Kantor Interbehaviorism: The 4 Principles Of This Theory
Jacob Robert Kantor (1888-1984) was the creator of interbehaviorism, a psychological and scientific model that coexisted with radical Skinnerian behaviorism and was strongly influenced by naturalistic philosophy.
In this article we will analyze Kantor’s four basic principles of interbehaviorism and its relationship with Skinner’s model.
Kantor coined the term “interbehaviorism” probably to differentiate his position from the classic model of behaviorist psychology, hegemonic in his time and very popular today: the “ER” (Stimulus-Response) scheme.
Kantor’s model defines a psychological field that is schematized as K = (es, o, f er, s, hi, ed, md), where “K” is a specific behavioral segment. Each of the rest of the abbreviations refers to one of the following variables:
Interbehaviorism is not only considered a psychological theory, but a general philosophical proposal, applicable to both psychology and the rest of the sciences, particularly those of behavior. In this sense, Moore (1984) highlights four basic principles that characterize Kantor’s interbehavioral psychology.
1. Naturalism
Naturalist philosophy defends that all phenomena are explainable by the natural sciences and that there is a clear interdependence between physical and unobservable events. Thus, this philosophy rejects the dualism between the organism and the mind, which it considers a manifestation of the biological substrate of the body when interacting with a certain environment.
Therefore, when analyzing any event it is essential to take into account the spatiotemporal context in which it occurs, since trying to study an isolated event is reductionist and meaningless. Kantor warned that psychology’s tendency toward mentalism interferes with its development as a science and must be denounced in any of its forms.
According to Kantor, there is no science that is superior to the rest, but rather the knowledge acquired by different disciplines must be integrated, and it is necessary for some to refute the approaches of others so that science can advance. For this, researchers should not look for a macrotheory but simply continue investigating and making proposals.
3. Multicausality
Interbehaviorism rejects traditional hypotheses and models of causality, which seek to explain the occurrence of certain events through linear and simple relationships. According to Kantor Causation must be understood as a complex process that integrates multiple factors in a given phenomenological field.
He also highlighted the probabilistic nature of science; In no case are certainties found, but it is only possible to generate explanatory models as close as possible to the underlying factors, from which it is impossible to obtain all the information.
4. Psychology as interaction between organism and stimuli
Kantor pointed out that the object of study of psychology should be interbehavior, that is, the bidirectional interaction between stimuli and responses of the organism. This interaction is more complex than those of sciences such as physics, since in psychology the development of behavioral patterns through the accumulation of experiences is very relevant.
Relationship with radical behaviorism
Kantor’s interbehavioral psychology and Burrhus Frederick Skinner’s radical behaviorism emerged around the same time. The relationship between both disciplines at its peak can be described as ambivalent, since both the similarities and differences between interbehaviorism and radical behaviorism They are evident.
The two models analyze behavior without using unobservable mediational variables, such as thoughts, emotions or expectations. In this way, they focus on studying the contingencies and causal relationships between behavior and its environmental determinants, avoiding the use of hypothetical constructs.
According to Morris (1984), the differences between interbehaviorism and radical behaviorism are basically a matter of emphasis or details; For example, Kantor did not agree with the Skinnerian perspective that behavior should be understood as a response, but rather conceived it as an interaction between different factors.
Schoenfeld (1969) stated that Kantor’s limited influence can be explained by the fact that His contributions were basically theoretical in nature since his main talent consisted of the analysis and criticism of current approaches and he sought to inspire others to follow a new direction in the field of psychology and science in general.
Bibliographic references:
Morris, E. K. (1984). Interbehavioral psychology and radical behaviorism: Some similarities and differences. The Behavior Analyst, 7 (2): 197-204.
Schoenfeld, W. N. (1969). JR Kantor’s Objective Psychology of Grammar and Psychology and Logic: A retrospective appreciation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12: 329-347.
