首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>The Behavior Analyst >Making sense of sensitivity in the human operant literature
【2h】

Making sense of sensitivity in the human operant literature

机译:理解人类操作文学中的敏感性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Human operant behavior is often said to be controlled by different variables or governed by different processes than nonhuman operant behavior. Support for this claim within the operant literature comes from data suggesting that human behavior is often insensitive to schedules of reinforcement to which nonhuman behavior has been sensitive. The data that evoke the use of the terms sensitivity and insensitivity, however, result from both between-species and within-subject comparisons. We argue that because sensitivity is synonymous with experimental control, conclusions about sensitivity are best demonstrated through within-subject comparisons. Further, we argue that even when sensitivity is assessed using within-subject comparisons of performance on different schedules of reinforcement, procedural differences between studies of different species may affect schedule performance in important ways. We extend this argument to age differences as well. We conclude that differences across populations are an occasion for more precise experimental analyses and that it is premature to conclude that human behavior is controlled by different processes than nonhuman behavior.
机译:与非人类操作行为相比,人类操作行为通常被认为是受不同变量控制或受不同过程控制的。在操作文献中对此主张的支持来自数据,该数据表明人类行为通常对非人类行为已敏感的强化计划不敏感。然而,引起术语敏感性和不敏感性使用的数据是来自物种间和受试者内部的比较。我们认为,由于敏感性与实验控制同义,因此关于敏感性的结论最好通过受试者内部的比较来证明。此外,我们认为,即使使用不同强化计划的受试者内部比较来评估敏感性,不同物种研究之间的程序差异也可能以重要方式影响进度。我们也将这一论点扩展到年龄差异。我们得出结论,人群之间的差异是进行更精确的实验分析的机会,现在断定人类行为受非人类行为受不同过程控制还为时尚早。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号