Classical Conditioning and the Origins of Behaviorism

Classical Conditioning and Its Precursors

Clark, R. E. (2004). The classical origins of Pavlov's conditioning. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 39(4), 279–294.

Classical conditioning is the cornerstone of behaviorism, yet it is often taken for granted how it was introduced to the field of psychology. This article begins with a brief account of the precursors to Pavlov's famous dog salivation experiments. The immediate precursor to Pavlov was Twitmyer's work on knee-jerk reflexes. Like Green (2009), Clark (2004) discusses William James and his contributions to the early evolution of psychology before delving into the substance of Pavlov's experiments. Using dogs as subjects, the Russian scientist revolutionized the study of human behavior by demonstrating how classical conditioning works. Clark (2004) traces the reception of Pavlov's work and then shows how those conditioning experiments were transformed into what we now call classical conditioning through the subsequent contributions of B. F. Skinner. Essentially, this research draws on primary sources to explain the evolution of behaviorism and early psychology from Twitmyer onward.

The Little Albert Experiment and Its Historiography

Digdon, N., Powell, R. A., & Harris, B. (2014). Little Albert's alleged neurological impairment. History of Psychology, 17(4), 312–324.

In 1920, Watson and Rayner conducted a now-famous experiment on an infant known as Little Albert. The experiment has since been widely criticized for obvious ethical reasons. Digdon, Powell, and Harris (2014) focus less on the original study itself and more on the reactions to it and the historiography that blossomed in its wake. According to the authors, a 2012 study by Friglund, Beck, Goldie, and Irons claimed that Little Albert was born with a neurological impairment and that Watson and his colleague were actually aware of this fact. If true, Watson and Rayner would have committed even graver ethical breaches than previously believed. Methodologically, Digdon, Powell, and Harris (2014) draw on primary sources — including the 1923 film Experimental Investigation of Babies made by Watson — as well as secondary sources that comment on, criticize, or build new research upon the Watson studies. The authors conclude that alternative explanations exist for Little Albert's story and that subsequent analyses should be critiqued on their own terms. The broader implications of this research are twofold: it encourages more critical engagement with the historiography of psychology and highlights the ethical dimensions of all psychological research.

Functionalism as a Foundation for Behaviorism

Green, C. D. (2009). Darwinian theory, functionalism, and the first American psychological revolution. American Psychologist, 64(2), 75–83. doi:10.1037/a0013338

This article focuses on functionalism, a branch of psychology contemporaneous with behaviorism. Functionalism is typically relegated to the history pages of psychology textbooks or described simply as the antithesis of structuralism, as Green (2009) points out. The author argues that functionalism is far more important than most historians of psychology acknowledge. One key reason is that functionalism represented a theoretical extension of Darwinism and thereby provided the first scientific and evolutionary foundation for behaviorism. Green (2009) further argues that Watson's theories were fundamentally functionalistic in character. The article discusses William James as one of the founders of functionalism, alongside Chauncey Wright. This source is particularly illuminating for any study of the early history of psychology, as it repositions functionalism from a footnote to a pivotal intellectual bridge between evolutionary theory and behavioral science.