PSYC 6717 week 6 Discussion: Applications of Philosophical Underpinnings

PSYC 6717 week 6 Discussion: Applications of Philosophical Underpinnings

To Prepare:

1. Examine this week’s Learning Resources to understand the fundamental philosophical principles underpinning applied behavior analysis: selectionism, determinism, empiricism, parsimony, and pragmatism.
2. Discover an article from the behavior analysis literature (published from 2012 to the present) that discusses an intervention addressing a practical concern.
3. Review the interactive media in the Learning Resources, titled “Philosophical Foundations of Behavior Analysis.”

By Day 4 of Week 6:

Share the article title you’ve chosen and provide a concise summary of the article. Also, assess how each philosophical foundation of behavior analysis is applied in the article, covering selectionism, determinism, empiricism, parsimony, and pragmatism. Ensure to include a proper APA-formatted reference and a link to the article.

Elizabeth Walker iHuman Reflection NRP/563: Management Of Women’s Health Issues

Take time to read your peers’ contributions.

Note: To engage in this discussion, you must submit your initial post before accessing and responding to your classmates’ posts. Start by clicking the “To Participate in this Discussion” link, then choose “Create Thread” to compose your initial post. Keep in mind that once you submit your post, you can’t modify or delete it, and you can’t post anonymously. Please review your post thoroughly before hitting the submit button!

By Day 6 of Week 6:

Respond to at least two colleagues’ posts by elaborating on how the article either aligns with or deviates from each of the philosophical underpinnings of behavior analysis. Provide concrete examples.

Ensure your contributions are well-supported with explicit references to behavior-analytic theories and research. In addition to the Learning Resources, explore the Walden Library and/or the internet for peer-reviewed articles to back up your posts and responses. Maintain proper APA format and citations, including those from the Learning Resources.

Revisit this discussion after a few days to review the responses to your initial post. Reflect on what you’ve learned and the insights gained from your peers’ comments in PSYC 6717 Week 6 Discussion: Applying Philosophical Foundations.

PSYC 6717 week 6 Discussion: Applications of Philosophical Underpinnings

This week, we delve into the practical applications of philosophical principles in the field of psychology. Making reasonable deductions from a study is reliant on a few key elements: establishing cause-and-effect connections, connecting initial conditions, removing logical errors, and using a data-based approach to confirm our conclusions. In our current study, we’ve anchored our philosophical principles on the idea that there’s a cause-and-effect relationship between the psychological effects of adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine in other people and the hesitancy of those who haven’t been vaccinated. These implications are vital because they ensure that our future research questions in this area are founded on a strong rationale. This, in turn, allows us to extend our studies on how people receive vaccines. Whether someone agrees or disagrees with getting vaccinated is closely tied to their past psychological experiences with how the vaccine affects those who’ve already received it.

These foundational elements, like causation, generalizability of findings, and the consequences of our results, are essential in our study. The study asserts that memories of adverse vaccine reactions in people we know or have heard of lead to vaccine hesitancy. While the principle of generalizability applies to some extent, as people who reject vaccines due to emotional reactions often belong to the same group, it’s crucial to avoid making hasty generalizations about vaccine hesitancy due to psychological disagreement. To do this, we use data to provide information about the number of people who are likely to agree or disagree with the vaccine. By doing this, we ensure that we don’t fall into the trap of making irrelevant arguments (ignoratio elenchi). Therefore, the application of sound reasoning is the driving force behind the philosophical foundation of our study, aligning with the theoretical framework of our work.

References

Hitchcock, D. (2017). The Role of Fallacies in Teaching Reasoning and Critical Thinking. In the book “On Reasoning and Argument” (pp. 401-408). Springer, Cham.

Exploring the Relevance of Philosophy in Behavior Analysis

Have you ever wondered why it’s essential to understand the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings of behavior analysis? This week, our learning resources highlight the importance of behavior analytic theory and philosophy in applied behavior analysis. What sets behavior analysis apart are its unique characteristics: a perspective rooted in natural science and the comprehensive integration of its components. The natural science perspective emphasizes the significance of using observable and socially significant events as the basis for constructs, as opposed to relying on hypothetical constructs, which are prevalent in traditional psychology and other helping professions.

Comprehensive and integrated components are key features of behavior analysis, exemplified by the interconnectedness of behavior analytic theory, philosophy, experimental analysis of behavior, applied behavior analysis, and the delivery of behavioral services. Attention to this systemic, natural science approach and the coordinated integration of these components is what sets behavior analysis apart as a distinctive field. This serves as the foundation for behavioral interventions, especially given that behavior analysts often work alongside professionals who adhere to hypothetical constructs that can be counterproductive to behavioral goals.

In his book, “Radical Behaviorism for ABA Practitioners,” James M. Johnston outlines several reasons why ABA practitioners should understand the philosophical foundations of their field. This understanding helps bridge the gap between scientific and everyday beliefs about behavior, enables practitioners to persuade clients and other professionals to support effective ABA objectives and procedures, maintains consistency between the field’s science and its practical applications, and safeguards against the confusion that everyday language can introduce.

In our upcoming discussion, you will select an article from the behavior analytic literature (published from 2012 to the present) that describes an intervention addressing a practical concern. You’ll then assess how the article embodies the philosophical foundations of behavior analysis, including selectionism, determinism, empiricism, parsimony, and pragmatism. Remember to provide the article’s title and a brief summary, along with your evaluation of how it aligns with these philosophical principles.

Incorporating Evidence-Based Practice into Behavioral Analysis

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a professional strategy where practitioners merge the most reliable evidence with their clients’ beliefs, contexts, and clinical abilities to provide effective assistance. This framework lays the groundwork for behavior analysts to apply the most dependable evidence available in their complex working environments. According to the article, behavior analysis avoids using hypothetical constructs in any of its work areas.

Recognizing the importance of having a clear and precise understanding of the strength of the evidence supporting interventions, along with the critical contextual factors that influence decision-making, and the pivotal role of clinical expertise, is central. For instance, the article emphasizes that behavior analysts primarily describe behavior without delving into diagnoses, disorders, or cognitive constructs. This theory and framework for EBP align with well-established models in medicine, science, and other professions. This method can enhance our understanding of treatment decisions across various systems, facilitate cooperation with external organizations such as insurance companies and grant agencies, and promote the systematic use of research evidence in making behavioral judgments.

Reference

Fryling, M. J. (2013). Theory, Philosophy, and the Practice of Applied Behavior Analysis. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 14(1), 45–54. [DOI: 10.1080/15021149.2013.11434444]

Is there anything specific you’d like to discuss further or any questions you have regarding these topics?