| Abstract: | B. A. Williams's (see record 1990-21741-001) commentary on C. P. Shimp et al (see record 1990-21730-001) derives from his matching law perspective and shows chiefly that associative learner and the matching law are different. The choice of which theoretical approach is better depends on one's background views about the nature and purpose of theory, the nature of a free-operant behavior stream, and the suitability of classical methods and results for identifying and resolving critical theoretical problems such as identifying suitable analytical units and adequately characterizing how reinforcement reorganizes the local structure of the behavior stream. Williams' perspective, that of a molar position, needs further conceptual clarification and empirical support before it can be convincing. An alternative molecular view seems attractive for offering the promise of conceptually integrating molar and molecular empirical phenomena. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
