Differences of Radical Behaviorism, Experimental Analysis of Behavior and Applied Behavior Analysis Essay.
The phrase “radical behaviorism” can either be applied to a philosophy which was created by B. F. Skinner and can also be used to refer to a particular school which became known during the time when behaviorism was in power. It considers behavior as a natural science and that the behavior of animals can be understood and studied beneficially, comparable to the behavior of humans (Chiesa, 1994).
On the other hand, “experimental analysis of behavior” can also refer to a school of psychology founded by B.
F. Skinner or to a philosophy that is basically from the philosophy of radical behaviorism. Data-driven examination of functional relations is one of the central principles which are incorporated in the experimental analysis of behavior. It also includes inductive examination and can be considered in contrast to the kinds of hypothetico-deductive learning theory (Skinner, 1963). “Applied behavior analysis” is an applied research of behavior and is one of the four domains in the analysis of behaviors.
Furthermore, it is the science in which strategy or procedures are derived from the main philosophies of behavior are applied systematically and uses the natural science perspective in terms of its applications.
The applied behavior analysis makes the technology for application in a variety of settings available. The diversity of its settings starts from individuals who have autism up to organizational improvement.
In addition to this, it is mainly used to enhance the significant social behaviors and that experimentation is employed in determining the variables responsible for modifications or changes (Cooper et al, 2006). These three philosophies under psychology, though they seem to be similar to one another, may also have certain dissimilarities among them. In terms of their underlying principles and philosophy, certain dissimilarities or differences, though somehow related, can already be noticed.
The radical behaviorism gained interest because of two proposals or philosophies, one is that all organismic action is determined and not free. Second is that, it refers to the consideration of the “anti-theoretical”. While on the other hand, the principles or premises utilized as basis for the experimental analysis of behavior includes that “everything that organisms do is behavior” and that “all behavior is lawful”. Central to this is the utilization of a Four-term contingency which are utilized to illustrate functional relationships in controlling behavior.
The Four-term contingency are motivating operations, discriminative stimulus, behavior as response and consequences. On the other hand, in the applied behavior analysis, it considers behavior as a subject, rather than a natural science and that it is composed of an antecedent, behavior, and consequence (Cooper et al, 2006). While in radical behaviorism, no recognition is given still tat work in traditional psychology has any value or that it can be useful in a unification with behaviorism (Weiner and Freedheim, 2003).
The methods, techniques, purposes and service delivery of the three philosophies in psychology also differ from one to the other. In the experimental analysis of behavior, operant conditioning chambers, which are enclosures specifically designed for holding and testing animals, and cumulative recorders, an instrument that graphically records responses from animals or subjects, are used. In the applied behavior analysis, the techniques employed include task analysis, chaining, prompting and fading. On the other hand, radical behaviorism uses operant psychology.
Operant psychology is an alternative or replacement for classical conditioning which was observed by Skinner to be non-functional in accounting for behaviors which individuals are most interested of. In the operant conditioning, positive reinforcements and negative reinforcements are utilized and are used to increase the re-occurrence of a behavior. In contrasting an emphasis on the experimental analysis of behavior with an emphasis on interpretive practices in characterizing the heart of radical behaviorism does not involve a denigration of the long-range value of laboratory research (Modgil and Modgil, 1987).