At 5:09 PM +0000 8/14/01, Richard Pisacreta wrote:
>
>Hey Folks:
>
>Most of us cover the Law of Effect in the learning chapter of our intro
>courses. I have a question. Laws usually involve some precise mathematics,
>e.g., Newton's Law of Gravity, the gas laws. The Law of Effect doesn't
>provide some predictive mathematics. So, why is it a law?
Clark Hull tried precise mathematical prediction; his laws lacked generality.
We've since backed off a bit.
Really exact scientific predictions are pretty well restricted to classical
(Newtonian) mechanics. Modern physics (quantum effects) tend to be
stochastic.
Of course, chemistry and biology are even more heavily statistical (think
Mendel).
Generally, as systems become more complex, our predictions become less precise.
Partly, this is simply a consequence of experimental control -- human
behavior involves many more variables than an idealized perfect billiard
ball on a perprect table (and then there's the three-body problem ;-).
At this point, our predictions are pretty well at the binary
increase/decrease level.
For very simply situations one might make more precise predictions, but
again (see Hullian theory) they'd lack generality.
In other words, the consequence of a young science dealing with a complex
and not easily controlled subject matter.
However (to return to your original question), a change in rate in a
specified direction under a specified set of conditions is still a
prediction, so the Law of Effect does qualify.
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Dept Minnesota State University, Mankato *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 *
* http://www.mankato.msus.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
