The selectionist meaning of C. S. Peirce and B. F. Skinner.
Words are not mirrors of ideas; they are responses kept alive by consequences—treat them that way in assessment and intervention.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The paper traces a single idea: words get their meaning through selection, not through hidden essences. It follows the thread from Darwin’s natural selection, to Peirce’s pragmatist semiotics, to Skinner’s verbal behavior. The author argues that all three thinkers treat consequences—not inner ideas—as the final judge of what a sign or word “means.”
What they found
There is no need to look inside the head for meaning. Once you see verbal behavior as a product of environmental selection, the mystery of “what words really stand for” disappears. The paper claims this view keeps behavior analysis consistent with modern biology and avoids mentalistic dead-ends.
How this fits with other research
Imam (2001) pinpoints Skinner’s 1945 paper as the moment he dropped mechanistic talk and fully embraced pragmatic selectionism; the 2002 article widens that lens to include Peirce and Darwin. Roche et al. (1997) review dozens of studies showing that topography-based verbal forms (speech, signs) are usually easier to teach first; the selectionist stance says the ease itself is a product of selection history, not a built-in advantage.
Petursdottir et al. (2023) extend the idea into AAC practice. They argue that array size, symbol clarity, and motor effort matter more than the old topography-versus-selection label. Their move from philosophical category to engineering detail shows how the selectionist view can guide real device choices.
Baum (2017) gives the stance mathematical flesh. He recasts “selection by consequences” with the Price equation, letting you quantify how response variants rise or fall within a single lifetime. Together, the four papers form a staircase: history, concept, clinical tool, and now numbers you can plot.
Why it matters
When a child’s mand fails, ask what consequence selected it, not what the child “really meant.” Check if the echoic is reinforced more clearly than the picture touch, or if the array is too crowded. Framing the problem as selection history keeps you focused on environmental levers you can actually move.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one client whose mands are weak; list the immediate consequences that follow each form, then swap in a stronger reinforcer for the target topography.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The selectionist meaning of C. S. Peirce and B. F. Skinner, which has an empirical existence, is advanced against essentialist meaning, which does not. Against a tradition that advocates essentialist meanings, the development of selectionist meaning is traced from Darwin through Peirce and on to Skinner. The views of Peirce and Skinner on meaning are presented as sharing a compatible conceptual foundation with contrasting but complementary distinctions. Support for selectionist meaning comes from contemporary dictionary construction, pragmatist philosophers, and recent views of scientific verbal behavior. Some implications are discussed.
The Analysis of verbal behavior, 2002 · doi:10.1007/BF03392972