NEOBEHAVIORISM

Sulakshana Khatoniyar
Faculty (Dept. of Psychology, Cotton University)
22.12.21
WHAT IS NEOBEHAVIORISM?
• Neobehaviorism resulted when behaviorism was
combined with logical positivism.

• Behaviorism: The theory that human and animal behavior can

be objectively studied through observable actions rather than
thoughts and feelings that cannot be observed.

• Logical positivism (logical empiricism): A school of philosophy

that combines empiricism, the idea that observational
evidence is indispensable for knowledge; with a version of
rationalism, the idea that our knowledge includes a
component that is not derived from observation but logical
reasoning.
Although there were major differences among the
neobehaviorists, they all tended to believe the following:

• If theory is used, it must be used in ways demanded by

logical positivism (logical reasoning).

• All theoretical terms must be operationally defined (all

concepts must be defined in terms of the procedures used
to measure the concept). Operational definitions tie
theoretical terms to observable phenomena.
• Nonhuman animals should be used as research subjects
for two reasons:
• Relevant variables are easier to control than they are for human
subjects.
• Perceptual and learning processes occurring in nonhuman animals
differ only in degree from those processes in humans; therefore,
the information gained from nonhuman animals can be generalized
to humans.

• The learning process is of prime importance because it is

the primary mechanism by which organisms adjust to
changing environments.
EDWARD CHACE TOLMAN
• Born on April 14, 1886 in West Newton, Massachusetts.

• Earned his undergraduate degree in experimental and

theoretical chemistry at MIT.

• Edward’s interests began to turn toward philosophy and

psychology after taking summer school courses. Most
influential, however, was his reading of James’s
Principles.
• At that time, psychology was dominated by Titchener and
James, and psychology was still defined as the study of
conscious experience, a fact that bothered Tolman.

• In 1911, Tolman decided to pursue graduate work in

philosophy and psychology at Harvard; once enrolled, his
interest turned increasingly to psychology.

• Tolman died in Berkeley, California, on November 19,

1959.
TOLMAN’S PURPOSIVE BEHAVIORISM

• Instead of studying S-R reflexes (like Watson), Tolman

decided to study purposive behavior.

• Although Tolman’s approach differed from Watson’s in

several important ways, Tolman was still a behaviorist and
was completely opposed to introspection and
metaphysical explanations.
• Tolman agreed with Watson that behavior should be
psychology’s subject matter, but Tolman believed that
Watson was focusing on the wrong type of behavior.

• Tolman called purposive behavior molar behavior to

contrast it with molecular behavior (Tolman referred to
S-R reflexes as molecular behavior).

• Because Tolman chose to study molar or purposive

behavior, his position is often referred to as purposive
behaviorism.
• In his book, Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men
(1932), Tolman gave examples of what he called
purposive (molar) behavior:
• a rat running a maze
• a cat getting out of a puzzle box
• a man driving home to dinner
• a child hiding from a stranger
• a pupil marking a mental-test sheet
TOLMAN’S USE OF RATS

• He saw the use of rats as a way of guarding against even

the possibility of indirect introspection that could occur if
humans were used as experimental subjects.

• Tolman developed such a fondness for rats that he

dedicated his book Purposive Behavior to the white rat.
In 1945 he said:
“Let it be noted that rats live in cages; they do not go on
binges the night before one has planned an experiment;
they do not kill each other off in wars; they do not invent
engines of destruction, and if they did, they would not be so
inept about controlling such engines; they do not go in for
either class conflicts or race conflicts; they avoid politics,
economics, and papers on psychology. They are
marvelous, pure, and delightful.”
THE USE OF INTERVENING VARIABLES
• Tolman believed that both the initiating causes of behavior
and the final resulting behavior must be capable of
objective observation and operational definition.
• He listed five independent variables as causes of
behavior:
• environmental stimuli
• physiological drives
• Heredity
• previous training
• Age
• Behavior is a function of these five variables.
• Between these observable independent variables and the
resulting response behavior (the observable dependent
variable), Tolman inferred a set of unobservable factors,
the intervening variables, which are the actual
determinants of behavior.

• These factors are internal processes that connect the

stimulus with the observed response.

• Intervening variables: Unobserved and inferred factors

within the organism that are the actual determinants of
behavior
• The behaviorists’ S-R proposition (for stimulus-response)
should read S-O-R, so far as Tolman was concerned. The
intervening variable is whatever is going on within O (the
organism) that brings about the behavioral response to a
given stimulus situation.

• But because intervening variables cannot be objectively

observed, they are of no use to psychology unless they
can be directly related to the independent variables and
the dependent variable.
• The classic example of an intervening variable is hunger.
We cannot actually see hunger in a person or a laboratory
animal, but hunger can be precisely and objectively
related to an experimental (independent) variable, such as
the length of time since the organism last received food.
Hunger can also be related to an objective response or
behavior (dependent) variable, such as the amount of
food consumed or the speed with which it was eaten.
Thus, the unobservable variable of hunger can be
described precisely in relation to empirical variables and
made amenable to quantification and experimental
manipulation.