The Evolution of Behaviorism in Early Psychology

The Origins of Behaviorism: A Synthesis Paper

Introduction

Although behaviorism is now considered part of psychology, the scientific study of human behavior started out as its own investigative field. In fact, early behaviorists actively endeavored to set themselves apart from the psychology of their day. Many behaviorists believed psychologists—particularly Sigmund Freud--focused too much on the subconscious mind. Behaviorism was the first attempt to study human behavior using the scientific method. A multitude of research trends and influences in the biological and social sciences led to the emergence of behaviorism as a separate school of thought around the end of the nineteenth century. The most important theorists that contributed to the evolution of behaviorism as a separate school of thought presented their work as fundamentally different from the other life sciences like biology, but also different from psychoanalysis. Those early behaviorists, who laid the groundwork for future researchers, included John Watson, William James, Wilhelm Wundt, Edward Tichener, Ivan Pavlov, and B.F. Skinner. Each of these different researchers approached the scientific study of human behavior using different research questions and methodologies, and each contributed tremendously to the early evolution of the science of psychology.
Early Foundations: Structuralism and Functionalism
The earliest foundations of behaviorism were laid on the groundwork established by the structuralism versus functionalism debate. Structuralists wanted to study psychology empirically, with the primary research goal of understanding the various structures of the human mind. Those structures included consciousness, volition, and emotions (“Structuralism, Functionalism, Behaviorism,” 2009). In this sense, structuralism was akin to psychoanalysis, although the latter did not apply the scientific method or empiricism. Structuralism did, however, use introspection as a primary research methodology (“Structuralism, Functionalism, Behaviorism,” 2009). Wilhelm Wundt and Edward Tichener tried to show that they could use introspection as a scientific method with the goal of objectively understanding the structures of the human mind or consciousness. Early structuralists wanted to explore the study of human perception and cognition using scientific methods to measure human responses to stimuli.
Wilhelm Wundt and Edward Tichener were the pioneers of the study of perception and cognition (Moore, 2011). A little-known figure in early psychology, Wundt’s experiments involved perception and sensation domains of the human experience. While it seems commonplace now to consider human perception, sensation, and cognition, these were revolutionary fields of inquiry at the time. As Green (2009) points out, though, Wundt’s work and other research in perception and cognition was primarily structuralist in nature. Only recently has science evolved tools, measures, and methods that can be applied to study perception and cognition using empiricism.
Functionalism in many ways evolved as a reaction to structuralism, and as a further means of legitimizing the field of psychology. Because functionalism used unreliable tools of measurement, it was difficult to establish alongside the natural sciences. Introspective methods were viewed as particularly problematic. Early behaviorists, especially William James and John Watson, believed that introspection is not a valid tool for scientific research, particularly as experiments cannot be replicated (Watson, 1913). Watson also believed that psychology used “esoteric methods,” and could not establish itself as a natural science if it continued to use introspection and focus only on abstract concepts like consciousness (p. 163). Watson does not claim the structures of the mind are not a worthwhile subject, but that it is simply not a scientific subject. Functionalists sought to make psychology an even more objective endeavor, and to show that psychology had pragmatic applications too.
Functionalism was the movement that initiated what would later be known as behaviorism. William James and Chauncey Wright were a few of the founders of functionalism (Green, 2009). Later, the founding father of behaviorism, John Watson, drew heavily from functionalism by focusing not on the structures of the human mind (consciousness or emotion), but on how those structures functioned. In other words, functionalists were interested in what was observable and measurable using objective instruments and the five senses only—without introspection and the “esoteric methods” Watson alludes to.
As Green (2009) also points out, functionalism was also influenced heavily by Darwinism. Darwinism also sought to find logical, measurable, and provable answers using the scientific method. John Watson, William James, and Chauncy Wright were proponents of functionalism, which allowed researchers to apply the scientific method to behavioral science and behavioral psychology (Green, 2009). Another prominent functionalist who helped propel the early behaviorism movement was Edwin Burket Twitmeyer, who first started studying the human “knee jerk” reflex (Clark, 2004, p. 279). Twitmeyer’s study of the knee jerk reaction later became integrated with classical conditioning. The knee jerk reaction has become a household term, thanks to the early fathers of behaviorism. Building on Twitmeyer’s knee-jerk reactions, Ivan Pavlov became the first researcher to methodically study classical conditioning.
The drive to make psychology a more scientific field meant that the functionalists like Watson, and later Pavlov and Skinner, would dominate the psychological discourse throughout the first half of the twentieth century. Green (2009) points out some of the contributions functionalism: “Applications of psychology that emerged from the functionalist ethos included child and developmental psychology, clinical psychology, psychological testing, and industrial/vocational psychology,” (p. 75). To resolve the tension between psychology and the social sciences, and to infuse psychology with a semblance of credibility, Watson also advised that psychologists stop studying consciousness altogether. Watson suggested that researchers focus on behaviors instead, because mental states and consciousness are too ephemeral. Moreover, the methods used to study consciousness and other structures of the mind were too speculative. Interestingly, Watson even finds a problem with the study of sensation and perception, which was being studied at the time by Titchner. Watson points out, for example, that even sensations and perceptions have introspective components.
John Watson: The Founder of Behaviorism
Behaviorism was a whole new paradigm of psychological research that grew out of functionalism but took the principle a step further. Watson was one of the first psychological researchers to actively investigate the nature-nurture debate. For Watson, environment was everything. Watson also referred to the fact that he believed that through the right training using the methods of behaviorism, any infant could be trained to do anything—from being a doctor to being a thief. In 1920, Watson and Rayner conducted a now-famous experiment on an infant named Albert to prove some of his research hypotheses. The experiment was later criticized for its being ethically problematic, but it still made a strong impact on the scientific community (Digdon, Powell & Harris, 2014). Essentially, Watson believed that nurture matters much more than nature. Nature is what gives human beings our instinctive tendencies and abilities to learn but nurture or the environment provides the stimuli. Watson’s paradigm suggests inherent equality of all beings regardless of demographic features, race, class, gender, and social status. Watson believes that a person is a product of the environment, and that with the right opportunities for advancement and learning, any human being can thrive. Many human beings simply lack the opportunity for learning, or their formidable years—from the time they are infants throughout early childhood—do not provide them with the types of opportunities that Watson wants to provide.
Whereas psychology was establishing itself as the field that studied the human subconscious and unconscious, behaviorism was something different altogether. Behaviorism focused squarely on observable responses in the human body and behavior, and had little to do with emotions and nothing to do with dreams. Also, behaviorism was also able to show people how they could potentially change their own behavior by teaching themselves new stimulus-response activities. Behaviorism became the basis for studying human motivation and learning. Even so, Watson’s early research in behaviorism failed to capture the nuances of human cognitive-behavioral responses.
Conditioning: The Heart of Behaviorism
Ivan Pavlov built upon Watson’s foundation, and is probably the most famous of all the pioneering behaviorists. Pavlov’s famous dog experiments in which the researcher trained dogs to salivate at the sound of a bell have become part of the common vernacular (Clark, 2004). Pavlov helped introduce the concepts of classical conditioning. Using dogs as subjects, the Russian scientist revolutionized the study of human behavior with his studies showing how classical conditioning works. The basic tenets of classical conditioning include the unconditioned stimulus (such as the smell of meat), the unconditioned response (the salivation at the smell of meat), the conditioned stimulus (the bell), and the conditioned response (the salivation at the sound of the bell). Pavlov proved that with a little training, it was possible to teach an old dog new tricks. Although it seems simple, classical conditioning is still integral to the understanding of human behavior. People essentially train themselves—or are trained—to respond to stimuli in certain ways.
Pavlov’s classical conditioning experiments soon evolved into more complex experiments involving operant conditioning. The most notable psychologist studying operant conditioning was B.F. Skinner. Just as Watson had done, Skinner helped show how behaviorism was relevant as an applied field of psychology. Like Pavlov, B.F. Skinner focused on the process of conditioning to explain how animals and human learn behaviors that do not necessarily seem logical at first. Operant conditioning can explain why some people have irrational fears, for example. B.F. Skinner took the entire concept of conditioning a step further by showing how stimuli could be manipulated to manipulate responses. Behaviorism was soon shown to have pragmatic implications for helping people to learn new habits or get rid of bad habits, or to show how specific phobias might be developed over time. The information learned through behaviorism would later be fully integrated into comprehensive psychological theories and practices.
When he first started doing his dog experiments, Pavlov had yet to break free from the purely mechanistic methods of measuring human behavior, whereas Skinner used behavioral research to show how people develop cognitive patterns and feelings around certain stimuli, too. In this way, Skinner paved the way for the future of cognitive-behavioral psychology. Now that magnetic resonance and other imaging techniques can illustrate how the brain is working during learned responses, it is possible to scientifically study the structures and the functions of the mind at the same time.
Skinner’s research showed that positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement were the cornerstones of learning as well as simply behavioral responses to stimuli. Another reason why B.F. Skinner made one of the most significant contributions to the field of psychology from the middle of the twentieth century onwards is that positive and negative reinforcement are still used in a variety of learning and organizational contexts. Positive and negative reinforcements are used in the ways parents raise their children, in the ways teachers respond to classroom management issues, and in the ways companies structure their human resources policies and programs. Even the criminal justice system is basically based on behaviorism. Positive reinforcement refers to offering rewards for desirable behaviors, and negative reinforcement refers to punishing undesirable behavior with the goal of eliminating it.
Conclusions
There were many influences and trends in research leading to the emergence of behaviorism as a separate school of thought. The most important theorists that contributed to the evolution of behaviorism as a separate school of thought presented their work as fundamentally different from the other life sciences like biology, but also different from psychoanalysis. Watson, Pavlov, and Skinner each sought to apply the scientific method to the study of human behavior. Unlike Freud and the psychoanalysts, Watson, Pavlov, and Skinner did not care much about the unconscious mind. To a degree, Skinner was interested in the ways the subconscious mind could be influenced by stimuli, and how human behavior was an expression of learned behavior via operant conditioning. However, behaviorists were totally different in their methodologies and their research questions from other psychologists. Although now behaviorism and psychoanalysis might be taught in the same course, during the 1950s and the rise of behaviorism as a separate school of thought, it would have been difficult to show how these fields were similar.
Behaviorism evolved from the 19th century onwards, as the methods used to study human behavior changed to incorporate scientific tools. Behaviorism also evolved as researchers became interested in the entire gamut of the human experience, both in terms of what mental processes are, how they function, and how those processes and functions impact behavior. The functionalist study of behaviorism was sometimes at odds with the structuralist approach relying more on intuition than on objectively measurable means. However, Wundt and Tichener still were interested in what are now considered scientifically measurable things like perception. Functionalism then evolved into behaviorism and ultimately to classical conditioning. Pavlov’s and Skinner’s research on classical conditioning helped to fulfill Watson’s ultimate objective of turning behaviorism into an applied science. Behaviorism could be used not just to understand human behavior but also to help people change their behavior.





References

Clark, R. E. (2004). The classical origins of Pavlov's conditioning. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 39(4), 279-294.
Green, C. D. (2009). Darwinian theory, functionalism, and the first American psychological revolution. American Psychologist, 64(2), 75-83. doi: 10.1037/a0013338
Moore, J. (2011). Behaviorism. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 449-464.
“Psyography: John Broadus Watson,” (n.d.). https://faculty.frostburg.edu/mbradley/psyography/johnbroaduswatson.html
“Structuralism, Functionalism, Behaviorism,” (2009). Journals of a River Knight Apprentice. https://riverknightapprenticejournals.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/psy101-structuralism-functionalism-behaviorism/
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20(2), 158-177. doi:10.1037/h0074428