Stimulus/Response Versus Input/Output Theory: An Orientation to the Syntax of Scientific Literature
There appears to be a steady desire within the scientific and lay community to explain events which occur in the universe in a concrete absolute fashion. This most likely extends from an unconscious (or conscious) need to control the world around us. Such control can give a sense of security regarding our future. If we can explain why events happen, we can attempt to predict when and for what reason events will precipitate sometime in the future. Being able to predict the future leads to a greater feeling of security and control.
However, it has been shown through decades of research that behavioral events are not predictable. Researchers tend to conclude that if they are to truly understand behavior then they must be able to develop a system which allows them to forecast the occurrence of certain behavior patterns. Conversely, if they are unable to state consecutively when and why a pattern is presented then they have failed to understand the event. In order to retain a sense that the universe is orderly the unpredictable results are often explained through the fault of the experimenter, that adequate control was not kept over the experimental situation. Through the Harvard Law of Animal Behavior ("under carefully controlled experimental circumstances, an animal will behave as it damned well pleases.") these "failed" experiments are incorporated into a succinct postulate which allows for the exploration of reason and desirability of such unpredictability (1).
Through lectures, reading, and World Wide Web research done during the current semester I am moving from a stimulus/response theory to an input/output theory. The stimulus/response theory let experimenters believe that the unpredictable behaviors (responses) they had observed were due to inadequately controlled stimuli. An input/output theory allows for, and seems to rest on, the fact that many behaviors originate from the internal (spontaneous) generation of outputs. Internal origination is fundamental to many aspects of commonly observed behavior (biological clocks, innate endogenous rhythm, and other innate behaviors) and the presence of these behaviors seems to rest on something other then concrete stimuli from the external world. The syntax of many of the studies found on the Web leads me to conclude that these scientists are searching for an input/output behavioral system yet are unable to adequately document such a clear relationship. This inability most likely stems from the recently discussed phenomena of bidirectionality within and outside the most broad input/output box (Lecture, Bio 202).
Polkinghorne asserts that “scientists are motivated by the desire understand what is happening in the world.”(551, Polkinghorne). As a physicist himself, Polkinghorne understands the desire to understand the world, even shifting careers to become a priest to better his understanding. Science asks how things happen, and does not attempt to answer every question. Questions asking why go ignored, as if they are not necessary to fully understand the world and the life that lives here. Science alone
The first theory Behavioral Determinism, lasted until 1950 and in the present’s days has some strong followers. This theory states that our reactions, develop in us by environmental conditioning, are the reflex of our actions. Behavioral Determinism, follows to the theory of knowledge of blank slate (tabula rasa) of David Hume. Behavioral determinism says that free will is an illusion and behavior is the result of stimulus and response association. Behavioral Determinism is the Nurture side of the Nurture versus Nature discussion.
Research Demonstration: The False Consensus Effect In science, we emphasize systematic, careful observation as a key to overcoming the limits of other methods of acquiring knowledge. That is, we trust systematic observation more than we trust our own intuition. We can actually investigate this issue. The following description provides you with the details necessary to conduct a simple study to investigate the accuracy of human intuition. We often believe that others are more like ourselves than they really are.
... are determined by the stimuli in the environment we are in. Behaviourists believe that all behaviour is learned and in turn can be unlearned by pinpointing the stimulus which is provoking the behaviour and changing the individuals learned response towards it.
Behavior is a phenotype that is, an observable characteristic we can measure. On the other hand, behavior is not just another phenotype. According to Robert Plomin in Behavioral Genetics, “Because behavior involves the action of the whole organism rather than the action of a single molecule, a single cell, or a single organ, behavior is the most complex phenomenon that can be studied genetically. Unlike some physical characteristics, behavior is dynamic, changing in response to the environment indeed, behavior is at the cutting edge of evolution text, because its focus is on the complexity of behavioral phenotypes”(2).
Telljohann, Susan Kay, Symons Cynthia Wolford, Dean F. Miller, and Dean F. Miller. Health Education: Elementary and Middle School Applications. Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill, 2001. Print.
Six hundred years ago western culture adopted the general scientific model as an unproven assumed perspective. The general scientific model developed as a phenomenon of knowledge that could be tested and replicated by all. The general scientific model presents a foundation of perception upon which theories, assumptions, and most beliefs are based off. Only confined by human limitations, the general scientific model is perceived to have endless possibilities of achievable knowledge. According to the general scientific model there are simply four basic assumptions that base the key to all knowledge: every event has a cause, causes can be known, humans can discover the causes of events, and ignorance of causes is due to improper tools (Portko,
Thorndike’s time in college and career did not pass without noticeable contribution or recognition. Galef (1998) wrote, “Thorndike's methods are so widely used in the behavioral sciences today that it is difficult to imagine that they once needed a champion” (p. 1129). During Thorndike’s time in Harvard, he developed theories from observing behaviors exhibited by animals. Thorndike found the animals used in his puzzle box tests demonstrated less insight than repeating accidental events in realizing ways to exit. This trial and error learning written in Thorndike’s dissertatio...
Speregen, Kathy. “Physical Education in America’s Public Schools”. University of Michigan. SiteMaker, n.d. Web. 26 April 2014
If we can harness/utilize the energy, motivation and sheer potential of their game-play and direct it toward learning, we can give students the tools to become winners in real game of life.
Learning through operant conditioning allows a conditioned behaviour to increase or decrease in the presence of reinforcement or punishment. However, this process can be affected by instinctive behaviours that would disrupt the conditioned behaviour. According to a study conducted by Breland and Breland (1961) they tried to condition a raccoon to pick up coins and drop them into a container. The raccoon however spent time rubbing the coins together and rubbing the coin on the inside of the container before finally dropping it in and receiving its food reinforcement. Even after conditioning, the raccoon’s need to rub the coins together became worse as he spent more and more time just rubbing the coins. This is known as instinctive drift where the raccoon’s instinctive behaviours limited its ability to perform the conditioned response. Therefore the raccoon failed to learn due to its innate tendencies that acted as a biological constraint and operant conditioning failed in teaching the raccoon through reinforcement.
Many events were unexplainable and maybe even seemed to be magical before science evolved to what it is today. All questions relating to the origin of life can be answered scientifically. One may question their beliefs based on scientific theory. Human life can be broken down to fundamental theory. Not only geological or biological, but also all events can be answered scientifically. Magic and magicians have certain function in society. The impossible becomes unexplainable, whether it is fact or fiction. But truly in the minds of magicians, their purpose in life is to leave a mystery, a mystery that science is unable to explain. They leave their mark and give people something to think about, a mark which will never be forgotten. Although magic is able to deceive the minds of many, few understand its effect of misdirection of the human mind.
Behaviorism is the point of view where learning and behavior are described and explained in terms of stimulus-response relationships. Behaviorists agree that an individual’s behaviors is a result of their interaction with the environment. Feedback, praise and rewards are all ways people can respond to becoming conditioned. The focus is on observable events instead of events that happen in one’s head. The belief that learning has not happened unless there is an observable change in behavior. “The earliest and most Ardent of behaviourists was Watson (1931; Medcof and Roth, 1991; Hill 1997). His fundamental conclusion from many experimental observations of animal and childhood learning was that stimulus-response (S-R) connections are more likely to be established the more frequently or recently an S-R bond occurs. A child solving a number problem might have to make many unsuccessful trials before arriving at the correct solution” (Childs, 2004).
The three essential aims of science are prediction, control and explanation. However, the greatest of these is scientific explanation. Scientific explanations are nothing but tentative proposals. They are offered in hope of capturing the best outlook on the matter. Scientific explanations however, are subject to evaluation as well as modification. They are valid deductive arguments whose conclusion is the event to be explained. The Scientific mode of explanation is more properly named the nomological-deductive type. It is also known as the DN account. This means that the explanation is deduced from law-like statements (from the Greeknomos= a law). For example, there is the law, or universal hypothesis, that whenever the Earth passes between the Sun and the Moon there is an eclipse of the Moon. Thus any particular eclipse may be explained as an instance of that general law. The general rule that provides the explanation is strengthened if it can be shown to be consistent with a more fundamental
In this essay, the role and benefits of Physical Education and School Sport will be identified from in and outside the school curriculum. The benefits that pupils have gained from the national school curriculum, what has changed from the past to present day in schools and how it has affected Physical Education in School Sport will be discussed. Also, mental and physical health benefits that occur from Physical Education will be mentioned in this essay along with what the teaching standards were like and how Physical education has changed such as different teaching ways.