B. F. Skinner: Myth and Misperception

A summary of the ideas in https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1207/s15328023top1902_1.

Many psychology students have misconceptions about Skinner’s work. This (referenced) paper aims to clear some of these ideas up. Despite his prestige in psychology, in his last public address, he labeled cognitive perspectives “the creationism of psychology.”

You can watch his last presentation here, if you’re curious. B. F. Skinner - APA Keynote Address

With how divisive Skinner’s perspectives were, it’s understandable that laymen and psychologists would reach erroneous conclusions of his work. By querying undergraduates, psychology graduates, and faculty, they identified the following areas of misconception:

A. the role of physiology and genetics in behavior, B. the extent to which all behavior can be conditioned, C. the uniqueness of the individual, D. the use of punishment in controlling behavior, and E. the existence of internal states.

From https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1207/s15328023top1902_1

These myths primarily from secondary literature covering Skinner’s work. In Skinner’s own book About Behaviorism, he identified some of these pain points, however still leaving those positions difficult to decipher for anyone lacking a strong science background.

Myth 1: Skinner Discounted the role of Physiology and Genetics in Behavior

Skinner focused on environmental variables not because he didn’t believe genetics and physiology were contributing factors, but because he felt said variables were impractical to control for.

Myth 2: Skinner Believed That any Behavior can be Conditioned

Skinner believed that some behaviors both had genetic basis and genetics would influence the ability for the organism to be conditioned in the first place. He also cautioned that if you suggest something can be explained by a science outside of psychology, it would be logical to attribute the explanation to the alternative field.

Myth 3: Skinner’s View of Humans Neglects the Uniqueness of the Individual

Skinner strongly believed individuals are unique. He explicitly states this, but this is supported in his research in that:

Many of his experiments involved single subjects, looking for changes in the individual.
He felt averaged data hid more than it exposed.
His laws of behavior were to be applied only in terms of the individual, not in aggregate.

He’s quoted saying:

When you have the responsibility of making absolutely sure that a given organism will engage in a given sort of behavior at a given time, you quickly grow impatient with principles, hypotheses, theorems, and statistical proof at the .05 level of significance… No one goes to the circus to see the average dog jump through a hoop significantly oftener than untrained dogs raised under the same circumstances. (p. 228)

Myth 4: Skinner Viewed Punishment as a Preferred Method of Behavior Control

Skinner was against punishment in reinforcement because:

It doesn’t teach the desired behavior.
It doesn’t (always) stop the undesired behavior.
It may result in worse behavior.

Myth 5: Skinner Denied the Existence of Internal States

He acknowledged that internal states exist. However, he felt they were irrelevant to functional analysis. Internal states and private events are unmeasurable, and therefore irrelevant to scientific study.

The rest of the article goes in to the details of the study, revealing the aforementioned five myths. As an extension or counterargument to this article, you may want to go read The Role of Cognition in Classical and Operant Conditioning.