6.2 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Verbal Behavior | 1/4 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbal_Behavior | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T08:56:05.628712+00:00 | kb-cron |
Verbal Behavior is a 1957 book by psychologist B. F. Skinner, in which he describes what he calls verbal behavior, or what was traditionally called linguistics. Skinner's work describes the controlling elements of verbal behavior with terminology invented for the analysis - echoics, mands, tacts, autoclitics and others - as well as carefully defined uses of ordinary terms such as audience.
== Origins == The origin of Verbal Behavior was an outgrowth of a series of lectures first presented at the University of Minnesota in the early 1940s and developed further in his summer lectures at Columbia and William James lectures at Harvard in the decade before the book's publication.
== Research == Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior drew heavily on methods of literary analysis. This tradition has continued. The book Verbal Behavior is almost entirely theoretical, involving little experimental research in the work itself. Many research papers and applied extensions based on Verbal Behavior have been done since its publication.
== Functional analysis ==
Skinner's Verbal Behavior also introduced the autoclitic and six elementary operants: mand, tact, audience relation, echoic, textual, and intraverbal. For Skinner, the proper object of study is behavior itself, analyzed without reference to hypothetical (mental) structures, but rather with reference to the functional relationships of the behavior in the environment in which it occurs. This analysis extends Ernst Mach's pragmatic inductive position in physics, and extends even further a disinclination towards hypothesis-making and testing. Verbal Behavior is divided into 5 parts with 19 chapters. The first chapter sets the stage for this work, a functional analysis of verbal behavior. Skinner presents verbal behavior as a function of controlling consequences and stimuli, not as the product of a special inherent capacity. Neither does he ask us to be satisfied with simply describing the structure, or patterns, of behavior. Skinner deals with some alternative, traditional formulations, and moves on to his own functional position.
== General problems == In the ascertaining of the strength of a response Skinner suggests some criteria for strength (probability): emission, energy-level, speed, and repetition. He notes that these are all very limited means for inferring the strength of a response as they do not always vary together and they may come under the control of other factors. Emission is a yes/no measure, however the other three—energy-level, speed, repetition—comprise possible indications of relative strength.
Emission – If a response is emitted it may tend to be interpreted as having some strength. Unusual or difficult conditions would tend to lend evidence to the inference of strength. Under typical conditions it becomes a less compelling basis for inferring strength. This is an inference that is either there or not, and has no gradation of value. Energy-level – Unlike emission as a basis for inference, energy-level (response magnitude) provides a basis for inferring the response has a strength with a high range of varying strength. Energy level is a basis from which we can infer a high tendency to respond. An energetic and strong "Water!" forms the basis for inferring the strength of the response as opposed to a weak, brief "Water". Speed – Speed is the speed of the response itself, or the latency from the time in which it could have occurred to the time in which it occurs. A response given quickly when prompted forms the basis for inferring a high strength. Repetition – "Water! Water! Water!" may be emitted and used as an indication of relative strength compared to the speedy and/or energetic emission of "Water!". In this way repetition can be used as a way to infer strength.
== Mands ==
Chapter Three of Skinner's work Verbal Behavior discusses a functional relationship called the mand. Mand is verbal behavior under functional control of satiation or deprivation (that is, motivating operations) followed by characteristic reinforcement often specified by the response. A mand is typically a demand, command, or request. The mand is often said to "describe its own reinforcer" although this is not always the case, especially as Skinner's definition of verbal behavior does not require that mands be vocal. A loud knock at the door, may be a mand "open the door" and a servant may be called by a hand clap as much as a child might "ask for milk". Lamarre & Holland (1985) study on mands demonstrated the role of motivating operations. The authors contrived motivating operations for objects by training behavior chains that could not be completed without certain objects. The participants learned to mand for these missing objects, which they had previously only been able to tact...
== Behavior under the control of verbal stimuli ==
=== Textual === In Chapter Four Skinner notes forms of control by verbal stimuli. One form is textual behavior which refers to the type of behavior we might typically call reading or writing. A vocal response is controlled by a verbal stimulus that is not heard. There are two different modalities involved ("reading"). If they are the same they become "copying text" (see Jack Michael on copying text), if they are heard, then written, it becomes "taking dictation", and so on.
=== Echoic === Skinner was one of the first to seriously consider the role of imitation in language learning. He introduced this concept into his book Verbal Behavior with the concept of the echoic. It is a behavior under the functional control of a verbal stimulus. The verbal response and the verbal stimulus share what is called point to point correspondence (a formal similarity.) The speaker repeats what is said. In echoic behavior, the stimulus is auditory and response is vocal. It is often seen in early shaping behavior. For example, in learning a new language, a teacher might say "parsimonious" and then say "can you say it?" to induce an echoic response. Winokur (1978) is one example of research about echoic relations.
== Tacts ==