Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:41:51.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Secure footing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2011

Peter Killeen
Peter Killeen
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Arizona State UniversityTempe, AZ 85287–1104. Wlleen@ASU.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Zeiler appreciates my organism-centered approach but believes that it issues from the wrong framework and focuses on the wrong phenomena. He is a “sharpener,” I a “leveler”; I believe that the full complexities of organisms in their natural environments should be the terminus, not the origin of our scientific enquiry. The study of schedule performance is oblique but not orthogonal to that terminus, and offers us a secure footing for the next step upward in complexity.

Type
Author's Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 19 , Special Issue 3 , September 1996 , pp. 550 - 551
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bolles, R. C. (1994) The response problem. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17: 135–136. [MDZ]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Killeen, Peter R. (1994a) Mathematical principles of reinforcement. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17: 105–172. [PRK, MDZ]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1950) Are theories of learning necessary? Psychological Review 57: 193–216. [PRK]CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skinner, B. F. (1969) Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. Appleton-Century-Crofts. [PRK]Google Scholar
Timberlake, W. (1994) Animal-centered models of reinforcement. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17: 153–154. [MDZ]CrossRefGoogle Scholar