Units of Which Behavior Is Composed. Knowl
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
JOURNAL OF THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR 1986, 469 219-242 NUMBER 2 (SEPrEMBER) UNITS OF ANALYSIS AND KINETIC STRUCTURE OF BEHA VIORAL REPERTOIRES TRAVIS THOMPSON AND DAVID LUBINSKI UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA It is suggested that molar streams of behavior are constructed of various arrangements of three elementary constituents (elicited, evoked, and emitted response classes). An eight-cell taxonomy is elaborated as a framework for analyzing and synthesizing complex behavioral repertoires based on these functional units. It is proposed that the local force binding functional units into a smoothly articulated kinetic sequence arises from temporally arranged relative response probability relation- ships. Behavioral integration is thought to reflect the joint influence of the organism's hierarchy of relative response probabilities, fluctuating biological states, and the arrangement of environmental and behavioral events in time. Key words: behavioral units, units of analysis, response class, organization of behavior, behavioral taxonomy, relative response probability PROTASIS edge of such units is not axiomatic but as in An impala gamboling across an East Afri- the case of our knowledge of other biological can Serengeti plain or a 16-month-old child units, must be arrived at empirically. Whether confronted with a novel toy presents seamless fundamental behavior units can be discovered streams of kinetic motion, free of beginnings depends largely on the criteria used for as- or endings. The scant frequency with which sessing and selecting behavior classes. Given behavioral scientists have concerned them- criteria, establishing which units satisfy those selves with identifying the fundamental units criteria is an empirical matter. Approximately of behavioral phenomena is, in part, due to three quarters of a century have been devoted the conspicuous integrity of such naturally oc- to research dealing with a range of behavioral curring episodes; indeed, at times they seem units without explicit criteria for assessing to defy scientific analysis. Of the unresolved their scientific significance. One of the pur- issues facing behavior scientists, none is more poses of this paper is to discuss the criterion central than the analysis and synthesis of the ofscientific significance as applied to the selec- fundamental units of behavior. Analyzing tion of behavioral units. Based on the stated continuously flowing behavior into basic com- criterion and available evidence, three types of ponents and then resynthesizing it is a major functional units emerge from our analysis: aim of behavioral science. This goal is predi- emitted, elicited, and evoked response classes. cated on an understanding of the fundamental The combination of these fundamental units units of which behavior is composed. Knowl- to form larger behavioral aggregates (i.e., functional behavioral composites made up of two or more fundamental units that covary Appreciation is expressed to Robert Hinde, whose collectively) is a secondary concern of this pa- helpful remarks improved the first draft of this paper, and per. It is proposed that once combined, some to John Falk, M. Jackson Marr, Paul Meehl, Richard combinations of fundamental units can no Meisch, J. Bruce Overmier, Roger Schnaitter, Murray longer be analyzed into those constituents. We Sidman, and Michael Zeiler, whose comments sizably im- proved the manuscript. We especially wish to express our will outline a behavioral taxonomy for ana- appreciation to our friend and teacher, Kenneth Mac- lyzing extended behavioral samples into their Corquodale. We hope the ideas expressed in this paper constituent components. are in keeping with the intellectual tradition he taught so Finally, the mechanisms involved in behav- effectively at the University of Minnesota for 37 years. Reprint requests may be sent to Travis Thompson, ioral syntax (i.e., the process by which simpler Department of Psychology, Elliott Hall, 75 E. River Road, behavioral components are integrated to form University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455. highly organized, complex behavioral reper- 219 220 TRA VIS THOMPSON and DA VID LUBINSKI toires) will be explicated. Our treatment of classification of fundamental units, behavioral these issues will include a discussion of the science has largely disregarded these issues. It apparent uniqueness of naturally occurring was not until the turn of the 20th century that behavioral episodes; some suggestions for the foundations of our current concepts of be- finding order in these phenomena are offered. havior units were laid, growing out of three traditions. Thorndike (1911) observed that behavior could be acquired by instrumental SELECTING BEHAVIORAL UNITS conditioning, and he isolated components of CRITERION OF SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE behavior by arranging some consequences of classes of movements that would control their Behavior, like any other physical phenom- future recurrence. Pavlov (1927) showed that enon, cannot be studied scientifically in its en- behavior could be conditioned by pairing a tirety. Portions of the continuous stream of an neutral stimulus with an effective eliciting organism's activity sharing certain common stimulus. His behavior units were specified as features must be abstracted for study from the whatever muscle contractions or glandular se- whole. These individual behavior instances are cretions occurred immediately following pre- important to the extent they can be shown to sentation of the eliciting stimulus. The third be members of replicable behavior classes. Al- tradition originated independently with Whit- though members of such classes are necessar- man (1899) and Heinroth (1911), who sug- ily something less than behavior in its original gested that large portions of behavior were of form, they are the basis of all scientific asser- fixed forms, elicited by complex patterns of tions concerning behavior. Clearly, the avail- stimuli, and were inherited rather than con- ability of significant behavior classes is of ditioned. The segments of behavior in the lat- prime importance, for it determines the kind ter case were less well defined, since they in- and number of lawful relations that can be volved not only simple muscle contractions, but established. It follows that the way continuous also complex patterns of coordinated move- behavioral repertoires are divided into fun- ments. Nonetheless, regular families of be- damental units is critically important in de- havior patterns could be isolated as elicited termining the success of the entire scientific by specific stimulus configurations. study of behavior. The selection of behavior The emergence of these three schools was units cannot be arbitrary, but must be based important in the development of our current on consistent criteria that "carve nature at its notions of behavior classification and units. All joints." three groups succeeded in abstracting and A common criterion applied in evaluating simplifying behavior, from a scientifically in- any unit is its scientific significance: the extent comprehensible flux to relatively simple and to which the unit enters into a wide range and observable segments, based on the conditions number of lawful relations (Sidman, 1960; controlling those behavior segments. In Spence, 1948). Theoretically rich but empir- Thorndike's case, the consequences of behav- ically unreliable measures fail to satisfy this ior that controlled recurrence of members of criterion, as do highly reliable measures with a class were the basis for identifying response extremely narrow conceptual implications. To units. Pavlov's behavioral unit was specified qualify as scientifically significant, a unit must by identifying the eliciting stimuli. Whitman reliably relate to an array of phenomena. This and Heinroth specified their units as inherited status cannot be established by argumenta- effector patterns covarying with species-spe- tion, but must be shown empirically. cific stimuli. EMERGENCE OF FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE CLASSES FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIORAL CLASSES AND Historically, behavior scientists have paid NATURAL BEHAVIOR little systematic attention to the search for sci- Behavioral units can be grouped together if entifically significant units of analysis. Indeed, they are controlled by the same variables, Loevinger (1957, p. 644) has asserted, "there characterized as functional (Skinner, 1938) or are no natural units for the study of behav- causal (Hinde, 1966) classifications of behav- ior." Whereas nearly every other area of bi- ior. This method of describing behavior cou- ology has placed a premium on isolation and ples the classification with its niethod of anal- KINETIC STRUCTURE 221 ysis. The success of isolating functional and specific nature. Behavior can be divided behavior units experimentally depends on the into three functionally different response diversity of the controlling conditions. If there classes according to its major controlling con- were as many uncorrelated controlling con- ditions: elicited behavior, emitted (or operant) ditions as there are behavior instances, we behavior, and a derivative of the former two would be at no scientific advantage. However, classes, evoked behavior. Elicited behavior is the conditions controlling behavior are distrib- identified as behavior whose probability is de- uted into several disjunctive categories. Inso- termined by antecedent eliciting stimuli, and far as each of these categories is relatively ho- conditioned via antecedent stimulus