Psychological Perspectives of Watson, Skinner, and Tolman - Research Paper Example

? Compare and contrast the perspectives of John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner with that of Edward C. Tolman Perspectives of John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner Compared with that of Edward C. Tolman With change in time, psychological perspectives have changed and developed as well. Psychologists have been developing different theories that try to explain the different ways of life of people and organisms. However, there are some psychological perspectives and core values that have remained intact over the years. These are vital reflections that tend to explain the way of life and why things unfold in a particular manner. Some of these core values have been developed by Watson, Skinner and Tolman. They generated psychological perspectives that have been proven and are practical even in today’s life. In making these achievements, they had to make it look practical by using organisms and living things. This proved that indeed, the psychological perspectives and contributions are real. As such, these psychological connections have remained a strong foundation in schools and learning institutions as they are closely connected to the human way of life. This makes it easier to study and control the behavior of learners. In these perspectives, there are several contrasts while there are still many similarities. This is due to the basing point of the psychological perspectives, which try to explain the behavior and the conduct of organisms. The psychological perspectives of Watson, Skinner and Tolman are similar in that they are all inclined to discovering behavior and mannerisms. These psychological connections are set to provide a deeper perspective on the behavior and mannerisms of living things (Millon and Lerner, 2003). For instance, both used rats as their practical examples. Using rats as a practical way of showing behavior change according to the environment shows they used a universal standard of expressing their perspectives. As such, their findings were. In using rats as their practical examples, they had to ensure they studied their behaviors in length. This led to a plausible outcome as all of them noted the results. Finding proof in a research is a more elaborate way of making a positive impact in psychology. Watson, Skinner and Tolman’s psychological perspectives were inclined to the fact that organisms developed behavior according to some underlying factors. For example, they both believed that human beings function in the way they are, simply because of their behavior. Therefore, the behavior of a person directly affects a person’s functioning. They are closely related and should not be separated. In making a strong point out of this, these behaviorists had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that behavior affected a person’s functionality. Apparently, they both had to use their beliefs and assumptions that strengthened their viewpoints. In supporting their arguments, they had to indulge strong assumptions that led to their study findings. For example, they had a strong belief that behavior was a gradual process and improved on occasions (Millon and Lerner, 2003). From this point, people should learn through perseverance as they interact with the conditions on a day-today basis. Therefore, people and organisms have to keep improving their behavior and adapting to the environment. This makes a strong point in shaping up the behavior of organisms and people. Though they were both inclined to studying behavior and mannerisms, they had their contrasting points. These were some of the points that created a drift in the psychological perspectives, though each was trying to explain a similar point. First, Watson and Skinner had close connections in their psychological studies. They believed that people behaved according to their interaction with other factors in the environment or in their life. These are vital factors that affect the daily life of a person. These are some of the contributions that were highly effective in changing the psychological perspectives in psychology. They both had strong contributions to psychology by developing psychological aspects that are related to conditioning. They believed that organisms and people developed behavior according to the exposed conditions. If people are exposed on a daily condition, they will have to develop a behavior that will be in line with the condition (Millon and Lerner, 2003). This makes it easier to contain the situation. In developing the point further, they developed operant conditioning in psychological perspective. In this position, they stated that a person’s or organism’s behavior could be dependent on repeated behavior. People or organisms that repeat a certain behavior are likely to adopt that kind of behavior. This makes it a condition that is not easy to change. Therefore, an organism will continue to display the same behavior over time. In modern day, this psychological aspect is used in zoos to study animal behavior. However, Tolman expressed a different view in psychological perspective. He stated that behavior was not solely dependent on stimuli and response. This is to mean that he did not have the same perspective in development of behavior through stimuli and response. Tolman stated that a simple muscular stimulus was not a vital factor that changed a person’s behavior or way of conduct. Similarly, a simple glandular stimulus was not responsible for the change of behavior in a person. Therefore, there should be other factors that should change a person’s behavior rather than the two stimuli. In this perspective, Tolman was a stout supporter of cognitive purpose. Hew argued that behavior was not only dependent on stimuli but also depended on other factors of a personal life. In his explanation, he stated that people and organisms were also controlled by the fact that they had feelings and could think. A human being for instance, has to think and feel before reacting to some issues (Millon and Lerner, 2003). Therefore, stimuli can only assist in achieving the end result. For instance, a person that has seen many aircraft accidents, experienced plane crushes and runway accidents is likely to have negative feeling towards traveling in air crafts. As such, they will tend to avoid all the places where the only access route is aircraft. Similarly, they will tend to avoid any air travel in their life. In supporting his point further, Tolman suggested that this behavior can only be solved by the use of cognitive support and purposes. For example, people that have bad experiences with flights and aircraft mishaps can be assisted by use of cognitive behavior. These are people that have a bad feeling for aircrafts and flying in general. Therefore, they are not likely to board any aircraft. It strikes their thinking that the same thing or mishap is bound to happen again. However, cognitive response could be used to change their psychological thinking. In this particular incident, a person could be exposed to beautiful pictures of aircrafts, the cool ambience in aircrafts, the effective and satisfactory services and the crew that is managing the flight. This could be followed by a visit to an airport. After several visits to an airstrip, a person can be given ample time to relax in an aircraft without even flying. This will relieve the person’s feelings and way of thinking. This could be followed by short distance flights, which replenishes a person’s confidence in flying. After a series of short distance flights, a person is well prepared to take on long distance flights with relative ease. This proves Tolman’s point where behavior is developed by changing a person’s thinking and their way of reasoning (Millon and Lerner, 2003). Similarly, changing a person’s feelings is a factor that contributes in the making of a decision. In modern day, this perspective is used in treating people in hospitals. For example, it is used in hospitals when offering therapy to patients. These patients are taught how to deal with challenging situations through day-to-day reliance on cognitive responses. Reference Millon, T., & Lerner M. J. (2003). Handbook of psychology, personality and social psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Read More