The contribution of physiological psychology.

R. B. Loucks
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0055213
IF: 8.2473
1941-01-01
Psychological Review
Abstract:The issue raised by B. F. Skinner's assertion that "no fact of the nervous system has as yet told anyone anything new about behavior" concerns the merits of a psychology of external behavior versus one of internal behavior. The behavioristic bias, that the former is more easily observed, is false. Measurements are no more exact, and important links in the causal series are left out. There is no rational point of division between external and internal behavior. A correlation between them is essential to completed research, and this need not wait upon "a rigorous description at the level of behavior." The modern sophisticated psychologist is not justified in an elaborate emphasis on the overt aspects of thinking, emotion, attention, and sensing. An example is symbolic behavior at the level of the delayed response, which goes beyond simple conditioning and requires the assumption of a correlation between the overt choice and some entity of the neurophysiological substrate. Limitations of knowledge about the nervous system, due to the recency of adequate techniques, do not justify abandoning the internal approach; many aspects of behavior can never be understood through any other approach.
psychology, multidisciplinary
What problem does this paper attempt to address?