Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2002 Jul;78(1):95–116. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2002.78-95

From molecular to molar: a paradigm shift in behavior analysis.

William M Baum 1
PMCID: PMC1284889  PMID: 12144313

Abstract

A paradigm clash is occurring within behavior analysis. In the older paradigm, the molecular view, behavior consists of momentary or discrete responses that constitute instances of classes. Variation in response rate reflects variation in the strength or probability of the response class. The newer paradigm, the molar view, sees behavior as composed of activities that take up varying amounts of time. Whereas the molecular view takes response rate and choice to be "derived" measures and hence abstractions, the molar view takes response rate and choice to be concrete temporally extended behavioral allocations and regards momentary "responses" as abstractions. Research findings that point to variation in tempo, asymmetry in concurrent performance, and paradoxical resistance to change are readily interpretable when seen in the light of reinforcement and stimulus control of extended behavioral allocations or activities. Seen in the light of the ontological distinction between classes and individuals, extended behavioral allocations, like species in evolutionary taxonomy, constitute individuals, entities that change without changing their identity. Seeing allocations as individuals implies that less extended activities constitute parts of larger wholes rather than instances of classes. Both laboratory research and everyday behavior are explained plausibly in the light of concrete extended activities and their nesting. The molecular- view, because it requires discrete responses and contiguous events, relies on hypothetical stimuli and consequences to account for the same phenomena. One may prefer the molar view on grounds of elegance, integrative power, and plausibility.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (221.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Alsop B., Elliffe D. Concurrent-schedule performance: Effects of relative and overall reinforcer rate. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Jan;49(1):21–36. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.49-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baum W. M. Molar versus as a paradigm clash. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 May;75(3):338–378. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-338. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Baum W. M. Optimization and the matching law as accounts of instrumental behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Nov;36(3):387–403. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.36-387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baum W. M. Performances on ratio and interval schedules of reinforcement: Data and theory. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Mar;59(2):245–264. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.59-245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Baum W. M., Rachlin H. C. Choice as time allocation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Nov;12(6):861–874. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-861. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Baum W. M. The correlation-based law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jul;20(1):137–153. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Baum W. M. Time-based and count-based measurement of preference. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Jul;26(1):27–35. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Baum W., Aparicio C. Optimality And Concurrent Variable-interval Variable-ratio Schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 Jan;71(1):75–89. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.71-75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Baum W., Schwendiman J., Bell K. Choice, contingency discrimination, and foraging theory. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 May;71(3):355–373. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.71-355. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Buzzard J. H., Hake D. F. Stimulus control of schedule-induced activity in pigeons during multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Sep;42(2):191–209. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Dallery J., McDowell J. J., Lancaster J. S. Falsification of matching theory's account of single-alternative responding: Herrnstein's k varies with sucrose concentration. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Jan;73(1):23–43. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.73-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Dinsmoor J. A. Stimuli inevitably generated by behavior that avoids electric shock are inherently reinforcing. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 May;75(3):311–333. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. GILBERT T. F. Fundamental dimensional properties of the operant. Psychol Rev. 1958 Sep;65(5):272–282. doi: 10.1037/h0044071. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Golikov P. P., Bobkova A. S., Bobkov A. J. Level of glucocorticoid receptors in male rat liver under stress. Endokrinologie. 1981 Mar;77(1):105–108. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. HERRNSTEIN R. J. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Jul;4:267–272. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Herrnstein R. J. Formal properties of the matching law. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jan;21(1):159–164. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-159. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Herrnstein R. J., Heyman G. M. Is matching compatible with reinforcement maximization on concurrent variable interval variable ratio? J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Mar;31(2):209–223. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.31-209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Herrnstein R. J. On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):243–266. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Heyman G. M., Tanz L. How to teach a pigeon to maximize overall reinforcement rate. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 Nov;64(3):277–297. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.64-277. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hineline P. N. Beyond the molar-molecular distinction: we need multiscaled analyses. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 May;75(3):342–378. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-342. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Houston A. I., McNamara J. How to maximize reward rate on two variable-interval paradigms. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 May;35(3):367–396. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Jenkins H. M., Moore B. R. The form of the auto-shaped response with food or water reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Sep;20(2):163–181. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Nevin J. A. An integrative model for the study of behavioral momentum. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 May;57(3):301–316. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Nevin J. A., Grace R. C. Behavioral momentum and the law of effect. Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Feb;23(1):73–130. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x00002405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Nevin J. A. Response strength in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):389–408. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Nevin J. A., Tota M. E., Torquato R. D., Shull R. L. Alternative reinforcement increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 May;53(3):359–379. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.53-359. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Pear J. J. Spatiotemporal patterns of behavior produced by variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Sep;44(2):217–231. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.44-217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Ploog B. O., Zeigler H. P. Key-peck probability and topography in a concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedule with food and water reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1997 Jan;67(1):109–129. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1997.67-109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Rachlin H., Baum W. M. Effects of alternative reinforcement: does the source matter? J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Sep;18(2):231–241. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. SKINNER B. F. Are theories of learning necessary? Psychol Rev. 1950 Jul;57(4):193–216. doi: 10.1037/h0054367. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Schick K. Operants. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 May;15(3):413–423. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Schwartz B., Williams D. R. Two different kinds of key peck in the pigeon: some properties of responses maintained by negative and positive response-reinforcer contingencies. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Sep;18(2):201–216. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Shull R. L., Gaynor S. T., Grimes J. A. Response rate viewed as engagement bouts: effects of relative reinforcement and schedule type. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 May;75(3):247–274. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-247. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Skinner B. F. Selection by consequences. Science. 1981 Jul 31;213(4507):501–504. doi: 10.1126/science.7244649. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Smith R. F. Topography of the food-reinforced key peck and the source of 30-millisecond interresponse times. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):541–551. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-541. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. VOL EPSHTEIN G. L., TAPINSKII L. S., ZHDANOV V. S. BRONKHOGRAFIIA PROPIL IODONOM (OSOBENNOSTI I OSLOZHNENIIA)--KLINIKO-RENTGENOANATOMICHESKOE ISSLEDOVANIE. Grudn Khir. 1963 Mar-Apr;5:105–108. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Vaughan W., Jr, Miller H. L., Jr Optimization versus response-strength accounts of behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Sep;42(2):337–348. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-337. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. White K. G. Behavioral contrast as differential time allocation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Mar;29(2):151–160. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-151. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. White K. G. Interresponse-time analysis of stimulus control in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 May;43(3):331–339. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.43-331. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES