1-Behaviorism
Behaviorism promised to make psychology a science by insisting on observable, measurable events, and by not allowing unseen, hypothetical constructs or personality traits to be used in the understanding of behavior. On the surface, this makes sense to many people. After all, we cannot see an id, ego, or superego, and to say that someone suffers from neurotic anxiety simply labels an observation, and that under certain circumstances this individual displays these behaviors.
Furthermore, the behaviors are often positively or negatively reinforced, which strengthens the likelihood that these behaviors will show up again under similar circumstances in the future. To ascribe them to “defense mechanisms” or other unconscious motivations is at best pointless, and at worst, misleading.
Please respond to one of the following prompts:
Based on the issues above, defend the behaviorist position or critique it from a psychoanalytic position. What, from your perspective, makes behaviorist assertions valid or invalid in this argument?
Briefly discuss how the new school of thought of behaviorism contributed to the growth of psychology as a professional discipline. What historical events, situations, or circumstances contributed to the rise of behaviorism in the United States?
Resources
To prepare for this week’s discussion, please read the following:
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2016). A history of modern psychology (11th ed.). Cengage.
Chapter 8, “Applied Psychology: The Legacy of Functionalism,” pages 162–175.
Chapter 9, “Behaviorism: Antecedent Influences,” pages 189–210.
Chapter 10, “Behaviorism: The Beginnings,” pages 211–234.
Delprato, D. J., & Midgley, B. D. (1992). Some fundamentals of B. F. Skinner’s behaviorism. The American Psychologist, 47(11), 1507–1520.
Minton, H. L. (1998). Introduction to “New methods for the diagnosis of the intellectual level of subnormals.” http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Binet/intro.htm
Skinner, B. F. (1948). “Superstition” in the pigeon. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Skinner/Pigeon/
Wozniak, R. H. (1999). Introduction to “Hereditary genius.” http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Galton/wozniak.htm
2-Types of Validity
In this week’s readings, you read about three types of validity evidence:
Construct.
Criterion (predictive and concurrent).
Content.
In your discussion post for this week, follow the guidelines below:
Compare and contrast the different types of validity evidence in terms of their purpose, procedures, and types of tests that collect each type of evidence.
Select a standardized psychological test used in your specialization or a related profession (preferably not one of the three you selected for your course project) and provide two examples of construct, criterion-related, and content evidence that could be collected to support the validity of your selected test.
Resources
Validity
Use your Psychological Testing and Assessment text to read or review the following:
Chapter 6, “Validity,” pages 193–220.
Complete the following Capella multimedia:
Validity.
Validity Exercise.
Testing Norms
Use your Psychological Testing and Assessment text to read or review the following:
Information on norms on pages 140–156.
Information on measures of cognitive ability and productivity on pages 611–617.
https://media.capella.edu/CourseMedia/psy-fp7610element17146/wrapper.asp
https://media.capella.edu/CourseMedia/PSY-FP7610Element17147/wrapper.asp
