Article Abstract:
Horne and Lowe's paper actually contradicts many of Skinner's theories despite claiming to embrace his precepts. For instance, Skinner rejects descriptions or explanations based on meaning, and does not consider verbal behavior as different from nonverbal behavior in principle. Skinner also views listening as having a central role and recognizes different processes producing unique forms or sequences of verbal behavior. Finally, he believes that the functional unit of verbal operant takes the place of structural units of language. All these are challenged by Horne and Lowe.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
Horne and Lowe are to be praised for including names as basic elements of verbal behavior and formulating a credible behavior-analytic account of the origin, development and functions of naming in childhood. However, the second half of their paper has certain shortcomings that have to be addressed. In this section, they proposed that naming is a necessary and adequate explanation of stimulus equivalence. Their arguments supporting this claim are merely circumstantial and do not not critically test their position.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
Horne and Lowe's account of naming is a highly commendable paper that widens understanding of the first few stages of the process of language development and the phenomena of stimulus equivalence observed in the matching-to-sample experiment. However, it has two major flaws. One is its failure to acknowledge that sentences are the functional units of languages. The other is its failure to recognize the three senses of the word 'tact' as used by Skinner in 'Verbal Behavior.'
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic: