Culture has been studied in numerous fields of knowledge for many years. Clifford Geertz, an anthropologist who significantly influenced the study of culture in the 20th century, proposed that human beings cannot be understood separately from their culture and highlighted the role that symbolic networks play in controlling human behavior. The present article aimed to discuss possible intersections between Geertz’s Anthropology and Behavioral Science (BS) concerning the theme of culture and the role of symbols. The discussion was conducted considering the changes in BS over time, from B. F. Skinner’s proposals, through Stimulus Equivalence, to Relational Frame Theory (RFT). Despite Geertz’s critiques of the behaviorism of his time, there appear to be some convergences between the two approaches, particularly regarding the analysis of culture. However, the main divergences are observed concerning the concept and role of symbols in behavior control. These divergences seem less significant in light of new concepts and evidence demonstrated by Stimulus Equivalence and RFT, which focus on the study of symbolic behavior. We propose that BS could benefit from Geertz’s Hermeneutic Anthropology by continuing to develop theoretical propositions that may (or may not) prove useful in scientific research on symbols and culture across different research areas.
AbdalaM.LinharesY.Neves FilhoH. B.de MeloC. M. (2023a). Aproximações conceituais entre análise comportamental da cultura e a Antropologia interpretativa [Conceptual approximations between behavioral analysis of culture and interpretive anthropology]. Acta Comportamentalia, 31(3), 505–524. https://doi.org/10.32870/ac.v31i3.86452
2.
AbdalaM.SilvaB. T.MaiaJ. G. C.de SouzaV. A.QueirozI. G. (2023b). Possíveis aproximações entre Antropologia Simbólica de Clifford Geertz e a Terapia de Aceitação e Compromisso [Possible approximations between Clifford Geertz’s symbolic anthropology and acceptance and commitment therapy]. Perspectivas em Análise do Comportamento, volumeespecial sobre clínica e cultura, 194–207. https://doi.org/10.18761/vecc0161122
3.
Barnes-HolmesD.Barnes-HolmesY.McEnteggartC. (2020). Updating RFT (more field than frame) and its implications for process-based therapy. Psychological Record, 70(4), 605–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-019-00372-3
4.
Barnes-HolmesD.Barnes-HolmesY.McEnteggartC.HarteC. (2021). Back to the future with an up-dated version of RFT: More field than frame?Perspectivas em Análise do Comportamento, 12(1), 033–051. https://doi.org/10.18761/PAC.2021.v12.RFT.03
5.
Barnes-HolmesD.HarteC. (2022). Relational frame theory 20 years on: The Odysseus voyage and beyond. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 117(2), 240–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.733
6.
BortolotiR.SchmidtM.HarteC.Barnes-HolmesD. (2023). Feel the func: Interpreting IRAP performances based on Cfunc versus Crel stimulus properties. Psychological Record, 73(3), 363–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-023-00557-x
7.
BourdieuP. (1972). Esquisse d'une théorie de la pratique. Librairie Droz. Cambridge University Press. (*Translated as: Outline of a Theory of Practice, 1977).
8.
BrassilN.HylandJ.O’HoraD.StewartI. (2019). Reversing time and size: Mutual entailment of nonarbitrary temporal and magnitude relational responding. Psychological Record, 69(1), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-018-0323-y
9.
CataniaA. C. (1998). Learning. Prentice-Hall.
10.
CaxiléC. R. V. (2006). Um rápido panorama da história cultural [A quick overview of cultural history]. Projeto História: Revista do Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados de História, 32(1), 385–388.
11.
CritchfieldT. S.Barnes-HolmesD.DougherM. J. (2018). What Sidman did--historical and contemporary significance of research on derived stimulus relations. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 41(1), 9–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-018-0154-9
12.
de RoseJ. C.McIlvaneW. J. (2019). Murray Sidman (1923-2019): Das leis do comportamento individual à análise comportamental da cognição. In ZilioD.CarraraK. (Eds.), Behaviorismos. Reflexões históricas e conceituais (Vol. 3, pp. 113–150). Paradigma.
13.
de RoseJ. C.McIlvaneW. J.DubeW. V.GalpinV. C.StoddardL. T. (1988). Emergent simple discrimination established by indirect relation to differential consequences. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1988.50-1
14.
de RoseJ. C. C.RochaC. A. A. (2023). Polarização política: Reflexões a partir da análise do comportamento simbólico. In DittrichA.StrapassonB. A.ZilioD. (Orgs.), Análise do comportamento: Dimensões políticas (pp.133–152). Paradigma.
15.
DiazJ. E.LuomaS. M.MiguelC. F. (2020). The role of verbal behavior in the establishment of comparative relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 113(2), 322–339. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.582
16.
DougherM. J.AugustsonE.MarkhamM. R.GreenwayD. E.WulfertE. (1994). The transfer of respondent eliciting and extinction functions through stimulus equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 62(3), 331–351. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1994.62-331
17.
DougherM. J.HamiltonD. A.FinkB. C.HarringtonJ. (2007). Transformation of the discriminative and eliciting functions of generalized relational stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 88(2), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2007.45-05
18.
DubeW. V.McIlvaneW. J.CallahanT. D.StoddardL. T. (1993). The search for stimulus equivalence in nonverbal organisms. Psychological Record, 43(4), 761–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395911
19.
DugdaleN.LoweC. F. (2000). Testing for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of language‐trained chimpanzees. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 73(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2000.73-5
20.
DymondS.RocheB.ForsythJ. P.WhelanR.RhodenJ. (2007). Transformation of avoidance response functions in accordance with same and opposite relational frames. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 88(2), 249–262. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2007.22-07
21.
FonsecaA. A. d. (2023). Aspectos da teoria interpretativa da cultura de Clifford Geertz na História cultural. Projeto História: Revista do Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados de História, 78, 341–364. https://doi.org/10.23925/2176-2767.2023v78p341-364
22.
GandarelaL.BoldrinL. S.DebertP. (2020). Transfer of the avoidance function in equivalence classes using loss of points as the aversive stimulus. Psychological Record, 70(3), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-019-00365-2
23.
GeertzC. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books.
24.
GibbsA. R.TullisC. A.ConineD. E.FultonA. A. (2024). A systematic review of derived relational responding beyond coordination in individuals with autism and intellectual and developmental disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 36(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-023-09901-z
25.
GlennS. S. (1988). Contingencies and metacontingencies: Toward a synthesis of behavior analysis and cultural materialism. The Behavior Analyst, 11(2), 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392470
26.
HarrisM. (1974). Cows, pigs, wars, and witches: The riddles of culture. Random House.
27.
HayesS. C. (1989). Nonhumans have not yet shown stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51(3), 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1989.51-385
28.
HayesS. C.Barnes-HolmesD.RocheB. (Eds.), (2001a). Relational frame theory: A Post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. Springer Science & Business Media.
29.
HayesS. C.FoxE.GiffordE. V.WilsonK. G.Barnes-HolmesD.HealyO. (2001b). Derived relational responding as learned behavior. In Relational Frame Theory: A Post-Skinnerian Account of Human Language and Cognition (pp. 21–49). Boston, MA: Springer US.
30.
HayesS. C.SanfordB. T. (2014). Cooperation came first: Evolution and human cognition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 101(1), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.64
31.
HorneP. J.LoweC. F. (1996). On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65(1), 185–241. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1996.65-185
32.
HughesS.Barnes-HolmesD. (2016). Relational frame theory: The basic account. In ZettleR. D.HayesS. C.Barnes-HolmesD.BiglanA. (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of contextual behavioral science (pp. 129–178). Wiley Blackwell.
33.
HughesS.Barnes-HolmesD.SmythS. (2017). Implicit cross-community biases revisited: Evidence for ingroup favoritism in the absence of outgroup derogation in Northern Ireland. Psychological Record, 67(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0210-3
34.
LloydK. E. (1985). Behavioral anthropology: A review of Marvin Harris’ cultural materialism. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43(2), 279–287. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1985.43-279
35.
LoweC. F.BeastyA.BentallR. P. (1983). The role of verbal behavior in human learning: Infant performance on fixed-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39(1), 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1983.39-157
36.
MaussM. (2023). Les Techniques du Corps. Paris: Flammarion.
37.
MonteroP. (1991). Reflexões sobre uma antropologia das sociedades complexas [Reflections on an anthropology of complex societies]. Revista de Antropologia, 34, 103–130. https://doi.org/10.11606/2179-0892.ra.1991.111255
38.
Montoya-RodríguezM. M.MolinaF. J.McHughL. (2017). A review of relational frame theory research into deictic relational responding. Psychological Record, 67, 569–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0216-x
MunnellyA.StewartI.DymondS. (2019). Symbolic generalization of discriminative functions in accordance with a five-member comparative relational network. Psychological Record, 69(4), 525–540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-019-00350-9
41.
PerezW. F.KovacR.NicoY. C.CaroD. M.FidalgoA. P.LinaresI.de RoseJ. C. (2017). The transfer of Crel contextual control (same, opposite, less than, more than) through equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 108(3), 318–334. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.284
42.
PerezW. F.NicoY. C.KovacR.FidalgoA. P.LeonardiJ. L. (2013). Introdução à Teoria das Molduras Relacionais (Relational Frame Theory): principais conceitos, achados experimentais e possibilidades de aplicação [Introduction to relational frame theory: Main concepts, experimental findings and application possibilities]. Perspectivas em análise do comportamento, 4(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.18761/perspectivas.v4i1.105
43.
PerezW. F.TomanariG. Y.VaidyaM. (2015). Effects of select and reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 104(2), 146–166. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.164
44.
PilgrimC. (2019). Equivalence-based instruction. In CooperJ. O.HeronT. E.HewardW. L. (Eds.), Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed., pp. 452–496). Pearson Education.
45.
RoccaJ. Z. (2012). O conceito de símbolo em Sidman e Skinner: Uma análise epistemológica. [The concept of symbol in Sidman and Skinner: An epistemological analysis]. [Doctoral Thesis, Universidade Federal de São Carlos].
46.
SbroccoG.HarteC.de RoseJ. C. (2025). The enemy of my enemy is my friend: Adults derive arbitrary sameness relations through trained opposition. Psychological Record, 75(2), 245–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-025-00637-0
47.
SidmanM. (1971). Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 14(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1401.0
48.
SidmanM. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Authors Cooperative.
49.
SidmanM.TailbyW. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: An expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1982.37-5
50.
SkinnerB. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. B. F. Skinner Foundation.
51.
SkinnerB. F. (1966). An operant analysis of problem solving. In KleinmuntzB. (Ed.), Problem-solving: Research, method, and theory (pp. 225–257). Wiley.
52.
SkinnerB. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. Apple- ton-Century-Crofts.
53.
SkinnerB. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. Pelican Books.
54.
SkinnerB. F. (1974). About behaviorism. Alfred A. Knopf.
55.
SkinnerB. F. (2014). Science and Human Behavior (The original work was published in 1953). The B. F. Skinner Foundation.
SteeleD.HayesS. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56(3), 519–555. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1991.56-519
58.
The New Jerusalem Bible. (1985). In WansbroughH. (Ed.), The New Jerusalem Bible. Doubleday.
59.
WatsonJ. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20(2), 158–177. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0074428
60.
WeberM. (1949). The methodology of the social sciences. Free Press.
WilsonD. S.HayesS. C.BiglanA.EmbryD. D. (2014). Evolving the future: Toward a science of intentional change. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37(4), 395–416. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X13001593
