Sei sulla pagina 1di 10

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319076898

John B. Watson

Article · January 2017


DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-4729-6

CITATIONS READS

0 19,725

1 author:

John C Malone
University of Tennessee
48 PUBLICATIONS   355 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Damn Darwin! View project

Behaviorism & History View project

All content following this page was uploaded by John C Malone on 03 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


J

John B. Watson The purpose of this essay is to correct the


record by concentrating on a few major aspects
John C. Malone of his work. Many complete accounts appear else-
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA where (Buckley 1989; Malone 1990/2004, 2009;
Malone and Garcia 2014).
More than other intellectual pioneers, John
B. Watson’s views have been so simplified and
distorted by successive generations of authors that
Introduction
it is difficult to discern his actual message. Watson
founded behaviorism in 1913; the difficulty lies in
John Broadus Watson was born in 1878 on a farm
the fact that this doctrine directly contradicts the
near Greenville, South Carolina. He earned a mas-
ancient folk psychology that forms the basis for
ter’s degree in 1899 at Furman University in
our languages and for our strongly ingrained
Greenville and went on to the prestigious Univer-
beliefs. Most readers, including almost all psy-
sity of Chicago, where he became the youngest
chologists, have escaped the difficulties by
recipient of a PhD and remained as an instructor.
adopting a simplified and false interpretation of
He soon established a reputation as a researcher of
his doctrines and leaving it at that. In fact, most
animal behavior, and in 1908 the opportunity of a
handbooks and textbooks corroborate that falsely
lifetime arose when he was offered a professor-
caricatured version.
ship and department chairmanship at the Johns
Todd (1994) surveyed textbook treatments of
Hopkins University in Baltimore. Watson also
Watson over the decades and found that they
became editor of the Psychological Review,
became “standardized” after 1960. According to
affording him tremendous influence over the
that portrayal, Watson “appeared suddenly in
development of psychology. Malone (2014)
1913” and promoted a narrow brand of psychol-
noted that he was “. . .attractive, strong, scientifi-
ogy that assumed that all behavior was learned
cally accomplished, and forceful” at a time when
and that led to an unethical “baby-frightening
other psychologists and zoologists “. . .seemed
experiment.” Given the mass of work Watson
weak, tentative, mealy mouthed, and ineffectual.”
produced studying instinct in animals in the labo-
Watson was combative and articulate, a real
ratory and the field and the countless infants he
fighter who dismissed the psychology that existed
worked with in Baltimore, he would have been
at the time. And he was a full professor at Johns
exasperated, but probably not surprised, to read
Hopkins at the age of 29! He was universally
such a summary.
respected as both a researcher and scholar and

# Springer International Publishing AG 2017


J. Vonk, T.K. Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_936-1
2 John B. Watson

came with a plan for action, rather than traditional they believe now, that Watson had forbidden the
quiet discussion and polite debate. study of the mind!
Watson had begun his career in the study of Watson was not limiting psychology; Hilgard
animal behavior (Malone 2017), both in the labo- (1987) argued that he was expanding its field of
ratory and in the field, including physically study. Psychology had been obsessed with the
demanding research on noddy and sooty terns in analysis of consciousness, restricted to humans
the Dry Tortugas. He clearly considered himself a able to understand and use language and who
comparative psychologist and 80 years later so did were more or less sane. They were trained to
comparative psychologist Donald Dewsbury “introspect” and describe their conscious experi-
(1994). But after 1915 his interest centered on ence using labels that they were taught, like “sen-
child development. His academic career was cut sation,” “feeling,” and “image.” Behaviorism, on
short in 1920, partly due to a scandalous divorce the other hand, applied to children and other non-
(Buckley 1989; Malone 1990/2004). Isolated verbal individuals, as well as subhuman animals
from academics, he began a very successful sec- and the insane.
ond career in advertising, first with J. Walter
Thompson agency and later with William Esty.
He continued to lecture occasionally and Consciousness?
published frequently, but usually in popular mag-
azines. His influence on modern psychology was Watson argued that the concept of consciousness
evidenced in 2014, when the centennial of his derives from the invention of the soul by lazy but
1913 seminal lectures announcing the founding clever ancients who discovered that they could
of behaviorism was celebrated by the Association manipulate people through fear of the supernatu-
for Behavior Analysis International (ABAI) and ral (1924). In both the 1924 and 1930 editions of
the publication of many testimonial articles. It is Behaviorism, it was “The Advent of the Behav-
commonly known that he established behavior- iorists” that first began to set things straight by
ism, a movement that fractured (or blossomed) banishing the soul, consciousness, and other fic-
into many disparate parts over the years. tional subjective terms and so providing a psy-
chology that is “as objective as baseball.”
The assumption that we have minds that oper-
Behaviorism ate our body machines is pure folk psychology.
Watson never argued that minds exist but are not
This is a way of treating the entire subject matter objective, so cannot be studied. This misunder-
of psychology as activity, or behavior. That seems standing has persisted for a century. He actually
a simple thing to say, but its implications are said that there is no “mind!” There are activities
difficult for many people to grasp and easy to like seeing, hearing, listening, remembering, and
misunderstand. Imagine that common psycholog- imagining, but do they constitute a “mind” that is
ical terms like “memory” and “visual images” are separate from the body?
replaced by “remembering” and “seeing.” Instead Watson emphasized repeatedly that the mind/
of things like memories and images that are some- body distinction is a false one, writing that
how stored in the brain and perceived by an inner “Surely no one could ever be bold enough or
ghost, we treat the psyche only as activities and rash enough to question that there is such a thing
dismiss our childish notions of bodies with com- as mind or that it is made up of conscious units.
puter brains controlled by magic spirits. When And yet this is just what the Behaviorist did”
Watson proposed that we can study psychology (1926). We do not study the Easter Bunny
in an objective way, just as we study the rest of the (or the mind) because there is no profit in studying
physical world by concentrating on behavior, things that exist only as words. The mind/body
some listeners and readers were enthralled, but distinction was invented by savages and, though
most were shocked. They believed in 1913, as incoherent, was passed on as folk wisdom that is
John B. Watson 3

believable only because it is drilled into us in our received from the psychological establishment,
language. The cultural belief in mind and body the press, and powerful enemies after his sensa-
does not make minds exist. tional divorce in 1920 and his departure from a
Similarly, does the word sensation mean any- pinnacle of academic success at Johns Hopkins.
thing? If not, why try to analyze our experience Harzem wrote that Watson had “dismissed at one
into sensations? Or, as Watson urged, should we stroke the entire body of literature on experimen-
study the conditions that produce reports of “red” tal psychology. . . painstakingly built over many
and the range of stimuli to which we are sensitive decades. . .the academic reaction to this action
and the conditions that cause red/green confu- was strong.”
sions, as he did with a variety of animal subjects Even today, it is difficult to find a textbook or
(Malone 2017)? Do we really want to hear your handbook or encyclopedia entry that presents a
description of the feeling of “redness” or my fair rendition of Watson’s views. The leading
description of the feeling of the chime of a bell? biography of Watson is generally well done, but
But that was psychology in 1913. Kerry Buckley (1989) mistitled it Mechanical
Man, implying a robotic/erector set orientation.
Watson’s behaviorism holds that explanations
Reactions to Watson’s Behaviorism must deal with our activity (behavior), not with
supposed underlying, usually hypothetical
No one enjoys watching their life’s work machinery. But like the cat attracted to the laser
dismissed, especially when the movement respon- pointer spot, the public is fascinated by colorful
sible gains traction and acclaim as revolutionary. brain scans, believing that they somehow explain
Woodworth (1931) referred to “the outbreak of the workings of the mind. Watson was expert in
behaviorism” as if the movement was a disease. biology, yet included no illustrations of brain
Behaviorism was a “youth movement,” and mechanisms, since he knew that a nervous system
Woodworth disapproved of the fact that Watson was not necessary for intelligent behavior and that
“had won the public ear” (1931). He was unhappy attributing behavior to the brain was only a dis-
with reviews of Behaviorism, Watson’s (1924 traction. No reader of his books could conclude
1930) flagship book: “The New York Times said that Watson denied private experience and treated
of the book, “It marks an epoch in the intellectual us as complicated machinery; ironically, that bet-
history of man.” The Tribune was more effusive: ter describes many cognitive theories! Yet, long
“Perhaps this is the most important book ever after his death in 1958, his famous descendent
written. One stands for an instant blinded with a B. F. Skinner showed no hesitation in throwing
great hope” (Woodworth 1931). And Woodworth Watson under the bus while damning him with
was neither the only critic nor the harshest. faint praise (e.g., 1974) and implying that Watson
Jastrow (1929) was furious, referring to Watson’s was guilty of the list of such sins (like portraying
“extravagant and irresponsible us as automatons) that are often still attributed to
claims. . .superman-ic distain for one’s fellow sci- all behaviorists.
entists,” coming from someone whose “standing
is unchallenged, his ability exceptional, his con-
tribution notable.” That made Watson’s hostility Mary Calkins Understood
toward conventional psychology even more egre-
gious, as if a “modern Machiavelli” was seeking Mary Calkins (1930) had studied under the great
to confound the world. Watson was using the William James in the 1890s, and she correctly
prestige and authority he had earned to “throw understood Watson’s behaviorism. In 1930 she
the labors of everyone else into the discard. . .” distinguished between “moderate” and “extreme”
(Jastrow 1929). behaviorism, which roughly corresponds to what
More recently, Harzem (1993) provided a Skinner (1945) would call “methodological” and
detailed account of the harsh treatment Watson “radical” behaviorism. The former holds that the
4 John B. Watson

mind cannot be treated by science because it is denial of seeing, imagining, thinking, and other
subjective, a position never held by Watson or by aspects of private experience that were never
Skinner, but which is often attributed to both. The denied by Watson or by anyone, ever. This is
latter, radical behaviorism, promoted by Watson always a contentious subject, because most of us
and named by Skinner, holds that mental terms are feel that we experience imagery and it’s easy to
fictional products of folk psychology and that the recoil when someone tells us that there are no
mind/body distinction is a false one. Calkins was “images,” as Watson did and as Skinner later
more perceptive than most psychologists who agreed. But even cognitivists agree that there are
followed, since she recognized that Watson’s no “pictures in the head, so there is no argument
behaviorism was the radical kind and she wrote, among most psychologists today (see Malone
“Rather, no theory is rightly called behaviorism 2009). There are better descriptors than “phenom-
which does not effectively ‘scrap’ mind and con- enal givennesses,” such as “qualia,” but whatever
sciousness alike,” published the year she died they’re called, pieces of private experience are not
(1930). “mental content,” and they’re not causes of
Though Watson claimed in 1936 that he never observable behavior or speech; they are also
understood John Dewey’s lectures when a student behaviors/activities that are part of the fabric of
at Chicago, the professor and the graduate student all behavior. How experience “feels” is best left to
shared some important beliefs. According to the humanities to describe.
Dewey (1930), modern justification for mind/ Nonetheless, the astute Mary Calkins (1930)
body dualism comes in part from physics, of all also had her doubts that behaviorism could
sources, and he probably was thinking of Galileo replace the study of consciousness wondering,
when he wrote, “Qualities ejected from physics “Is thinking merely a kind of doing?” We wonder
found a home in mind, or consciousness.” This is (with Watson) what else it could be. Consider first
because Galileo viewed reality solely as physics Watson’s bare-bones “theory of learning;” once
and dismissed sensations, like “warm” or understood, his views on thinking, emotion, child
“bright,” as unreal, since they are subjective. development, and psychopathology become clear.
Dewey pointed to “. . .the authority of physics
for taking them to be mental and psychic in
nature.” The separation of physics and sensation Pattern Reactions
“. . .created. . .the beginnings of modern psychol-
ogy and impregnated its terminology. Behavior- In 1919 Watson wrote that we are “what we come
ism is a reaction against the confusion created by with and what we have been through,” and the
this mixture” (Dewey 1930). latter is by far the most important. We come with a
So “mind,” “consciousness,” “sensation,” set of innate reactions called out by specific stim-
“image,” and other terms are jargon, fictions that uli, so touch produces movement, an air puff
have no referent, but they “impregnated” our ter- causes a blink, food in the gut produces peristaltic
minology. If Watson asked you to define those movements, an object crossing the visual field
mental terms, he claimed that you would soon be causes orienting and following, and a sudden
“tongue-tied” since “you don’t know what you noise causes fear reactions. In the womb the infant
mean by them” (1924). Bergmann (1956) reacts incessantly, adjusting to constantly chang-
famously displayed a complete misunderstanding ing stimulation, and adjustment continues until
of Watson’s behaviorism writing, “His premise, death, the final adjustment.
that there are no minds, is false and sheer non- Through life, we adjust, constantly, with the
sense. . .when. . .I speak of minds, these are whole body. These pattern reactions comprise
so-called mental contents, or awarenesses, or phe- three general categories: manual (M), “laryngeal
nomenal givennesses. . .” (Bergmann 1956). (L),” and visceral (V), corresponding to motor,
Bergmann confused Watson’s denial of mental communicative, and emotional behaviors.
causes, like mind, sensation, and the rest, with Whether calm or agitated, reading or walking,
John B. Watson 5

asleep or awake, these three classes of behavior for organic intelligence. Louise Barrett (e.g.,
simultaneously are active, though in different 2011) showed how powers that were previously
degrees. For example, quiet reading may show ascribed to the brain are actually explained by
low levels of manual and visceral behaviors and body structure and the environment, just as Wat-
higher levels of laryngeal activity, as could be son and many modern writers argue. As Watson
symbolized mLv. That could change in a moment pointed out, there are “. . .many animals and free
if we react to the sound of a scream, swimming plants without nervous systems”
becoming MLV. (1924, p. 43). This is not to say that a central
This principle applies easily to learning, say a nervous system is superfluous, but many writers
baby learning to grasp a bottle, which it does “by have joined Barrett (2011) in condemning the
the sweat of its brow” (Watson 1919). The shiny brain reverence of the past century (e.g.,
object calls out its whole set of reactions – arms, Tennenhouse 2017).
legs, vocal cords, salivation, and stomach
secretion – the MLV set. Eventually, the bottle is
pushed away or grasped and adjustment is Thinking
achieved. The evoking stimulus has changed and
whatever behavior accomplished that will be like- Watson wrote that “. . .man both talks and thinks
lier to occur when such a stimulus recurs. That with his whole body – just as he does everything
behavior will also occur when similar stimuli else with his whole body” (1930). But earlier he
appear, and this acquisition of old responses to had suggested that laryngeal movement was an
new stimuli forms the basis for all learning and the important physical embodiment of thinking, as
formation of one’s personality. well as talking (e.g., 1913), and this was seized
by critics eager to show that a functioning larynx
was not essential for thought. But even his con-
Embodiment temporary critics recognized that interpreting
thinking as “behavior” did not necessarily mean
Watson repeated often that we adjust with the activity of the laryngeal vocal apparatus.
whole body – “Let me emphasize again – Watson dealt with this specific issue in both
whole” (1924). And we place “. . .no more editions of Behaviorism (e.g., 1924) and earlier
emphasis on the brain and spinal cord than upon when he issued “A Correction of Statement” in
the striped muscles of the body, the plain muscles 1920 at the Congress of Philosophy that met at
of the stomach, the glands, etc. . .” (1924). In fact, Oxford. He wrote, “In advance of any argument
a nervous system merely “speeds up the mes- I think we can say that he (the behaviorist) has
sage,” but the message still gets through in the never really held the view that thinking is merely
absence of a nervous system, just more slowly the action of the language mechanisms. . .Like
(1924). As a biologist, he also realized that the everything that we do thinking is done with the
whole body is alive, therefore not really “mechan- whole body.” Further, if the body is damaged so
ical,” in the sense that we usually refer to non- that limbs or organs are missing, “he thinks with
organic devices such as erector set robots. the remaining parts. . .thinking, whatever its type,
Watson’s Behaviorism presents psychology as is an integrated bodily process.”
the activity of the whole body. In current cognitive
jargon, that is “the embodiment of mind,”
described well by Killeen and Glenberg (2010), Silent Problem Solving
who trace the history of the “situating” of mind
from Descartes to the present. Watson would be When problem solving, our behavior is no different
pleased to see that the old “information pro- from that of a rat learning a maze. Suppose a man is
cessing” model is now becoming passé, as we given a gold cigarette case with a secret release
realize that digital computers are awful models mechanism and told that he can have the case if he
6 John B. Watson

can figure out how to open it (Watson 1920). We Psychoanalysis


watch as he spends several minutes manipulating it
but fails to find the release mechanism. Now we Watson criticized psychoanalysis in his last
send him away to a room by himself and tell him to works, just as he criticized all “subjective psy-
come out when he has figured it out. After a few chology.” But for decades he approvingly cited
minutes, he comes out and proudly shows that he Freud and even published a detailed endorsement
has figured out the trick to open it. But how did he of Freudian psychoanalysis in 1916, when Freud
do it? We didn’t see what he did when he was sent to had not yet become a household word. This was a
that room. But we saw him at work for several scholarly piece, published in The Scientific
minutes before entering the room – why would we Monthly, which Watson concluded by arguing
suppose that he did anything different once we that everyone who dares should undergo psycho-
couldn’t observe him? The parallel with observable analysis. This applies especially to those occupy-
behavior and thinking is obvious; just because we ing stressful high-level government or business
can’t see or hear the process doesn’t mean that it is positions, so that their pressures are not aug-
different in kind from the problem-solving behavior mented by the stresses of unresolved conflicts
that we do see. arising in childhood and youth that they are inca-
pable of verbalizing! Years before and after that
article, Watson referred repeatedly to Freudian
psychology, criticizing some of its language, but
Other Thinkers
endorsing it in general. Perhaps surprising, Wat-
son was a conspicuously vocal defender of Freud-
To really understand another’s “thinking,” the
ian psychology, though Freud never realized this
behaviorist, “as well as the psychoanalyst. . .
(Bergmann 1956).
(require) a minute search into the subject’s biog-
raphy as far back as infancy” (1920). Watson went
on to criticize the study of moment-by-moment
Psychopathology
private experience since that requires introspec-
tive training, with the subject repeating the labels
The adjustments we make through life produce
for “conscious experience” that were just taught –
sets of reactions to the innumerable situations we
what else could they be? He continued, “The
have encountered, and those reactions are orga-
report by the subject throws very little light.”
nized so that we can also adjust to new situations.
The same applies when the behaviorist considers
Though “new” unfamiliar circumstances resem-
his own thinking, which yields little via introspec-
ble familiar situations to some degree and the
tion and really requires examination of one’s own
more they resemble the familiar, the easier the
life history. However, we find that most of our past
adjustment. So a person familiar with high school
experiences were not verbalized, and the body of
can adjust to college easily, but the adjustment to
that wordless “memory” constitutes the uncon-
military life may be more difficult, since it
scious. Watson suggested that “The theory of the
includes stimuli that demand responses we lack.
unverbalized in human behavior gives us a natural
Our learned adjustments total to become our per-
science way of explaining many things that the
sonality, and a well-adjusted personality can deal
Freudians now call “unconscious complexes,”
with new situations that are encountered. But
“suppressed wishes” and the like” (1930). This
what if the new situation is so novel that it leaves
explains Watson’s respect in his early work for the
us unable to adjust?
methods of psychoanalysis.
As Watson wrote, “Almost any event or hap-
pening might start a change; a flood might do it, a
death in the family, an earthquake, a conversion to
the church, a breakdown in health, a fist fight –
anything that would break up your present habit
John B. Watson 7

patterns. . .” (1930). Recovery from such trauma cues related to each of those, plus food, sex, and
may be difficult and lengthy, since it requires a shelter, can form 720 combinations and should be
rebuilding of personality. We do not learn chem- used in advertising displays as often as possible to
istry or become a piano virtuoso in a day, and attract the viewer’s attention. So Johnson’s baby
reshaping a personality may be more difficult powder came to signify love, by pairing its image
than either, but Watson was sure that it could with that of a loving mother patting a healthy,
be done. happy baby. Scott’s toilet tissue was paired with
imagery of a bowel surgery and the warning that
harsh toilet paper can lead to scary results. Further
Advertising and More examples appear elsewhere (Malone 1990/2004).
Walter Dill Scott had already changed advertising
In 1920 Watson was 42 years old and left Balti- from informative to persuasive. But Watson car-
more for New York City, banished from aca- ried that strategy further than it had been applied,
demics and embittered; the publicity produced and he is credited for it in advertising circles
by his divorce and the viciousness of his former (Advertising Age 1999).
wife’s influential family was too much (Buckley It appears that Watson’s legacy to business was
1989). He was introduced to people associated more than just his work with advertising copy. He
with J. Walter Thompson Advertising Agency also produced innovations in personnel selection
and provisionally hired. By 1924 he was a vice and management, as noted by DiClemente and
president and became a wealthy man, living first Hantula (2000), who scoured the Library of Con-
on Fifth Avenue and later on a 40-acre “farm” in gress for documents providing a more complete
Westport, Connecticut. picture of Watson’s business life and legacy. They
Watson could have dedicated Behaviorism to wrote, “Indeed, the terms ‘behavioral’ and ‘exper-
Pavlov, or Darwin, or Bertrand Russell, but both imental’ are often used to describe Watson and his
editions were dedicated to Stanley Resor, who led work, and they have overshadowed his contribu-
the J. Walter Thompson Advertising Agency from tions to I-O psychology. . .many of his ideas
1916 to 1955. With his wife’s creative genius endure today. . .He pioneered much of the work
behind ad campaigns, Resor built JWT into a in selecting successful sales people and argued for
worldwide power, eventually setting records in personality testing in personnel selection before
billings. The dedication to Resor owed to that ‘The Big Five’ were introduced to contemporary
man’s “unfailing interest in both industry and research. . .This may be perhaps his lasting
science,” an interest shared by Watson, clearly legacy. . ..”
evidenced in his 1913 manifesto. According to
the archives of JWT, “To foster a scientific
approach to advertising the company established Remembered by His Son
a Research Department in 1915 and hired eminent
academics such as John B, Watson, the founder of Watson’s son James was interviewed by Hannush
behavioral psychology. These professionals (1987), providing an account of memories of life
added a new dimension to marketing research as with his father, with “no promises about objective
J. Walter Thompson applied motivational studies observation.”
to advertising, initiated the use of scientific and James remembered his father as having a sense
medical findings as a basis for copy, and of humor, as charming, and “a delightful person to
established the Consumer Panel. . .” (J. Walter be around.” He was bright, sociable (yet shy), fas-
Thompson Archives). tidious, and masculine. James said that “Dad was
The behavioral approach to advertising was very concerned with manly activities. . .courage and
simple and effective. His research with infants personal capabilities. . ., bravery and manliness,
suggested that there are three innate emotional manual work, farm work, carpentry, and all of the
(visceral) reactions – fear, rage, and love. The manly arts including boxing.”
8 John B. Watson

He showed more affection for animals than for Bergmann, G. (1956). The contribution of John B. Watson.
people, and the only times he expressed much Psychological Review, 63, 265–276.
Buckley, K. W. (1989). Mechanical man: John Broadus
anger was when he saw “cruelty or abuse of Watson and the beginnings of behaviorism. New York:
other people or animals. . .cruelty to animals and Guilford.
children. . .That’s something he couldn’t stand.” Calkins, M. W. (1930). The case against behaviorism. The
He always had a huge garden and he was a skilled Sewanee Review, 38, 199–209.
Dewey, J. (1930). Conduct and experience. In
carpenter, who built bridges, barns, greenhouses, C. Murchison (Ed.), Psychologies of 1930
workshops, corrals, riding rings, dams, and stone (pp. 409–422). Worcester: Clark University Press.
walls.” Dewsbury, D. A. (1994). John B. Watson: Profile of a
Watson’s so-called “behavioral” method of comparative psychologist and proto-ethologist. In
J. T. Todd & E. K. Morris (Eds.), Modern perspectives
child raising was totally idiosyncratic and forbade on John B. Watson and classical behaviorism
any displays of warmth or emotion; James attrib- (pp. 140–144). Westport: Greenwood.
uted his difficulties in life and his brother’s suicide DiClemente, D., & Hantula, D. A. (2000). John Broadus
to that upbringing, which he thought left them Watson: I/O psychologist. The Industrial Psychologist,
37(4), 47–55.
without the self-esteem necessary for a healthy Hannush, M. J. (1987). John B. Watson remembered: An
life. He wrote, “Tragically, that’s the antithesis of interview with James B. Watson. Journal of the History
what Dad expected from practicing those behav- of the Behavioral Sciences, 30, 137–152.
ioral child raising philosophies.” Harzem, P. (1993). The discrediting of John Broadus Wat-
son. Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis, 19, 33–66.
Following Rosalie’s death in 1936, Watson Hilgard, E. R. (1987). Psychology in America: A historical
was devastated and seemed “confused” and survey. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Javonovich.
depressed for several years. James was barely a J. Walter Thompson Archives. David M. Rubenstein
teenager when she died, and his recollections of Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Duke University.
http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/hartman/guides/jwt-
his father, then in his late fifties, show a less history.html
combative man. James could only say that he Jastrow, J. (1929). Review of Watson, J. B., The ways of
had “heard about” his father’s competitiveness behaviorism, Harper Bros., 1928; Psychological care
and aggressiveness in his earlier career, but it of infant and child, Norton, 1928; J. B. Watson and
W. McDougall, The battle of behaviorism, Norton,
evidently diminished after Rosalie’s death. 1929. Science, LXIX, 455–457.
Killeen, P. R., & Glenberg, A. M. (2010). Resituating
cognition. Comparative Cognition & Behavior
Reviews, 5, 59–77.
Cross-References Malone, J. C. (1990/2004). Theories of learning:
A historical approach. Belmont: Wadsworth.
▶ Anthropomorphism Malone, J. C. (2009). Psychology: Pythagoras to present.
▶ Behaviorism Cambridge: MIT Press.
Malone, J. C. (2017). Animal psychophysics: The study of
▶ Cartesian Dualism
sensation in nonverbal organisms. In: Call, J. (Editor-
▶ Development of Behavior in-Chief) APA handbook of comparative psychology:
▶ Embodied Cognition Vol. 2. Perception, learning, and cognition.
▶ Learning Washington: APA., Chap. 1, pp. 3–24.
Malone, J. C., & Garcia-Penagos, A. (2014). When a clear
▶ Psychopathology
strong voice was needed: A retrospective review of
▶ Thinking Watson’s (1924/1930) behaviorism. Journal of the
Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 102, 267–287.
Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psycho-
logical terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270–277.
References Skinner, B. F. (1974). In R. Epstein (Ed.), Notebooks.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Advertising Age John B. (1999). Watson (persons of the Tennenhouse, E. (2017). It’s a no-brainer. New Scientist,
century, 29 Mar). http://adage.com/article/special- 3134, 323–335.
report-the-advertising-century/john-b-watson/140217/ Todd, J. T. (1994). What psychology has to say about John
Barrett, L. (2011). Beyond the brain: How body and envi- B. Watson: Classical behaviorism in psychology text-
ronment shape animal and human minds. Princeton: books, 1920–1989. In Todd, J. T. & Morris, E. K.
Princeton University Press.
John B. Watson 9

(Eds.), Modern perspectives on John B. Watson and Watson, J. B. (1924). Behaviorism. New York: People’s
classical behaviorism. Westport: Greenwood, 76–107. Institute. (Rev. Ed. 1930).
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views Watson, J. B. (1926). What is behaviorism? Harper’s
it. Psychological Review, 20, 158–177. Monthly Magazine, 152, 723–729.
Watson, J. B. (1916). The psychology of wish fulfillment. Watson, J. B. (1936). John Broadus Watson.
Scientific Monthly, 3, 479–487. (autobiography). In C. Murchison (Ed.), A history of
Watson, J. B. (1919). Psychology from the standpoint of a psychology in autobiography (Vol. 3, pp. 271–281).
behaviorist. Philadelphia: Lippincott. Worcester: Clark University Press.
Watson, J. B. (1920). Is thinking merely the action of Woodworth, R. S. (1931). Contemporary schools of psy-
language mechanisms? British Journal of Psychology, chology. New York: Ronald Press.
11, 87–104.

View publication stats

Potrebbero piacerti anche