Introduction
As the second force of psychology behaviorism was the necessary step for the progression and maturing of psychology. This evolution brought legitimacy and scientific experimentation to psychology seeking to establish psychology as a verifiable science. While Freud is considered the father of psychology, behaviorism had many great men of science strive for its place in the world. Many would credit John Watson or Ivan Pavlo as the fathers of behaviorism. However, there were multiple independent breakthroughs in the same time period and no one person can be considered the founder of behaviorism.
Behaviorism is a means by which one’s actions or reactions can be conditioned (Clark, 2004) and predicted. Both Pavlo and Watson conducted experiments leading to the theory of classical conditioning, but neither’s understandings were complete. Burrhus Skinner would later shape a deeper understanding behind a person’s actions (Hothersall, 2004). The great minds of behaviorism have studied the ability to train a person’s involuntary responses to stimuli (Clark, 2004; Green, 2009).
The driving principle behind the second force of psychology as Watson (1913) would have argued is to ensure behaviorism’s scientific standing. Watson also sought to separate behaviorism from psychology (Ledoux, 2014) due to the lack of scientific method in Freud’s and other foundational psychological works. To Watson psychology was a science with no scientific approach or standards. He preferred objective experiments where the results could be quantitated rather than opinion-based observations as Freud’s works were.
Development of Behaviorism
There were several early schools of behaviorism. All were based on psychology as the precursor and need for further work. These schools were spread around the globe, but two main schools of thought took place in the United States and in Russia. In secret in Russia Ivan Pavlo conducted what would become his famous dog experiments. While in the United States Watson led the way with his Little Albert experiment and later mice mazes.
Watson’s publication of Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It officially declared the existence of functionalism. Watson’s school of functionalism focused on verifiable experimentation addressing the main issue with psychology the lack of scientific approach and experimentation. Watson’s school of thought caught on quickly in the United States amongst behaviorists, but it was short lived as a distinct thought.
Pavlo proved the idea of conditioning of responses to be possible through his experiments. Although Pavlo conducted his work mostly in secret in Russia his work at least his basic discovery has become generally well known. Pavlo through experimenting with dogs was able to discover and verify physical responses can be conditioned. By ringing a bell every time, a dog was fed, Pavlo was able to condition the dog on a higher level to associate the bell with food. Later Pavlo was able to ring the bell without providing food causing the dog to start to secret digestive fluids also known as salivating. Pavlo’s discovery changed the way behaviorists looked at responses and what was possible with conditioning.
Watson wrote a paper in 1913 specifically aimed at the shortfalls of introspection. Introspection was essentially the founding principles of psychology and the methods by which Freud conducted his work. Watson took issue with introspection’s methods and complete lack of objective results and applicable findings. It was Watson’s belief psychology would not become a verifiable science and behaviorism needed to become a separate entity all together so it could be a viable science (Watson, 1913). Despite his desire for behaviorism to be a standalone science he well knew it would never happen. Instead it appears Watson spent most of his academic career attempting to utilize behaviorism to improve psychology.
The founding of behaviorism was developed in the United States and Russia in an interesting manor around the same time with no known interaction between the two. It is possible someone or somehow information was transferred between the two nations, but it appears behaviorism was the logical next step to psychology coming to be at the same time in multiple places. In Russia, behaviorism started with Pavlo’s work and his experiments with dogs proving conditioning is possible (Clark, 2004). In the United States behaviorism was founded by a paper written by Watson. His 1913 paper described issues he felt existed with current psychology and laid the ground work for behaviorism to take its place as a legitimate science (Watson, 1913).
A need to understand and manipulate or control behavior was the cause for the creation of behaviorism. This need can be traced to the inability of psychology to treat serious behavioral issue patients and also governments in how they train their troops and intelligence agents. While psychology was lacking in a scientific approach, the study of one’s actions needed to be scientific (Ledoux, 2012; Watson, 1913). Watson also believed psychology was lacking in treating behavioral issues bluntly stating as much in his 1913 article.
Watson’s work contributed to the foundation of behaviorism and the establishment of the school of functionalism. Functionalism did not last long but it played a significant role in the movement of psychology to behaviorism. Watson’s main contribution to psychology was his Little Albert experiment. This experiment proved the behaviors of a person can be conditioned to associate one item with another. Little Albert demonstrated the fear a baby had of a loud noise could be transferred or associated with something the baby was not originally fearful of. In this case a white lab mouse (Digdon, Powell & Harris, 2014). Watson’s methods were questionable and openly questioned in his time. Reviewing Watson’s experiment, a century removed, the Little Albert experiment was vital to the progression of behaviorism however the treatment of the child would be considered by most inappropriate and unethical. The issues with Watson’s research methods would later lead to Watson’s ousting from Johns Hopkins University and the American Psychological Association (Hothersall, 2004).
As the next step from Freud’s psychology, behaviorism functions as the second force of psychology. Behaviorism initially sought to be separate from psychology and in its own right stands apart from other forms of psychology as a scientific approach aimed to condition responses (Clark, 2004). However it is an integral part of psychology and the application of psychology to treat patient conditions.
Reexamination of Little Albert
Digdon, Powell, & Harris in their 2014 article reexamined the facts behind Watson’s Little Albert experiment. As the identity of the child was not disclosed by Watson the child’s identity was assumed. As Digdon, Powell, & Harris (2014) examined the records of the hospital, the town and Watson’s descriptions it appears the wrong child was assumed to be Watson’s subject. This difference changed the quality and legitimacy of Watson’s work but many still took issue with his approach. The fundamental lesson learned from Watson’s Little Albert experiment is the ability to condition behavior. Digdon, Powell, & Harris’s (2014) work reignites the conversation of the legitimacy and results of Watson’s Little Albert experiment.
With Psychology or Without
Many have pushed for behaviorism to function as an independent science of psychology. From Watson’s article in 1913 to Ledoux’s in 2012 there is a wide range of behaviorists who feel it must be separate from psychology. As early behaviorists were openly disappointed with the lack of scientific method by psychologists shaping the foundation of behaviorism. Behaviorism in turn serves as the scientific branch of psychology conducting objective measurable experiments. The results of such experiments, led to real treatment conditioning a patient’s behaviors to address a problem. Behaviorism became and has remained a significant disciple within and the second force of psychology.
Watson – Breaking Ground
Watson was a bold man who did not hold back from stating what he believed. Watson made clear his disappointment with psychology, its methods and its lack of objective results. Most importantly, Watson appeared to be concerned with psychology offering little to no treatment while he believed behaviorism could (Watson, 1913). Knowing it was unlikely to happen Watson stated the need for behaviorism to standalone from psychology as a verifiable science. Watson’s work and 1913 article fought for behaviorism to be a science. Behaviorism would not be the same today without Watson’s vocal concerns and his Little Albert experiment. Watson left his mark on behaviorism both for good and for bad, but he did ensure behaviorism exists as a science with objective quantifiable experiments leading to applicable treatments.
Conclusion
Behaviorism is the second force of psychology and has become the scientific application of the basic principles of psychology. Through the work of committed men such as Watson and Pavlo behaviorism has left its mark on psychology and society. The discovery and experimentation of conditioning has changed the way we think about one’s behavior. As behaviorism effects many aspects of treating a patient behaviorism bridges multiple sciences and medical disciplines. Behaviorism in accordance with other disciplines provides deeper understanding of behaviors and patient responses.
References
Clark, R. E. (2004). The classical origins of Pavlov’s conditioning. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 39(4), 279-294. doi: 10.1007/BF02734167.
Digdon, N., Powell, R. A., & Harris, B. (2014). Little Albert’s alleged neurological impairment. History of Psychology, 17(4), 312-324. doi: 10.1037/a0037325
Green, C. D. (2009). Darwinian theory, functionalism, and the first American psychological revolution. American Psychologist, 64(2), 75-83. doi: 10.1037/a0013338.
Hothersall, D. (2004). History of Psychology (4 ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Ledoux, S. F. (2012). Behaviorism at 100. American Scientist, 100(1), 60-65. doi: 10.1511/2012.94.60
Moore, J. (2011). Behaviorism. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 449-464. doi: 10.1007/bf03395771
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20(2), 158-177. doi:10.1037/h0074428