On Jan 29, 2016, at 10:54 AM, Mike Palij <m...@nyu.edu> wrote: >> So SDT is really about behavior under stimulus control, not just stimuli. >> for my own experimental application: > > Your behavioristic tendencies are showing. ;-)
I’ll take that as a compliment ;-). >> "Brandon, Paul K. >> A Signal Detection Analysis of Counting Behavior (1981). >> in Quantitative Analysis of Behavior vol.I, Michael Commons and John A. >> Nevin, >> eds., Ballinger" > > Remember Skinner's comparison of his approach to that of Tolman > that I mentioned in a previous post? Tolman asserted that certain > variables operated within the organism while Skinner argued that > those variables operated in the environment. The latter gives rise to > notions like "stimulus control" while the former gives rise to the > evaluation of evidence, an internal process. This then raises the > question of whether SDT is correctly specified or even the correct > model (perhaps Luce's choice axioms provide a better description). > > -Mike Palij > New York University > m...@nyu.edu As I read Skinner (and I’ve read most of it) he never denied the existence of immediate causation (internal mediating processes) — but he doubted that the state of neurology during his time was adequate to account for behavior at the level of internal mechanisms. So we’re not talking about the same variables here; Tolman was talking about intervening variables (a mechanism mediating between environmental variables and behavior), while Skinner was talking about independent, directly observable variables (environment, history) as better predictors of behavior. Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato pkbra...@hickorytech.net --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=48015 or send a blank email to leave-48015-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
