DATA IN SEARCH OF A PRINCIPLE: A REVIEW OF RELATIONAL FRAME THEORY: A POST‐SKINNERIAN ACCOUNT OF HUMAN LANGUAGE AND COGNITION

Abstract

Responding to derived relations among stimuli and events is the subject of an accelerating research program that represents one of the major behavior analytic approaches to complex behavior. Relational Frame Theory: A Post-Skinnerian Account of Human Language and Cognition (Hayes, Barnes-Holmes,& Roche, 2001) offers a conceptual framework for this work and explores its implications for verbal behavior and a variety of other domains of complex human behavior. The authors dismiss Skinner’s interpretation of verbal behavior as unproductive and conceptually flawed and suggest a new definition and a new paradigm for the investigation of verbal phenomena. I found the empirical phenomena important but the conceptual discussion incomplete. A new principle of behavior is promised,but critical features of this principle are not offered. In the absence of an explicit principle,the theory itself is difficult to evaluate. Counter examples suggest a role for mediating behavior,perhaps covert, thus raising the question whether a new principle is needed at all. The performance of subjects in relational frame experiments may be a mosaic of elementary behavioral units, some of which are verbal. If so, verbal behavior underlies relational behavior; it is not defined by it. I defend Skinner’s definition of verbal behavior and argue that an account of relational behavior must be integrated with Skinner’s analysis; it will not replace it.

Stimulus Equivalence: Testing Sidman's (2000) Theory

“…A controversial but influential theory (see Burgos, 2003;Palmer, 2004aPalmer, , 2004b, one of RFT's central tenets is the notion that a relational response (here, responding controlled by stimulus-stimulus relations) is itself treated as an operant. RF (relational frame) theorists view derived relational responding as learned behavior, and instances of derived relational responding seen in equivalence and RF experiments are conceptualized as generalized operants (see .…”

Applied Behavioral Science Goes to Scale: A Review of Biglan’s The Nurture Effect

“…The chapter concludes by introducing the role of functional contextualism in language and why this matters for nurturing psychological health. The topic of functional contextualism remains the source of much debate, even in the pages of The Behavior Analyst (e.g., Hayes and BarnesHolmes 2004;Palmer 2004), and some readers may take issue with how Biglan introduces this discussion:…”

Constructs and Events in Verbal Behavior

“…In fact, there may be somewhat of a theoretical divide between some behavior analysts and their approaches to language and cognition (e.g., see a recent discussion, Dymond & Alonso-Á lvarez, 2010;Schlinger, 2008). Indeed, there are those who have extended Skinner's analysis (S. C. Hayes et al, 2001), those who seem to adhere closely to it (e.g., Palmer, 2004Palmer, , 2008Schlinger, 2008), and those who integrate multiple perspectives (e.g., Barnes-Holmes, BarnesHolmes, & Cullinan, 2000;Greer & Speckman, 2009;Rehfeldt & Root, 2005;Rosales & Rehfeldt, 2007). As RFT has gained popularity with both researchers and practitioners in behavior analysis (e.g., Dymond, May, Munnelly, & Hoon, 2010;Rehfeldt & BarnesHolmes, 2009), advocates of Skinner's approach have begun to respond to the critiques of Skinner's definition made by RFT theorists.…”

“…Generally speaking, advocates of Skinner's (1957) analysis acknowledge the con-cerns with his definition of verbal behavior presented by RFT theorists (e.g., Normand, 2009;Palmer, 2004). Interestingly, that the definition is criticized for equating verbal behavior with simple acts of lever pressing is seen as the point of Skinner's analysis, not a criticism of it.…”