Peter Killeen
Interested in ontologies, epistemologies, and models. I write on time, motivation, learning, schedules of reinforcement, ADHD, hypnosis, statistics, and discount functions. Recent interest in tobacco addiction.
Supervisors: David Hestenes, BF Skinner, Howard Rachlin, and Dave Cross
Address: Psychology
ASU
Tempe AZ
85287-1104
Supervisors: David Hestenes, BF Skinner, Howard Rachlin, and Dave Cross
Address: Psychology
ASU
Tempe AZ
85287-1104
less
InterestsView All (18)
Uploads
Papers by Peter Killeen
the appreciation of a sunset, sonnet, musical passage, or good joke. Mechner takes on the gamut of such aesthetic appreciations,
removed from the urgency of the primal ones, and gives us the first thorough attempt at a behavioral explication. Because he has
been so thorough and apt, my commentary can add little value to his thesis, only subtract from it. Therefore, rather than critique, I
exemplify, and then simplify. By reducing his voluminous report to two lines: a theorem and an equation, I thereby encapsulate
aesthetics in a sweet pill of spire. Aesthetic appreciation of this note may require a willing suspension of disbelief.
For 50 years Experimental Analysts of Behavior (EAB) have been riding the crests of waves raised by BF Skinner. His technical innovations and conceptual simplifications were a powerful breath of fresh air, and the large effect sizes engineered with contingencies of reinforcement
gave its practitioners confidence in their methods. The goals of EAB meanwhile went unexamined, its antimentalistic philosophy untested, and the gap between laboratory and life inevitably widened. This gap can only be bridged by renewed conversations on the fundamentals of our field, and new technologies to examine behavior that we have largely ignored. Interpretative accounts—showing that reinforcement may have played an important role in some complex or exceptional behavior—is no longer enough. To ensure a future for EAB several things must happen. We must learn that data have little value until embedded in a coherent
narrative; and the best of those are called theories. The biological EAB must reach levels up to biology/ethology/ecology; and levels down to physiology/neuroscience. The psychological EAB must recognize the value of bringing into our tool-box treatments of states such as affects and dispositions; operations such as attention, rumination, goal-setting, and reframing; and craft a better understanding of belief systems in general. The social EAB must strive to generalize basic laws formulated in open-loop controlled laboratory settings to dynamic interactive closed-loop processes with two or more interacting systems. To be successful these endeavors require respect for other approaches to these phenomena, and collaborations with scientists who know more about them than we yet do.
Response to commentaries on "Coal is not Black ..."; we incorporate the insights of colleagues on the role of dispositions and affordances in the control of behavior.
the appreciation of a sunset, sonnet, musical passage, or good joke. Mechner takes on the gamut of such aesthetic appreciations,
removed from the urgency of the primal ones, and gives us the first thorough attempt at a behavioral explication. Because he has
been so thorough and apt, my commentary can add little value to his thesis, only subtract from it. Therefore, rather than critique, I
exemplify, and then simplify. By reducing his voluminous report to two lines: a theorem and an equation, I thereby encapsulate
aesthetics in a sweet pill of spire. Aesthetic appreciation of this note may require a willing suspension of disbelief.
For 50 years Experimental Analysts of Behavior (EAB) have been riding the crests of waves raised by BF Skinner. His technical innovations and conceptual simplifications were a powerful breath of fresh air, and the large effect sizes engineered with contingencies of reinforcement
gave its practitioners confidence in their methods. The goals of EAB meanwhile went unexamined, its antimentalistic philosophy untested, and the gap between laboratory and life inevitably widened. This gap can only be bridged by renewed conversations on the fundamentals of our field, and new technologies to examine behavior that we have largely ignored. Interpretative accounts—showing that reinforcement may have played an important role in some complex or exceptional behavior—is no longer enough. To ensure a future for EAB several things must happen. We must learn that data have little value until embedded in a coherent
narrative; and the best of those are called theories. The biological EAB must reach levels up to biology/ethology/ecology; and levels down to physiology/neuroscience. The psychological EAB must recognize the value of bringing into our tool-box treatments of states such as affects and dispositions; operations such as attention, rumination, goal-setting, and reframing; and craft a better understanding of belief systems in general. The social EAB must strive to generalize basic laws formulated in open-loop controlled laboratory settings to dynamic interactive closed-loop processes with two or more interacting systems. To be successful these endeavors require respect for other approaches to these phenomena, and collaborations with scientists who know more about them than we yet do.
Response to commentaries on "Coal is not Black ..."; we incorporate the insights of colleagues on the role of dispositions and affordances in the control of behavior.
Reviewed for American Journal of Psychology, 2016, 129(3), 329-335.