue, A. W. (1978). Behaviorist John B. Watson and the continuity of the species. Behaviorism, 6, 71–79.
Logue, A. W. (1994). Watson’s behaviorist manifesto: Past positive and current negative consequences. In J. T. Todd & E. K. Morris (Eds.), Modern perspectives on John B. Watson and classical behaviorism (pp. 109–123). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Malagodi, E. F., & Jackson, K. (1989). Behavior analysts and cultural analysis: Troubles and issues. The Behavior Analyst, 12, 17–33.
Petrovich, S. B., & Gewirtz, J. L. (1991). Imprinting and attachment: Proximate and ultimate considerations. In J. L. Gewirtz & W. M. Kurtines (Eds.), Intersections with attachment (pp. 69–93). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Reese, H. W. (1989). Rules and rule-governance: Cognitive and behavioristic views. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp. 3–84). New York: Plenum.
Segal, E. F. (1972). Induction and the provenance of operants. In R. M. Gilbert & J. R. Millenson (Eds.), Reinforcement: Behavioral analyses (pp. 1–34). New York: Academic Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270–277.
Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Skinner, B. F. (1969). An operant analysis of problem solving. In Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis (pp. 133–171). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Knopf.
Skinner, B. F (1974). About behaviorism. New York: Knopf.
Skinner, B. F. (1981). Selection by consequences. Science, 213, 501–504.
Sommerville, C. J. (1982). The rise and fall of childhood. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Staddon, J. E. R. (1977). Schedule-induced behavior. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 125–152). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Staddon, J. E. R. (1983). Adaptive behavior and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Todd, J. T. (1994). What psychology has to say about John B. Watson: Classical behaviorism in psychology textbooks, 1920–1989. In J. T. Todd & E. K. Morris (Eds.), Modern perspectives on John B. Watson and classical behaviorism (pp. 75–107). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20, 158–177.
Wilson, D. S., & Sober, E. (1994). Re-introducing group selection to the human behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 585–654. (Includes commentary)
Zettle, R. D., & Hayes, S. C. (1982). Rule-governed behavior: A potential theoretical framework for cognitive-behavioral therapy. In P. C. Kendall (Ed.), Advances in cognitive-behavioral research and therapy (Vol. 1, pp. 73–118). New York: Academic Press.