A.3: Explain behavior from the perspective of radical behaviorism.
Free practice questions for this part of the BCBA, with an explanation for every option.
An adult client tells a BCBA that before social events he thinks, 'Everyone will laugh at me,' and then avoids the event. Which interpretation of the client's thinking is most consistent with radical behaviorism?
- A. The thought is a private event. It is behavior that follows the same principles as overt behavior and is itself explained by environmental history.Correct. Radical behaviorism includes private events (thinking, feeling) as behavior inside the skin. They are governed by the same principles and are explained by environmental variables.
- B. The thought is a hypothetical construct that is best described with cognitive-processing terms.Explaining the thought with constructs at another dimension (cognitive processes) is mentalism, which radical behaviorism rejects.
- C. The thought is the inner cause of the avoidance, so treatment should target the thought directly.Treating a thought as an autonomous inner cause is a mentalistic explanation. A radical behaviorist treats the thought as behavior to be explained, not as the final cause.
- D. The thought cannot be observed publicly, so it falls outside a scientific analysis.Excluding unobservable events is the position of methodological behaviorism, not radical behaviorism.
At an IEP meeting, a team member says, 'Jaden hits peers because he's an aggressive kid.' When asked how they know he is aggressive, they answer, 'Because he hits peers.' From a radical behaviorist perspective, what is the main problem with this explanation?
- A. It fails to consider phylogenic contributions to aggression.Phylogenic history can matter, but leaving it out is not what makes this explanation invalid. The flaw is the circularity.
- B. It is circular. The label is an explanatory fiction that only renames the behavior it claims to explain.Correct. The cause ('aggressive') is inferred from the same behavior it is supposed to explain. This is circular reasoning, and the label is an explanatory fiction that gives no useful information about controlling variables.
- C. It relies on self-report rather than direct observation.The problem is not the data source. The team member's statement is based on observed hitting, but the reasoning is still flawed.
- D. It describes the behavior's topography but not its duration.Measurement dimensions are a separate issue. The statement fails as an explanation, not as a description.
Which statement would a radical behaviorist endorse but a methodological behaviorist reject?
- A. Behavior is best explained by referring to hypothetical constructs at a different dimensional level.Explaining behavior with hypothetical constructs at another dimensional level is mentalistic, and radical behaviorism explicitly rejects it. A radical behaviorist would not endorse this statement.
- B. Only events that can be observed by more than one person are appropriate subject matter for a science of behavior.This publicly-observable-only rule defines methodological behaviorism. Radical behaviorism rejects it.
- C. Mental states are the ultimate causes of observable behavior.Treating mental states as ultimate causes is mentalism. A radical behaviorist rejects this, so it cannot be the answer.
- D. Events that occur within the skin, such as covert self-talk, can be included in a scientific account of behavior.Correct. Radical behaviorism, Skinner's position, includes private events in its analysis. Methodological behaviorism excludes them because they cannot be publicly agreed upon.