THE epistemologies of parsimony: A review of <i>Ockham's razors: A user's manual</i> by Elliott Sober
Recording more than one response at a time could give numbers that challenge pure environmental accounts.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Smith read Sober’s book Ockham’s Razors and wrote a short review.
He asked one question: could animal data ever prove Skinner wrong?
The paper is pure philosophy—no new lab work, just clear reasoning.
What they found
Sober says Bayesian and frequentist ideas of “simple” are not the same.
If you record many response types, not just one, the numbers could favor a mental explanation over pure environment.
That would shake the radical-behaviorist claim that only outside events control behavior.
How this fits with other research
Leigland (1999) and Watson et al. (2007) use pragmatism to defend Skinner. They say values and science can live together. Smith (2017) adds a warning: hard data might still overturn Skinner.
Marr (1989) wants Newton-style equations for response rate. Smith likes the numbers idea but says the equation must fit multi-response data or it hides mental causes.
Malott (2018) tells practitioners to trust JABA first. Smith answers: before you trust, design the test that could fail—then you really know.
Why it matters
Next time you write a protocol, add a second response class. Watch both with equal care. If the simpler environmental story breaks, you will spot it early—and stay honest to the science.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Add one extra measure—like latency or topography—to your current target and graph both.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Sober analyzes two paradigms of parsimony that have been used successfully in science. These are associated with two interpretations of probability: Bayesian and frequentist. Sober applies these paradigms to problems in biology, psychology, and philosophy. In the chapter on psychology, he argues that objective data consisting of environmental input and two or more concurrent responses could be used to refute empirically the radical behaviorist thesis that probability of learned responses can be accounted for solely on the basis of environmental variables. Sober believes that such data are readily available and offers a thought experiment to illustrate his point. Behavior analysts, however, would want actual experimental data, undoubtedly with animals, before accepting any such refutation. Nonetheless, Sober's philosophical point about the type of experiment that would be capable of refuting this thesis is valid. The behavior analytic program, however, does not depend upon the truth of this thesis.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2017 · doi:10.1002/jeab.292