|
| Neuroscience and Behavior Analysis: Relationships among Functional Systems |
| Sunday, May 27, 2007 |
| 1:30 PM–2:50 PM |
| Randle B |
| Area: TPC/EAB; Domain: Theory |
| Chair: Travis Thompson (University of Minnesota) |
| Discussant: William D. Timberlake (Indiana University) |
| Abstract: Behavior analysis has been largely concerned with public variables external to the organism that influence behavior. Endogenous factors have often been considered private, inaccessible and in some cases, hypothetical. The misunderstood relationships among biological and behavioral events have engendered counterproductive explanatory controversy leading to missed scientific opportunities. The potentially symbiotic interrelations are illustrated by acceptance of selection by reinforcement as the central organizing principle of all behavior, including complex human behavior, concepts such as stimulus control and conditioned reinforcement and their mediating biological counterparts, and integration of behavior-analytic and genetic and neuroscientific findings by means of simulation research. The concept of behavioral phenotype within basic and applied behavior analysis will also be examined. Of particular interest are behavioral phenotypes associated with functional disabilities as contrasts with typical development, providing opportunities to explore interactions with clinical/educational intervention procedures. Behavior analytic science must come to terms with genetic influences on behavior to complete its development. It will then be suggested that an organism’s integrated repertoire of operant behavior is a biological system, similar to other biological systems. Endogenous variables can serve as establishing operations, discriminative stimuli, conjoint neurochemical and neurophysiological mediating events and maintaining consequences within a functional analysis of behavior. |
| |
| Integration of Behavior-Analytic, Genetic, and Neuroscientific Findings by Means of Simulation Research. |
| JOHN W. DONAHOE (University of Massachusetts, Amherst) |
| Abstract: I review the sometimes misunderstood relation between behavior analysis and the other biological sciences, including Skinner's final comments on the subject. The potentially symbiotic interrelations are illustrated by (a) the acceptance of selection by reinforcement as the central organizing principle of all behavior, including complex human behavior, (b) behavioral concepts such as stimulus control and conditioned reinforcement and their mediating biological counterparts, and (c) the integration of behavior-analytic and genetic/neuroscientific findings by means of simulation research. Unfortunately, but understandably, many biological scientists have been misled by the dominant theoretical view in psychology--cognitivism. |
| |
| Behavioral Phenotypes in the Functional Analysis of Behavior. |
| WILLIAM J. MCILVANE (University of Massachusetts Medical School) |
| Abstract: Following on the recent completion of the Human Genome project and other advances in human genetics, there has been an accelerating search for so-called „behavioral phenotypes‰ associated with specific genotypes. Of particular interest are behavioral phenotypes associated with functional disabilities, general and specific, not only as informative contrasts to typical development but also because of their possible interactions with clinical/educational intervention procedures. Behavior analytic science, whether basic, translational, or applied, only rarely focuses explicitly on genotype-phenotype relationships in the analysis of behavior. There may be growing perils associated with inattention to this dimension of the scientific analysis of behavior, as my presentation will document. I will argue that behavior analytic science must come to more secure terms with genetic influences on behavior in order to complete its development ˆ roughly paralleling Skinner‚s argument regarding the relationship between behavior analysis and neuroscience. I will argue further that behavior analysts have within their science methods and perspectives that will help to advance and clarify thinking about behavioral phenotypes. In doing so, I will pose a number questions that behavioral scientists of all stripes can profitably ask themselves when "behavioral phenotype" is considered as an independent variable in the scientific analysis of behavior. |
| |
| Relations among Functional Biological Systems in Behavior Analysis. |
| TRAVIS THOMPSON (University of Minnesota) |
| Abstract: This paper is proposes that an organism’s integrated repertoire of operant behavior has the status of a biological system, similar to other systems, like the nervous, cardiovascular or immune systems. Evidence is reviewed indicating that the distinctions between biological and behavioral events is often misleading, engendering counterproductive explanatory controversy. A good deal of what is viewed as biological (often thought to be inaccessible or hypothetical) can be made publicly measurable variables using currently available and developing technologies. Moreover, such endogenous variables can serve as establishing operations, discriminative stimuli, conjoint mediating events and maintaining consequences within a functional analysis of behavior and need not lead to reductionistic explanation. It is suggested that explanatory misunderstandings often arise from conflating different levels of analysis. Finally, it is suggested that behavior analysis can extend its reach by identifying variables operating within a functional analysis that also serve functions in other biological systems. |
|
| |