> Phil Gervaix asks: > > > Today's question may sound quite technical, but... > > I am studying motivation at school with my students, using a book by 2 > > French authors who introduce their chapter on reward & punishment by > > presentiing Tolman and Hull as opponents (actually resorting to a boxing > > sport metaphor: "Ladies & gentlemen, on my right..." kind-of-thing). > > Hull is presented as a hard core behaviorist, and Tolman as a precursor of > > cognitivists. > > My question is many-fold: > > 1. > > Is it right or fair to present them this way? > > 2. > > What are the historical and intellectual relationships between both? Who > > came first? Who shot first? > > 3. > > Was there an open and contemporaneous controversy between them? Did they > > refute, contradict, influence eachother? Or is it more like a textbook > > controversy? > >
I believe that you are right to be concerned about the standard Hull-Tolman Prize Fight mentality of many textbooks. Tolman preceded Hull historically. Tolman's major book was published in 1932 and Hull's was published in 1943. Tolman had many important papers on animal learning appear in the early 1920's and Hull did not become interested in maze-learning until the very late 1920's. Many of Tolman's early targets were people like Thorndike, Guthrie, & Kuo. Hull was an intellectual heir of Thorndike and, thus, became a target for Tolman. Tolman was clearly a behaviorist, but many people forget there are lots of behaviorisms with very disparate approaches. Tolman's approach was modeled on the Gestalt psychologists, Lewin, and Brunswik, and involved quasi-physical field metaphors. How different were Tolman and Hull? This is a difficult question. You should read papers like "The Determiners of Behavior at a Choice Point" (Tolman, 1938, Psych Review) where Tolman directly contrasts his approach to that of Hull. A good source of Tolman papers is the book "Behavior and Psychological Man" (Univ. Calif. Press, 1951). I was taught as an undergrad that the battle was Hull (mechanical behaviorism--boo hiss) vs. Tolman (early cognitivist--yeah good). After reading the primary literature by both Hull and Tolman, my conclusion is that the standard textbook presentation has very little connection to the historical record. Ken PS: As to who "won" the account of maze-learning, see the article by Restle, where he points out that the different camps used different types of mazes! Restle, F. (1957). Discrimination of cues in mazes: A resolution of the "place-vs.-response" question. Psychological Review, 64, 217-228. ---------------------- Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dept. of Psychology Appalachian State University Boone, NC 28608 USA --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
