Behaviorism vs. Neo-Behaviorism

Attribute	Behaviorism	Neo-Behaviorism
Focus	Observable behavior	Observable behavior and cognitive processes
Founder	John B. Watson	B. F. Skinner
Methodology	Stimulus-response associations	Operant conditioning
Emphasis	External factors	Internal factors
Approach	Environmental determinism	Environmental determinism with cognitive influences

Introduction

Behaviorism and Neo-Behaviorism are two schools of thought within psychology that focus on observable behaviors and the principles that govern them. While both approaches share some similarities, they also have distinct differences in terms of their theoretical foundations and methodologies.

Behaviorism

Behaviorism, founded by John B. Watson in the early 20th century, emphasizes the importance of observable behaviors as the primary focus of psychological study. According to behaviorists, behavior is learned through conditioning, and can be modified through reinforcement and punishment. One of the key principles of behaviorism is the idea that all behaviors are a result of environmental stimuli, and that internal mental processes are not necessary to explain behavior.

• Focus on observable behaviors
• Emphasis on conditioning and reinforcement
• Rejects the importance of internal mental processes

Neo-Behaviorism

Neo-Behaviorism emerged as a response to the limitations of traditional behaviorism, particularly its neglect of cognitive processes. Neo-Behaviorists, such as B.F. Skinner and Edward C. Tolman, incorporated cognitive elements into their theories while still maintaining a focus on observable behaviors. Unlike traditional behaviorism, Neo-Behaviorism acknowledges the role of internal mental processes in shaping behavior, such as beliefs, expectations, and perceptions.

• Incorporates cognitive elements
• Recognizes the role of internal mental processes
• Focuses on observable behaviors while considering cognitive factors

Comparison of Attributes

When comparing Behaviorism and Neo-Behaviorism, it is important to consider their key attributes in terms of theoretical foundations, methodologies, and applications in psychology.

Theoretical Foundations

Behaviorism is rooted in the belief that all behaviors can be explained by environmental stimuli and conditioning. It rejects the notion of internal mental processes and focuses solely on observable behaviors. In contrast, Neo-Behaviorism acknowledges the importance of cognitive elements in shaping behavior, such as thoughts, beliefs, and expectations. Neo-Behaviorists argue that behavior is influenced by both external stimuli and internal mental processes.

Methodologies

Behaviorism relies heavily on experimental methods to study behavior, such as classical and operant conditioning experiments. Behaviorists use controlled environments to manipulate variables and observe the effects on behavior. Neo-Behaviorism also utilizes experimental methods, but incorporates cognitive tasks and measures to assess internal mental processes. Neo-Behaviorists may use cognitive tasks, such as memory tests or problem-solving tasks, in addition to traditional behavioral measures.

Applications in Psychology

Behaviorism has been influential in the field of psychology, particularly in areas such as behavior therapy and learning theory. Behavior therapy techniques, such as systematic desensitization and token economies, are based on the principles of behaviorism. Neo-Behaviorism has also had an impact on psychology, particularly in the study of cognitive processes and decision-making. Neo-Behaviorists have contributed to our understanding of how cognitive factors influence behavior and decision-making processes.

Conclusion

While Behaviorism and Neo-Behaviorism share a focus on observable behaviors, they differ in their theoretical foundations and methodologies. Behaviorism emphasizes the role of environmental stimuli in shaping behavior, while Neo-Behaviorism incorporates cognitive elements into its theories. Both approaches have made significant contributions to the field of psychology and continue to influence research and practice in the field.