Practitioner Development

B. F. Skinner and G. H. Mead: on biological science and social science.

Blackman (1991) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1991
★ The Verdict

Skinner folds biology and social context into one story so you can stop juggling two explanations.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who write treatment plans or supervise staff.
✗ Skip if Clinicians looking for quick data sheets or protocol graphs.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Mazur (1991) compares Skinner’s ideas with those of social scientist G. H. Mead.

The paper argues that Skinner’s science links body-level selection with social-level rules.

No data were collected; the piece is a close reading of both writers’ texts.

02

What they found

Skinner’s frame treats every act as both biologically selected and socially shaped.

That single lens keeps biology and culture in the same picture, unlike split psychologies.

03

How this fits with other research

Emerson (2003) extends the same unity by giving you three tools to swap mental talk for behavior talk.

Abbott (2013) conceptually replicates Skinner’s 1945 warning: stop defining words and start analyzing the contingencies that control them.

Parrott (1984) seems to clash by pairing Skinner with Kantor instead of biology, but the goal is the same—one coherent base for behavior analysis.

Michael (2003) turns the unity idea into a teaching rule: keep Science and Human Behavior open on your desk and interpret every case with it.

04

Why it matters

When you write a plan you no longer need separate "biological" and "social" sections. You can state how evolution gave the response form and how the verbal community maintains it. One paragraph, one science, cleaner notes and clearer parents.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Write your next plan in one short paragraph that names both the biological reinforcer and the social cue that keeps the behavior alive.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
theoretical
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

Skinner's contributions to psychology provide a unique bridge between psychology conceptualized as a biological science and psychology conceptualized as a social science. Skinner focused on behavior as a naturally occurring biological phenomenon of interest in its own right, functionally related to surrounding events and, in particular (like phylogenesis), subject to selection by its consequences. This essentially biological orientation was further enhanced by Skinner's emphasis on the empirical foundations provided by laboratory-based experimental analyses of behavior, often with nonhuman subjects. Skinner's theoretical writings, however, also have affinity with the traditions of constructionist social science. The verbal behavior of humans is said to be subject, like other behavior, to functional analyses in terms of its environment, in this case its social context. Verbal behavior in turn makes it possible for us to relate to private events, a process that ultimately allows for the development of consciousness, which is thus said to be a social product. Such ideas make contact with aspects of G. H. Mead's social behaviorism and, perhaps of more contemporary impact in psychology, L. Vygotsky's general genetic law of cultural development. Failure to articulate both the biological and the social science aspects of Skinner's theoretical approach to psychology does a disservice to his unique contribution to a discipline that remains fragmented between two intellectual traditions.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1991 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1991.55-251