Rick Froman wrote: > As I was reading the article, I was wondering if psychologists (specifically > behaviorists) would have anything helpful to add to the definition of a > behavior. When we teach learning, behavior is part of the definition but we > don't often define behavior (except when discussing latent learning we > mention the idea of potential behaviors). Would behavioral psychologists > respond to the question differently than the behavioral biologists? I don't > think psychologists would probably consider the lack of a behavior to be a > behavior (although the behaviors performed instead of the original behavior > would be considered behaviors). > > Isn't "staying" on the part of a dog a "behavior"? Wouldn't that be a non-action behavior?
For me, "behavior" is a word that psychologists used to stick at the end of the description of whatever they were studying in order to make it sound "scientific." My favorites (because of their blatant foolishness) as an undergrad were "dreaming behavior" and "sleeping behavior." More recently, psychologist have continued this practice, but using the word "cognition" instead: "social cognition." Those who were doubly insecure (often therapists) tried adding both terms, in order to make themselves seem doubly scientific: cognitive behavior. :-) Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 [email protected] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ========================== --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
