Behavior as a social construction

Abstract

Behavior analysis is examined from a social constructionist perspective. Constructionism is first defined and contrasted with a generic positivistic image of science. Behavior analysis, especially the matching law, is then viewed from both perspectives. The actual practice of behavior analysis (as opposed to the philosophy of radical behaviorism) more strongly resembles positivist than constructionist views. This alignment between behavior analysis and positivism emerges more sharply when positivist and constructionist perspectives are compared on the relation between science and music. Charles Rosen has identified how the classical style of musical composition and performance depended on 18th century keyboard technology, and a constructionist view sees the matching law as reflecting mid 20th century technology and culture in much the same way as it sees, say Mozart's 23rd piano concerto, as reflecting late 18th century culture. Behavior analysts, who often behave as though they see the matching law as an objective, impersonal, stable, hard, cold, incontrovertibly true fact, appear more inclined than constructionists to see a fundamental difference between the matching law and Mozart's 23rd piano concerto, to which they would attribute few if any of these characteristics. Possible implications are derived for tolerance in science.