Theoretical Comparison between John Watson and B. F. Skinner

Theoretical Comparison

1)      Behaviorism by John Watson

“Watson is recognized as the father of behaviorism, a learning theory that is based on observable behavior.  Watson was extreme in his position that at birth a person is tabula rasa- a blank slate.  Watson believed that development depends on learning given the proper experiences, learning will proceed.  This theory focuses on studying observable stimuli and observable responses to stimuli.    According to Watson, behavior was a subject matter in its own right, to be studied by the observational methods common to all sciences” (Ashford & LeCroy, 2010). 

“Early forms of psychology assumed that mental life was the appropriate subject matter for psychology, and introspection was an appropriate method to engage that subject matter. In 1913, John B. Watson proposed an alternative: classical S–R behaviorism. According to Watson, behavior was a subject matter in its own right, to be studied by the observational methods common to all sciences. Unfortunately, by around 1930, Watson’s behaviorism had proved inadequate. Many researchers and theorists then adopted a view in which various organismic entities were inferred to mediate the relation between S and R: mediational S–O–R neobehaviorism. This general view has remained influential, although the details of the various versions have differed over the years. The behavior analysis of B. F. Skinner took an entirely different approach. Particularly important was the study of verbal behavior. Although behaviorism is often conventionally defined as an approach that seeks to explain behavior without directly appealing to mental or cognitive processes, this definition needs considerable clarification, especially as it pertains to Skinner’s behavior analysis and his view of

behaviorism as a philosophy of science (Moore, The Psychological Record, 2011, 61,449-464).”

2)      Learning Theory by B. F. Skinner

“B. F. Skinner built on Watson’s learning theory (1953) by advancing the study of operant conditioning, a form of learning that occurs when responses are controlled by their consequences. Skinner observed that behavior is repeated when followed by positive consequences and that it is not repeated when followed by neutral or negative consequences.  When consequences such as rewards and punishments are made contingent on behavior, they can have a powerful influence on behavior” (Ashford & LeCroy, 2010). 

Both behaviorism by John Watson and B. F. Skinner’s theory are learning theories.  Watson used experiments to explain the importance of learning through experience.   As in the experiment he conducted on a child named Albert.  Albert was exposed to a stimulus, the cute white rat and at the same time was exposed to a second stimulus, a loud, frightening sound.  Through repeated exposure to these two stimuli he associated the two sounds together. As a result, when Albert was presented with the white rat he experienced a fearful response.  B. F. Skinner, used the theory of learned behavior and put a different spin by using reinforcement and punishment.  “These concepts are really quite simple, and part of the attraction of operant conditioning is that is a straightforward theory about behavior” (Ashford & LeCroy, 2010).  In the same way, B. F. Skinner observed behavior that was influenced by experience and how fears are not inborn but learned. 

The learner has worked with children for the majority of her life and has observed that children are not tabula rasa.  Most children, without regard for age, seem to have preconceived ideas of what they want and how to get it.  Currently, I work with a two year old that tries to get whatever he wants without regard for any other child.  Even though, his mother (a teacher) and his teachers have told him over and over again to wait his turn and stop hitting his friends. 

The learner has also observed that children respond better to discipline when it involves positive and negative consequences.  The learner has used B. F. Skinners learning theories without being aware of the origin.  When the learner started working with children in a formal setting, she was first encouraged to use this theory.  The learner would use gummy worms to reward the children for making right choices.  The majority of the time positive reinforcement worked as it should, except with the exception of two children.  One of these children was believed to have a learning disability and had a difficult time focusing.  The second did not seem to care about consequences. 

 Ashford, Jose B. & LeCroy, Craig Winston (2010). Human Behavior in the Social Environment A Multidimensional Perspective. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Moore, J. (2011).  The Dominance of Associative Theorizing in Implicit.  The Psychological Record, 61, 449-464.