Los nuevos datos sobre los procesos de condicionamiento hablan a favor de una posición ecléctica entre las dos posturas extremas tradicionales en el análisis de la conducta: el innatismo y el ambientalismo. Se sugiere aquí que la teoría de la conducta basada en los procesos de condicionamiento puede reconciliarse con estos nuevos datos, pero sólo si se revisan ciertas suposiciones conductistas tácitas sobre los parámetros de los procesos de condicionamiento y, sobre todo, del condicionamiento instrumental u operante. El condicionamiento operante especifica cómo se modifica y mantiene la conducta de un organismo en función de las relaciones que se establecen entre los estímulos, las respuestas, los reforzadores y los estados de impulso. Los nuevos datos minan los fundamentos en que se han basado los supuestos sobre estos elementos por separado, más que los que se refieren a los tipos de relaciones que se establecen entre ellos. Cabría clasificar a algunos de estos supuestos bajo el epígrafe de la motivación, por lo que se concluye que, por fin, se están reflejando en el conductismo las sutilezas de la motivación, después de varias décadas en que no ha ocurrido así. Tras este refinamiento el conductismo parece fundirse con las principales corrientes de la etología configurando una ciencia de la conducta más completa de lo que nunca una ciencia aislada ha podido ser.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BollesR. C.Species specific defense reactions and avoidance learning.Psychological Review, 1970, 77, 32–48.
2.
BollesR. C.Reinforcement, expectancy, and learning.Psychological Review, 1972, 79, 394–409.
3.
BoringE. G.The physical dimensions of consciousness. New York. Century, 1933.
4.
BrelandK.BrelandM.The misbehavior of organisms.American Psychologist, 1961, 16, 681–684.
5.
BrownP. L.JenkinsH. M.Auto-shaping ot the pigeon's key-perk.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1968, 11, 1–8.
ChomskyN.Language and mind (Enlarged ed.). New York. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1972.
8.
CodeC. R. (Ed.). Handbook of physiology: Alimentary canal. Vol. I. Control of food and water intake. Washington, DC. American Psysiological Society, 1967.
9.
De VilliersP. A.Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. EnHoningW. K.StaddonJ. E. R. (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1977.
10.
De VilliersP. A.HerrnsteinR. J.Toward a law of response strength.Psychological Bulletin, 1976, 83, 1131–1153.
11.
DunhamP.The nature of reinforcing stimuli. EnKonigW. K.StaddonJ. E. R. (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N. J. Prentice-Hall, 1977.
12.
EstesW. R.New perspectives on some old issues in association theory. EnMackintoshN. J.HoningW. K. (Eds.), Fundamental issues in associative learning. Hallifax. Canadá. Dalhousie University Press, 1969.
13.
FantinoE.NavarickD.Recent developments in choice. EnBowerG. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (vol. 8). New York. Academic Press, 1974.
14.
GarciaJ.KoellingR. A.Relations of cue to consequence in avoidance learning.Psychonomic Science, 1966, 4, 123–124.
15.
HearstE.JenkinsH. M.Sign-tracking, the stimulusreinforce relation and directed action.Austin, Tex.: Psychonomic Society, 1974.
16.
HerrnsteinR. J.Introduction. EnWatsonJ. B., Behavior, an introduction to comparative psychology. New York. Holt, Tinehart & Winston, 1967 (Publicado originalmente en 1914).
17.
HerrnesteinR. J.Nature as nurture: Behaviorism and the instinet doctrine.Behaviorism, 1972, 1, 23–52.
18.
HultC. L.Principles of behavior. New York. Appleton-Century, 1943.
19.
JenkinsH. M.MooreB. R.The form of the auto-shaped response with foor or water reinforcers.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973, 20, 163–181.
20.
KilleenP.On the temporal control of behavior.Psychological Review, 1975, 82, 89–115.
21.
KohlerW.The place of value in a world of facts. New York. Liveright, 1938.
22.
KonorskiJ.Integrative activity of the brain.Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1967.
23.
KonorskiJ.MillerS.On two types of conditioned reflex.Journal of General Psychology, 1937, 16, 264–272.
24.
LewinK.(Principles of topological psychology) (F. Heider & G. M. Heider, Trand.). New York McGraW-Hill, 1936.
25.
McdougallW.An introduction to social psychology. Londres, Methuen, 1908.
26.
MillensonJ. R.Principles of behavioral analysis. New York. Macmillan, 1967.
27.
MocreB.The role of directed Pavlovian reactions in simple instrumental learning in the pigeon. EnHindeR. A.Stevenson-HindeJ. (Eds.). Constraints on learning. New York. Academic Press, 1973.
28.
PavlovI. P. (Conditioned reflexes) (G. V. Anrep. Trad.). Londres, Oxford University Press, 1927.
29.
RachlinH.HinclineP. N.Training and maintenance of key-pecking in the pigeon by negative reinforcement.Science, 1967, 157, 954–955.
30.
SchlosbergH.Conditioned responses in the white rat.Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1934, 45, 303–335.
31.
SchlosbergH.The relationship between success and the laws of condinoning.Psychological Review, 1937, 44, 379–394.
32.
SchwartzB.GamzuE.Pavlovian control of operant behavior. EnHonigW. K.StaddonJ. E. R. (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N. J. Prentice-Hall, 1977.
33.
Seligman;M. E. P.On the generality of the laws of learning, Psychological Review, 1970, 77, 406–418.
34.
SeligmanM. E. P.HagerJ. L.Biological boundaries of learning. New York. Meredith, 1972.
35.
ShettleworthS. J.Constraints on learning. EnLehrmanD. S.HindeR. A.SharE. (Eds.), Advances in the study of behavior (vol. 4). New York. Academic Press, 1972.
36.
ShettleworthS. J.Reinforcement and the organization of behavior in golden hamsters: Hunger, enviroment, and food reinforcement.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1975, 104, 56–87.
37.
SkinnerB. F.The generic nature of the concepts of stimulus and response.Journal of General Psychology, 1935, 12, 40–63.
38.
SkinnerB. F.The behavior of organisms. New York. Appleton, 1938.
39.
SkinnerB. F.The experimental analysis of behavior, American Scientist, 1957, 45, 343–371.
40.
SkinnerB. F.Contingencies of reinforcement. New York. Meredith. 1969.
41.
StaddonJ. E. R.SimmelhagV. L.The «supertition» experiment. A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior.Psychological Review, 1971, 78, 3–43.
42.
StevensS. S.Autobiography. EnLindzeyG. (Ed.), A history of psychology in autobiography (vol. 6). Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice-Hall, 1974.
43.
Thorndike;E. L.The psychology of learning. Vol. 2. Educational psychology. New York. Columbia University Press, 1913.
44.
TigerL., Men in groups. New York. Random House, 1969.
45.
TrolandL. T.The fundamentals of human motivation. New York. Van Nostrand, 1928.
46.
WatsonJ. B.Behaviorism. New York. Peopl's Institute, 1924.
47.
WilcoxonH. C.DragoinW. B.KralP. A.Illnessinduced aversions in rat and quail. Relative salience of visual and gustatory cues.Science, 1971, 171, 826–828.
48.
WolinB. R. Difference in manner of pecking a key between pigeons reinforced with food and with water. (Conference on the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1949). Reimpreso enCataniaA. C. (Ed.), Contemporary research in operant behavior.Glenview, III.: Scott, Foresman,. 1968
49.
WoodruffG.WilliamsD. R.The associative relation underlying autoshaping in the pigeon.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1976, 26, 1–13.
