Neo-behaviourism

Positivism

Positivism emphasised observable data and rejected metaphysics However, strict positivism limited theoretical explanation.

Logical positivism

Solved this problem by distinguishing between empirical observations and theoretical terms, allowing theory as long as it was logically defined and empirically testable. 

Logical positivism divides science into two levels: Developed by the Vienna Circle (around 1924)

1. Empirical level

   • Observable events
     Measurable data

2. Theoretical level

   • Concepts that explain observations
     
     

   • Must be: Logically defined and Indirectly testable

The problem positivism created

Pure positivism says:

• “If you can’t observe it, don’t talk about it.”
  But science needs theory to: explain behaviour and make predictions. 

The problems psychology faced

Psychology wanted to use concepts like:

• Drive

• Learning

• Anxiety
  Intelligence

But these are: Abstract, Invisible, Mental

Operationalism

Operationism, introduced by Bridgman, required that all scientific concepts be defined in terms of the operations used to measure them. Operationism helped shape neobehaviourism by permitting theory while maintaining objectivity and empirical testability.

Neobehaviourism

Neobehaviorism emerged from the combination of behaviorism and logical positivism. Neobehaviorists allowed the use of theory provided it followed the rules of logical positivism. 

Learning = the primary mechanism through which organisms adapt to their environments.

How does neobehaviorism differ from early behaviorism?

Watson (Behaviorism)	Neobehaviorism
Rejected theory	Allowed theory
Anti-mentalism	Used theoretical constructs
Focused on Stimulus–Response	Allowed intervening variables
Strict objectivism	Logical positivism

Edward Chase Tolman

Edward Chase Tolman was a neobehaviorist, but unlike Watson or Hull, he believed that: Behavior is purposeful, organised, and guided by mental representations. He called his approach intentional behaviorism.

Tolman:

• Learning ≠ association
  

• Learning = acquisition of knowledge
  

• Reinforcement affects performance, not learning itself

According to Tolman:

• The organism is active, not passive

• It forms: Expectations about outcomes and beliefs about the environment

Classical behaviorism

• Learning = strengthening Stimulus–Response associations
  Reinforcement is necessary for learning

Tolman & Honzik (1930): Latent learning experiment

1. Rewarded group

   • Food at the end every day

2. Non-rewarded group

   • No food ever

3. Latent learning group

   • No food at first

   • Food introduced later (around day 11)
     

Results

• Group 1: Gradual improvement
  

• Group 2: Little improvement
  

• Group 3: Sudden, dramatic improvement once food was introduced

Tolman concluded:

• Rats learned the maze without reinforcement

• Learning was latent (hidden)

• Reinforcement only revealed what was already learned
  This contradicted strict behaviorism.

Cognitive map experiment (maze with shortcuts)

• Rats learned a complex maze to reach food
  

• Later, the usual path was blocked
  

• Several new paths (shortcuts) were opened
  

Rats chose the path that:

• Led most directly to the goal

• Even if they had never used it before

Interpretation: 

• They formed a cognitive map of the maze

• Behavior was guided by an internal spatial representation

Tolman – Intentional Behaviorism

Behavior is purposive & organized

Learning ≠ S–R associations

Active organism → expectations

Cognitive maps guide behavior

Latent learning → learning without reinforcement

Clark L. Hull: the drive theory

Drive theory (basic idea)

Hull believed that:

• Organisms are motivated by biological needs
  

These needs create a drive (e.g., hunger, thirst)

Learning mechanism

Hull proposed the following sequence:

Stimulus → Drive → Response → Drive reduction → Reinforcement

Hull’s system was powerful but limited:

• Could not explain:

  • Latent learning

  • Insight learning

  • Cognitive maps

  • Complex human behavior

• Overly mechanistic

• Reduced behavior to biological needs

Criticism of neo-behaviorism and transition to cognitive psychology

Excessive reductionism: complex phenomena were left behind.

Hypothetical constructs that are difficult to verify: cognitive maps and drives.

Theoretical rigidity: Hull’s models were too strict.

Partial successes: only effective in controlled contexts.

Behaviorism failed to explain cognition adequately.
Cognitive psychology:

• Reintroduced the mind

• Maintained scientific rigor

This marked a new paradigm in psychology.

Cognitive revolution (1950s–60s)

• Chomsky (1959): language ≠ reinforcement

• Miller (1956): memory limits (7 ± 2)

• Simon & Newell: computational models

More Definitions

Latent learning - According to Tolman, learning that has occurred but is not translated into behavior.

Law of contiguity - Guthrie’s one law of learning, which states that when a pattern of stimuli is experienced along with a response, the two become associated. In 1959 Guthrie revised the law of contiguity to read, “What is being noticed becomes a signal for what is being done.”

Logical positivism - The philosophy of science according to which theoretical concepts are admissible if they are tied to the observable world through operational definitions.

Positivism - The belief that science should study only those objects or events that can be experienced directly. That is, all speculation about abstract entities should be avoided.