Toward an Interdisciplinary Science of Culture

Relations between Description and Experimentation in the Metacontingency Enterprise: An Interbehavioral Analysis

Despite extensive theoretical development, there is a lack of consensus in the metacontingency enterprise on the extent to which current metacontingency constructs describe experimental happenings. The purpose of this article is to provide an interbehavioral analysis of the metacontingency enterprise that examines relations between description and experimentation in order to facilitate research on cultural selection occurring through metacontingencies. In particular, this article considers how stimulus functions of descriptions of metacontingency constructs participate in metacontingency experiments in terms of specificity, types of analysis, levels of analysis, and procedures. The extent to which experimental findings are able to be described in terms of metacontingency constructs is assessed. Prominent events and relations demonstrated by metacontingency experiments are summarized and discussed, as well as inconsistencies between relations described and relations constructed based on events observed. Recommendations for experimental and descriptive adjustments are offered. Although this analysis may or may not have any bearing on the metacontingency enterprise, it may serve as a template for conducting interbehavioral analyses of activities in other enterprises, if not more analyses of the metacontingency enterprise.

Interbehavioral psychology and the behavior systems framework: A brief reply

The present commentary considers a paper by Silva, Silva, and Machado (2019) published in this special issue, which describes some relations between Behavior Systems Theory and Interbehavioral Psychology. In particular, the systems aspects, field orientation, and role of experimentation in both Behavior Systems Theory and Interbehavioral Psychology are discussed. Similarities and differences among the two perspectives are highlighted, and misconceptions about Interbehavioral Psychology are addressed.

A Historical Perspective on the Future of Behavior Science

Like all natural sciences, behavior science has much to offer toward an understanding of the world. The extent to which the promise of behavior science is realized, though, depends upon the extent to which we keep what we know before us. This paper considers fundamental concepts in behavior science, including the concepts of behavior, stimulation, setting conditions, and language. In considering these concepts, we revisit comments from B. F. Skinner and J. R. Kantor and also consider some areas of behavior analytic research and the implications they have for reconsidering long-held assumptions about the analysis of behavior. We hope that, in considering our foundations, the vitality and strength of the discipline might be enhanced, our impact on science improved, and our future secured.

Constructs and events in verbal behavior

Skinner's (1957) analysis of verbal behavior has been the subject of much controversy in recent years. While criticism has historically come from outside the field of behavior analysis, there are now well-articulated arguments against Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior from within the field as well. Recently, advocates of Skinner's analysis have attempted to respond to the critiques, particularly to those regarding Skinner's definition of verbal behavior articulated by proponents of relational frame theory. Specifically, it has been suggested that talk about definitions equates to making the essentialist error. This paper provides an overview of these issues in the context of understanding the role of constructs in science more generally. It will be argued that definitions are central to scientific progress, and are not only relevant to a functional analysis, but a central prerequisite to the pursuit of such an analysis.