Radical Behaviorism 

+abdulrahman sultan more to come for sure! Thanks for the reinforcement!

Great! That is what they are for! Let us know if we can clarify something for you.

Awesome! Can you give another example for matching law and how I could use it in an intervention utilizing a token economy?

Will do!

+Veronica Howard we ate here to help! Please subscribe and share!

Our stated goal is to remove Behavior Analysis from behind a paywall (that being a university) and put it in the hands of people that will use it to better the world. The application of these principles spans every human endeavor and, in our opinion, is unethical not to share. Thank you for the SR+!

That's a huge reinforcer. Thanks!

In the not so distant future we plan on covering all of EAB as well! Likely using the Murphy & McSweeney text - with a touch of Catania.

I recommend watching the channel to answer this question.

Radical behaviorism in a nut shell simply means that any action is a behavior and it's therefor part of the science of behavior analysis. This is radical because it includes thoughts and private events (hard to study effectively but behavior none the less). For further reading I suggest the book called Radical Behaviorism the Philosophy and the Science - by Mecca Chiesa. It's not a long read but it's an amazing one.

Sharone, first let me say it is quite in depth. A good reference is an article by J. Moore: www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15021149.2001.11434196?journalCode=rejo20 (On Distinguishing Methodological from Radical Behaviorism). But in short - methodological behaviorism ONLY focuses on overt directly observable behavior. In other words, private events (thinking) that are acceptable as forms of behavior (albeit only observable by an audience of 1) in RADICAL behaviorism are NOT addressed in methodological behaviorism. Skinner's RB is often confused as a Methodological Behaviorism but alas, it is nothing of the sort. Hence the term radical - it's radically different than methodological behaviorism. There are also some differences with how verbal behavior is accounted for. :-) Hope this helps!

Rather simple - Watson (daddy of methodological bx) stated that we had this “black box” and that although it existed; we can’t see it or measure it and therefore, we won’t worry about it. Skinner said, nonsense, it does exist; however, we must break each bx down and it very well may be related to biology, etc. It’s just more difficult to measure compared to overt bx. Bottom line; Skinner said it does exist and can be measured and we CANNOT ignore it.

+codeagent47 thank you

I have no words... that’s both, accurate and inaccurate yet hilarious.