Is a New Definition of Verbal Behavior Necessary in Light of Derived Relational Responding?

Leigland, Sam

doi:10.1007/bf03392757

Cited by 21 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus C, in the preceding example, might profitably be referred to as a verbal discriminative stimulus (Hayes & Wilson, 1993). Although logically consistent, the argument for a modified nomenclature has yet to recruit a consensus among behavior analysts (e.g., Leigland, 1997;J. Spradlin, personal communication, October 23, 1997).…”

Section: Why Emotion Is a Viable Behavior-analytic Topic Nowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Behavior Analysts Should Study Emotion: The Example of Anxiety

Friman

Hayes

Wilson

1998

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

175

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historically, anxiety has been a dominant subject in mainstream psychology but an incidental or even insignificant one in behavior analysis. We discuss several reasons for this discrepancy. We follow with a behavior-analytic conceptualization of anxiety that could just as easily be applied to emotion in general. Its primary points are (a) that languageable humans have an extraordinary capacity to derive relations between events and that it is a simple matter to show that neutral stimuli can acquire discriminative functions indirectly with no direct training; (b) that private events can readily acquire discriminative functions; (c) that anxiety disorders seem to occur with little apparent direct learning or that the amount of direct learning is extraordinarily out of proportion with the amount of responding; and (d) that the primary function of anxious behavior is experiential avoidance. We conclude that the most interesting aspects of anxiety disorders may occur as a function of derived rather than direct relations between public events and overt and private responses with avoidance functions. Implicit in this conclusion and explicit in the paper is the assertion that anxiety is a suitable subject for behavior-analytic study.

show abstract

Section: Why Emotion Is a Viable Behavior-analytic Topic Nowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Behavior Analysts Should Study Emotion: The Example of Anxiety

Friman

Hayes

Wilson

1998

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

175

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of the authors have begun to consider an integration of relational frame theory with Skinner's interpretation of verbal behavior (e.g., O'Hora & Barnes-Holmes, 2001), but this ecumenical spirit is not evident in the discussion of Verbal Behavior in RFT. I fear that silence will be taken for assent (but see Leigland, 1997).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Palmer

2004

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…such as those found in relational classes" (p. 206)-that RFT proponents seem to champion. Although there is not sufficient space here, let me just add that I believe that the criticisms of Skinner's definition of verbal behavior have been more than adequately addressed (e.g., Leigland, 1997;Normand, 2009;Palmer, 2008;Schlinger, 2008b). Conformity to Scientific Principles Dymond and Alonso-Álvarez (2010) state that "the interpretation presented in Verbal Behavior does indeed conform to basic scientific principles, but only with those scientific principles available up to 1957" (p. 356) and that some have "raised the intriguing empirical question of whether 'behavioral principles different from those already discovered in research with nonhumans may be needed to explain complex human behavior, most notably in the experimental analysis of verbal behavior' (Dymond et al, 2003, p. 334…”

Section: Consistency Of Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%