Logic, reasoning, and verbal behavior.

Hansen et al. (1989) wrote a theory paper. They asked, "Can we treat logic as learned verbal habits?"

They used Skinner's Verbal Behavior book as a lens. Propositions, rules, and "if-then" talk became operants shaped by praise and correction.

Logical statements are just more verbal behavior. They are mands, tacts, and autoclitics like any other words.

Reasoning is not a ghost in the machine. It is the speaker editing their own verbal responses under audience control.

de Rose (1986) gave us three building blocks: instructional control, equivalence classes, and autoclitics. Hansen et al. (1989) used those blocks to build a bridge to logic.

Schoneberger (1991) widened the bridge to "understanding." Both papers show Skinner's frame can swallow topics once owned by philosophy.

Embregts (2000) later warned, "Words are not things." That warning keeps the 1989 paper honest. It reminds us to watch what the verbal community does, not what the words "stand for."

You can stop hunting for hidden rules inside a learner's head. Look at the contingencies that shaped the verbal rule instead. When a teen says, "If I study, then I pass," treat that as a tact-autoclitic chain reinforced by report-card grades. Change the contingencies and the "logic" will follow.