Neobehaviorism: the concept of Edward Tolman
The formula of behaviorism was clear and unambiguous: “stimulus-response.”
Meanwhile, outstanding psychologists appeared in the circle of behaviorists who questioned this postulate. The first of them was a professor at the University of Berkeley (California), American Edward Tolman
(1886-1959), according to which the formula of behavior should consist not of two, but of three terms, and therefore look like this: stimulus (independent variable) - intermediate variables - dependent variable (response).
The middle link (intermediate variables) is nothing more than mental moments inaccessible to direct observation: expectations, attitudes, knowledge.
Following the behaviorist tradition, Tolman experimented with rats looking for a way out of a maze. The main conclusion from these experiments was that, based on the behavior of animals strictly controlled by the experimenter and objectively observed by him, it can be reliably established that this behavior is controlled not by the stimuli that are acting on them at the moment, but by special internal regulators. Behavior is preceded by a kind of expectations, hypotheses, and cognitive “maps.” The animal builds these “maps” itself. They guide him in the labyrinth. From them it, being launched into the labyrinth, learns “what leads to what.” The position that mental images serve as a regulator of action was substantiated by Gestalt theory. Taking her lessons into account, Tolman developed his own theory, called cognitive behaviorism.
Tolman outlined his ideas in the books “Target Behavior in Animals and Humans” and “Cognitive Maps in Rats and Humans.” He carried out experimental work mainly on animals (white rats), believing that the laws of behavior are common to all living beings, and can be most clearly and thoroughly traced at the elementary levels of behavior.
The results of Tolman’s experiments, presented in his main work “Goal-directed behavior in animals and humans” (1932), forced a critical rethinking of the cornerstone scheme of SR (“stimulus-response”) behaviorism.
The very idea of goal-directed behavior contradicted the programmatic guidelines of the founder of behaviorism, Watson. For classical behaviorists, goal-directed behavior implies the assumption of consciousness.
To this Tolman stated that it does not matter to him whether an organism has consciousness or not. As befits a behaviorist, he focused on external, observable reactions. He proposed that the causes of behavior included five major independent variables: environmental stimuli, psychological drives, heredity, prior learning, and age. The behavior is a function of all these variables, which can be expressed by a mathematical equation.
Between the observed independent variables and the resulting behavior, Tolman introduced a set of unobservable factors, which he called intervening variables. These intervening variables are actually determinants of behavior. They represent those internal processes that link the stimulus situation to the observed response.
Thus, the SR formula should be read as SO R. Intermediate variables are everything that is associated with O, that is, with the organism, and forms a given behavioral response to a given irritation.
However, while remaining in the position of behaviorism, Tolman was aware that since intermediate variables are not subject to objective observation, they are of no practical use to psychology unless they can be linked to experimental (independent) and behavioral (dependent) variables.
A classic example of an intervening variable is hunger, which cannot be observed in a test subject (whether animal or human). Nevertheless, hunger can be quite objectively and accurately linked to experimental variables, for example, to the duration of the period of time during which the body did not receive food.
In addition, it can be linked to an objective response or to a behavioral variable, such as the amount of food eaten or the rate of food absorption. Thus, this factor becomes available for quantitative measurement and experimental manipulation.
In theory, intervening variables have proven to be a very useful construct. However, the practical implementation of this approach required such enormous work that Tolman eventually abandoned all hope of “compiling a complete description of even one intermediate variable.”
The results obtained in the experiments forced Tolman to abandon the law of effect, which was fundamental for the entire behavioral doctrine, discovered by Thorndike. In his opinion, reinforcement has a rather weak effect on learning.
Tolman proposed his own cognitive theory of learning, believing that repeated performance of the same task strengthens the emerging connections between environmental factors and the organism's expectations. In this way, the body learns about the world around it. Tolman called such connections created by learning Gestalt signs.
Historians of science make a bold assumption that the father of behaviorism, John Watson, suffered from a specific disorder - an-ideism, that is, he was completely devoid of imagination, which forced him to interpret all observed phenomena purely literally.
Tolman cannot be denied creative imagination, however, he also based his theoretical reasoning on objectively observable phenomena. What did he see in his experiments that made him go beyond Watson's ideas?
Here is a rat running through a maze, randomly trying either successful (you can move on) or unsuccessful (dead end) moves. Finally she finds food. During subsequent passages of the maze, the search for food gives the rat's behavior purposefulness.
Each branching move comes with some expectations. The rat comes to “understand” that certain signs associated with the fork do or do not lead to the place where the desired food is located.
If the rat's expectations are met and it actually finds food, then the gestalt sign (that is, the sign associated with some choice point) receives reinforcement. Thus, the animal develops a whole network of gestalt signs at all choice points in the maze. Tolman called this a cognitive map.
This pattern represents what the animal has learned, not just a collection of some motor skills. In a certain sense, the rat acquires a comprehensive knowledge of its labyrinth, and in other conditions - of a different environment around it. Her brain develops something like a field map that allows her to move in the right direction without being limited to a fixed set of learned body movements.
In a classic experiment described in many textbooks, Tolman’s ideas found clear and convincing confirmation. The maze used in this experiment was cross-shaped. Rats of the same group always found food in the same place, even if, in order to get to it, they sometimes had to turn left rather than right at different entry points into the maze. The motor reactions, of course, were different, but the cognitive map remained the same.
The rats of the second group were placed in such conditions that they had to repeat the same movements each time, but the food was in a new place each time.
For example, starting at one end of the maze, a rat found food only by turning right at a certain fork; if the rat was launched from the opposite side, then in order to get to the food, it still had to turn to the right.
The experiment showed that the rats of the first group—those who “studied” and “learned” the general scheme of the situation—orientated much better than the rats of the second group, which reproduced learned reactions.
Tolman suggested that something similar occurs in humans. A person who has managed to navigate a certain area well can easily go from one point to another along different routes, including unfamiliar ones.
Another experiment examined latent learning, that is, learning that cannot be observed while it is actually happening.
A hungry rat was placed in a maze and allowed to roam freely. For some time the rat did not receive any food, that is, no reinforcement occurred. Tolman was interested in whether any learning takes place in such an unreinforced situation.
Finally, after several non-reinforced trials, the rat was given the opportunity to find food. After this, the speed of completing the maze increased sharply, which showed the presence of some learning during the period of absence of reinforcement. This rat's performance very quickly reached the same level as that of rats that received reinforcement on every trial.
It would be wrong to perceive Tolman as a “rat mentor”, far from human problems. His article, revealingly titled “Cognitive Maps in Rats and Humans” (also available in Russian translation), became not only a collection of evidence against the S ® R scheme, but also a passionate appeal to reduce the level of frustration, hatred and intolerance generated in society by narrow cognitive maps.
In view of the fact that this classic text risks remaining outside the circle of interests of our psychologists, we will allow ourselves an extensive and, it seems, very important quotation. Noting the destructive nature of human behavior, Tolman ends his article with these words:
“What can we do about this? My answer is to preach the powers of the mind, that is, broad cognitive maps. Teachers can make children intelligent (that is, open their minds) if they ensure that no child is overmotivated or overly irritated. Then children will be able to learn to look around, learn to see that there are often roundabout and more careful paths to our goals, and learn to understand that all people are mutually connected to each other.
Let's try not to become over-emotional, not to be over-motivated to such an extent that we can only deal with narrow cards. Each of us must place ourselves in sufficiently comfortable conditions to be able to develop broad maps, to be able to learn to live according to the reality principle rather than according to the too narrow and immediate pleasure principle.
We must expose ourselves and our children (just as the experimenter does with his rats) to the influence of optimal conditions with moderate motivation, protect them from frustration when we “throw” them and ourselves into that huge labyrinth that is our human world.
I cannot predict whether we will be able to do this or whether we will be given the opportunity to do so; but I can say that only to the extent that we cope with these requirements for organizing people’s lives, we will teach them to adequately navigate situations in life’s tasks.”
Beck's cognitive psychotherapy
In this article, for a number of reasons, we decided to dwell in more detail on Beck’s cognitive therapy (CT).
Firstly, in our opinion, it is cognitive psychotherapy that integrates the most important achievements of other cognitive-behavioral approaches. Moreover, the two-level scheme of cognitive processes proposed by Beck makes it possible to integrate cognitive principles with the psychodynamic approach. In this scheme, Beck identifies actually dynamic (moving, changing) and structural (more stable and permanent) components of the cognitive process. Dynamic components are the flow of thoughts or, in the language of behaviorism, internal behavior. Structural components are stable cognitive formations that represent beliefs, beliefs and attitudes. These components determine the nature and content of the dynamic components or the flow of thoughts about oneself and about the world. Thoughts, in turn, determine a person’s emotional state and behavior. Thus, in order to change behavior and inappropriate emotional states, it is necessary to modify thinking. The difficulty is that many thoughts are semi-conscious in nature and cannot be directly detected and controlled (Beck calls them automatic thoughts). Beliefs and beliefs formed in previous experiences can also be unconscious. Therefore, the techniques developed by Beck are aimed primarily at identifying, recognizing and modifying the so-called dysfunctional thoughts and beliefs that lead to painful conditions and inappropriate reactions. These fundamental ideas of cognitive psychotherapy clearly contradict one of the main theses of behaviorism about the external determination of behavior. Finally, the study of the sources of formation of structural components inevitably leads to the concept of early experience in which they were formed, which means a direct connection with the psychodynamic approach, where the concept of early experience is one of the central ones. The integrating function of the two-level model of cognitive processes proposed by Beck is illustrated by the following diagram.
Cognitive psychotherapy is a bridge between behaviorism and psychoanalysis
In our opinion, the integrative nature of cognitive psychotherapy is its most important advantage, which allows us to string a variety of techniques and approaches onto the core idea of modifying dysfunctional thoughts and beliefs. Another advantage of the two-level scheme is that it sets a clear strategy for psychotherapeutic work - from more superficial, situationally unfolding thoughts (a dynamic component of the cognitive process) to deep, stable structural formations.
Another equally important advantage of cognitive psychotherapy compared to other cognitive-behavioral approaches is the presence of a detailed theory of mental pathology: for almost all major mental disorders, psychological models have been developed and the main targets of psychotherapeutic influence have been identified, and the techniques and techniques most adequate to these targets have been described.
The undoubted advantage of cognitive psychotherapy compared to psychodynamic approaches is its short-term nature and cost-effectiveness. At the same time, numerous controlled studies have proven the high effectiveness of cognitive psychotherapy for a wide variety of disorders.
In Russia, cognitive psychotherapy has not yet become widespread, which is partly due to the lack of a flow of cognitively oriented “missionary trainers” from the West. At one time, the spread of psychoanalysis, psychodrama, Gestalt therapy, and neurolinguistic programming in Russia became possible thanks to a series of training programs brought here by Western specialists. Compensating for the gap that has arisen in relation to cognitive psychotherapy seems to be very important, since this approach has proven to be highly effective in the treatment of various disorders and is distinguished by its close connection with modern scientific psychology. Cognitive psychotherapy, with its structure, can greatly help compensate for the chaos that is often characteristic of the Russian client. At the same time, the central link in the process of cognitive psychotherapy is reflection, which leads to co-consciousness of basic, initial ideas about oneself and the world, which is in tune with the existentially oriented Russian mentality. This approach is especially highly effective in the treatment of emotional disorders, the incidence of which, according to epidemiologists, has increased significantly (which indirectly confirmed by the expansion of the corresponding clusters in modern classifications ICD-IO, DSM-IVr), makes, in our opinion, appropriate to popularize CT in Russia.
Links
This page was last edited on April 19, 2015 at 6:25 pm.
Behaviorism (English: behavior) is a branch of psychology that studies the behavior of living beings and ways to influence it. In a narrower sense, this science studies external behavior, without making a distinction between humans and animals.
The classical behaviorism of J. Watson reduces psychological manifestations to the body's response to motor ones. Thinking comes down to a speech act, and emotions to internal changes in the body. Consciousness is fundamentally not included in the list of studies of behaviorism. Because it does not depict behavioral indicators. The main feature of behavior is the connection between stimulus and response (S – R).
The idea of behaviorism
Stimulus occupies an important niche in behaviorism. It implies a given situation that builds reinforcement for the response. These reactions are represented by the emotional and verbal reactions of the surrounding society. But at the same time, personal experiences do not go unnoticed, but are transferred to a dependent position on external factors.
Scientific researcher John Watson outlined the main points on which behaviorism is built:
The purpose of observing psychology is the behavior and reactions of all living beings. These are the manifestations that will be studied.
All physiological and psychological manifestations come from the type of behavior.
The reaction of people and animals needs to be studied as a single motor indicator to external stimuli - stimuli.
By examining the stimulus indicators, you can predict the next response. The main task of behaviorism is to learn to predict the actions of an individual. In this way, an individual's behavior can be controlled.
All types of human reactions consist of acquired forms (conditioned reflexes) or are inherited (unconditioned reflexes)
A person’s habits are the result of learning. Those. repeated repetition of the response is imprinted in memory. This can subsequently be reproduced. Thus, the formation of skills occurs through the development of conditioned reflexes.
Thinking and speaking are also included in the list of skills.
Memory serves as storage of acquired skills.
The formation of mental reactions occurs throughout life. Such development depends on living conditions, social society and external stimuli.
There is no systematization of age development. There are no common signs in the process of formation of the child’s psyche at different stages of age.
Emotions mean the body's response to positive and negative stimulants of the surrounding space.
Watson assumed that a person could be taught anything. In his opinion, genetic, personality and mental factors will not interfere with learning.
If we go deeper, the essence of behaviorism is the creation of a laboratory of society.
