Abstract
Travis Thompson’s lengthy review of Staddon’s The New Behaviorism requires several corrections and extensions. This response discusses Staddon’s analysis of Herrnstein’s matching law and concludes that Thompson misinterprets a gentle critique as a paean. The response goes on to defend the utility of models and “internal states” (i.e., postulated processes that are not directly measurable) as “formal representation[s] of the data reduced to a minimal number of terms,” a position similar to one of B. F. Skinner’s statements. The response ends with a defense of Skinner’s empirical brilliance, but a critique of his sweeping societal prescriptions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
