I rapporten undersöks om det på kort sikt blir någon skillnad i elevers kunskapsutveckling beroende på om de arbetar utifrån ett behavioristiskt kontra sociokulturellt inlärningsteoretiskt perspektiv. Dessutom belyses positiva och negativa sidor med de olika arbetsmetoderna. Studien genomfördes i parallellklasser i årskurs 5 där den ena klassen arbetade sociokulturellt, den andra behavioristiskt, under ett lektionstillfälle. Elevernas kunskapsutveckling synliggjordes och jämfördes genom att låta dem göra en för- och efterhandsdiagnos. Efteråt genomfördes också intervjuer för att få fram elevernas syn på arbetssätten. Det fanns ingen större skillnad mellan de båda klassernas resultat. Av intervjuerna framkom dock att den sociokulturella arbetsmetoden ansågs mer engagerande och lustfylld än den behavioristiska. Vi tror att en enstaka lektion är för lite för att kunna hitta signifikanta skillnader mellan olika inlärningsmetoder. Det skulle vara intressant att göra samma undersökning under en längre tidsperiod i framtiden för att få fram ett resultat med högre grad av reliabilitet och validitet. Den här studien är intressant för den belyser skillnader i hur man som lärare kan arbeta i klassrummet och att kunskapstillägnande kan ske på olika sätt. / This study examine during a short period of time, if there is a difference in students knowledge development depending on whether the teaching method is based on a behavioral or sociocultural learning theory.  In addition, positive and negative aspects of each method are highlighted. The study was conducted in parallel classes in grades 5, where one class worked sociocultural and the other behavioral during the length of one lesson. Students' knowledge was visualized and compared by having them do a pre- and post-lesson diagnosis. Afterwards, interviews were also conducted to obtain students' views on working methods. There was no significant difference between the two classes' results. The interviews revealed that the sociocultural working method was more engaging and enjoyable than the behavioral. We believe that a single lesson is too little to be able to find significant differences between different learning theories, it would be interesting to do the same study for a long time in the future to get a result with more reliability and validity. This study is interesting for highlighting differences in how teachers can work in the classroom and that knowledge development can be achieved in different ways.

Thesis (MA (Psychology))--University of Stellenbosch, 2005. / The first objective of the present study was to determine whether the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) could predict dietary and fluid adherence among in-centre hemodialysis patients attending government hospitals in the Western Cape.

This paper puts forth a radical behaviorist approach to legal theory according to which law is a set of behavioral contingencies which control the behavior of individuals according to politically defined goals. Based on the proposition that modern legal systems, because of their inherent contingency and chronic mutability, are irremediably instrumental to politically defined social goals, and on the radical behaviorist fundamental assumption that a science of human behavior is possible, the paper develops what can be called a radical behaviorist perspective on social systems theory. According to this perspective, a social system is neither a collection of individuals nor of individual acts, but a class of interconnected behavioral patterns or cultural practices conditioned and maintained through the same generalized reinforcer, which, in the case of law, is the dichotomy between legal versus illegal. To construct this radical behaviorist perspective on social systems theory, the paper relies on three major theoretical foundations. The first one is a criticism of Skinner’s concept of verbal behavior according to which instead of a special kind of behavior, it is defined as nothing but the human species-specific operant control of the vocal musculature by social reinforcement contingencies. The second one is to propose a more functional alternative to Skinner’s concept of human social behavior as that kind of operant behavior which is conditioned and maintained by other people’s behavior. The third one is a dialogue between radical behaviorism and Luhmann’s social systems theory, whose main purpose is to provide radical behaviorism with a more sophisticated description of modern society which, despite several differences, is also radically anti-individualistic and evolutionary. The final part of the paper is a detailed discussion of how law controls human behavior.

The conditional control of equivalence has received much attention in the analysis of verbal behavior. While previous research identified conditional control of relational responding and conditional control of equivalence class formation, this study investigated the possibility of conditional control of members of an equivalence class. Following baseline conditional discrimination training and equivalence testing, subjects were taught to select a particular member in the presence of a Green background screen and another member in the presence of a Red background screen.

To prevent a partner's infidelity and relationship defection, men perform mate retention behaviors. Some of these mate retention behaviors are high-risk because they decrease the likelihood of infidelity while potentially increasing the likelihood of relationship defection. Although previous research has indicated that mate value may be related to mate retention generally, research has not addressed these cost-inflicting mate retention behaviors specifically. The current research examines the relationship between men's and women's mate values and men's use of partner-directed insults - a specific type of cost-inflicting mate retention behavior. The results from a sample of 158 women indicate that although men's and women's mate values predict men's partner-directed insults, men's mate value is a better predictor than is women's mate value. Women who report that their partners have lower mate value also report that their partners insult them more frequently than women who report that their partners have higher mate value. / by Emily J. Miner. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2009. / Includes bibliography. / Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2009. Mode of access: World Wide Web.

O objetivo foi investigar como a natureza do reforçador afeta o comportamento humano em FI após diferentes histórias de reforço. Universitários foram expostos inicialmente a um de três programas de reforço: FR 40, DRL 20 s ou FI 10 s por três sessões de 15 minutos cada. As contingências de reforço foram programadas com o software ProgRef e a conseqüência para a resposta de pressionar um botão era pontos. Para alguns participantes os pontos eram trocados por fotocópias (Condição 1), para outros os pontos eram trocados por dinheiro (Condição 2), enquanto para outros os pontos não eram trocados por nada (Condição 3). Subseqüentemente, os participantes com história de FR e DRL foram expostos a um programa de reforço em FI 10 s e os participantes submetidos inicialmente ao FI 10 s tiveram o parâmetro do FI alterado para 5, 20 ou 30 s, por três sessões de 15 minutos cada. Os participantes da Condição 3-Pontos, expostos a histórias de responder em FR ou DRL, foram submetidos a cinco sessões de Extinção após as sessões de FI. Os participantes expostos ao FR apresentaram um padrão de responder em taxa alta e constante independentemente do tipo de reforçador utilizado. Quando a contingência mudou de FR para FI a taxa de respostas permaneceu alta para os participantes das Condições 1-Fotocópia e Condição 2-Dinheiro, mas diminuiu para a maioria dos participantes da Condição 3-Pontos. Os participantes expostos inicialmente ao DRL apresentaram um responder em taxa baixa tanto sob a contingência de DRL quanto sob a de FI subseqüente, independentemente da condição de reforço. Apesar desse efeito de persistência comportamental, houve uma diminuição no IRT quando a contingência mudou, o que sugere que o responder era controlado também pela contingência de FI presente. O tipo de reforçador empregado parece ter afetado a probabilidade de que os participantes expostos inicialmente a um programa de reforço em FI 10 s exibissem uma taxa de respostas alta (participantes da Condição 2-Dinheiro) ou baixa (participantes da Condição 3-Pontos). O tipo de reforçador empregado parece ter afetado também o padrão de responder dos participantes quando a parâmetro do FI mudou de 10 para 5, 20 ou 30 segundos. O padrão de responder da maioria dos participantes das Condições 1 e 3 (Fotocópia e Pontos, respectivamente) mudou quando o parâmetro do FI foi alterado, enquanto que o padrão dos participantes da Condição 2-Dinheiro permaneceu o mesmo. Quando a contingência de reforço dos participantes da Condição 3-Pontos foi alterada de FI para extinção houve uma mudança no padrão comportamental tanto dos participantes que tinham história de responder sob FR quanto daqueles com história de responder em DRL. Tomados em conjunto os resultados sugerem que: (a) o comportamento dos participantes foi controlado tanto pela história de reforço quanto pelas contingências presentes; (b) a natureza do reforçador empregado pode favorecer o responder em taxa alta e constante sob FI – tanto após exposição a uma contingência de FR quanto quando o FI é programado desde o início (i.e., sem história experimental prévia a nenhuma outra contingência de reforço). Os resultados do presente estudo assemelham-se àqueles obtidos em outros estudos com organismos humanos e não-humanos respondendo sob programas de reforço e sugerem que as diferenças entre o comportamento de humanos e não-humanos sob programas de reforço podem ser atribuídas tanto à história de condicionamento quanto a diferenças de procedimento entre os estudos com humanos e não-humanos. Os resultados também sugerem que a natureza do reforçador é uma variável importante para modular os efeitos da história experimental sobre o comportamento de seres humanos. / In the present study it was investigated how the nature of reinforcer affects the human behavior on FI reinforcement schedule under different histories of reinforcement. College students were initially exposed to one of three reinforcement schedules: FR 40, DRL 20 s or FI 10 s for 15 minutes each. A computer software, ProgRef, was used to program contingencies of reinforcement. So, if the subject gave a click on the left button of mouse, a number correspondent to the number of reinforced response pop out on the monitor screen. That number was equivalent to points, and some students could exchange their points for photocopies (Condition 1), other for money (Condition 2), and other could not exchange for anything (Condition 3). Later, students whose behaviors have been reinforced in FR and DRL schedules (histories) went to a FI 10 s reinforcement schedule and the ones who had already been exposed to the FI 10 s had their FI parameter altered to 5, 20 or 30 s during three sessions of 15 min each. Before being exposed to histories of responding in FR or DRL, Condition 3-Points participants were exposed to five Extinction sessions after being exposed to FI 10 s sessions. All students exposed to FR had high rates of responding, independently of the nature of reinforcer. When the contingencies changed from FR to FI, response rates remained high in the Conditions 1 and 2 (Photocopies and Money), but it deeply decreased in the Condition 3. Students exposed to DRL history presented a low rate of response under both DRL and FI contingencies, independently of the nature of reinforcement. Despite this behavioral persistence effect, the IRT decreased when contingency changed from DRL 20 s to FI 10 s. This suggests that the pattern responding was also under controlling of contingency of reinforcement current. The nature of reinforcer affected the students’ behavior in FI 10 s even then had no previous experimental history. A high rates of responses was produced by students in the Condition 2-Money while a low rates of responses was produced by most students in the Condition 3-Points. The nature of reinforcer also influenced the students’ behaviors pattern as FI value changed from 10 to 5, 20 or 30 s. Results show that students’ behaviors pattern changed as FI value was altered as in the sequence before in the Conditions 1 and 3. However, it did not change at the same way as FI value was altered in the Condition 2. As contingencies of reinforcement, in the Condition 3, were altered from FI to extinction schedules, subjects’ behaviors under FR and DRL schedules showed a different pattern. Taken as a whole the results suggests that: first, participants’ behavior seemed to be controlled either by reinforcement history or by contingency of reinforcement; Second, the nature of reinforcement may be produced both high and low rates of response under FI – both after FR contingency exposure and when FI is programmed from the beginning (i.e., with no previous experimental history to no other reinforcement contingency). The results of the present study are in agreement to most those studies carried out with human and non-human responding under reinforcement schedules and suggest that the discrepancies between the behavior of humans and non-humans on schedules of reinforcement maybe attributed to both conditioning history and procedural differences between human and non-human research procedures. Also, the results here presented suggest that the nature of reinforcer is an important variable to modulate the effects of experimental history on the human behaviors.

The purpose of this quantitative research study was to compare Chinese and American students’ inclined level of critical thinking using the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) (Insight Assessment, 2013). The literature of Paul and Elder (1996, 2000, 2005, 2010), Facione and Facione (1992, 1996) and Brookfield (2005, 2010, 2013) and the conceptual framework in this study provided the foundation for the main research question of whether there are differences between Chinese and American students’ scores on the seven individual scales and their total score on the CCTDI. The Sample included 41 Chinese and 50 American undergraduate and graduate students at Florida Atlantic University, a regional research university located in southeast Florida. Independent t-tests concluded that there were no differences between the 41 Chinese students and the 50 American students regarding their critical thinking dispositions on each of seven scales on the CCTDI. A factorial analysis of variance measured moderator questions to determine whether there was a difference between Chinese and American students’ CCTDI scores based on student gender, discipline of study, undergraduate or graduate status, or enrollment as an undergraduate within the United States. There were significant differences between the critical thinking dispositions of Chinese and American undergraduate and graduate students when comparing the scale of open mindedness and gender. There were also significant differences for the scale of confidence in reasoning and discipline. For the remaining questions, there were no significant differences. A Pearson’s correlation determined that there was no relationship between the length of time students had been in the United States and their scores on the CCTDI. Educational implications include that when problem-solving skills are developed in the college setting, critical thinking can be cultivated to help prepare students for work in future employment settings. Social implications include the use of critical thinking when faced with decision making in adults’ lives, as well as in their daily work. This study may be the foundation for future studies. Finally, educators may find the CCTDI helpful in positioning students’ critical thinking dispositions prior to learning or training activities. / Includes bibliography. / Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2014. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

O objetivo foi investigar como a natureza do reforçador afeta o comportamento humano em FI após diferentes histórias de reforço. Universitários foram expostos inicialmente a um de três programas de reforço: FR 40, DRL 20 s ou FI 10 s por três sessões de 15 minutos cada. As contingências de reforço foram programadas com o software ProgRef e a conseqüência para a resposta de pressionar um botão era pontos. Para alguns participantes os pontos eram trocados por fotocópias (Condição 1), para outros os pontos eram trocados por dinheiro (Condição 2), enquanto para outros os pontos não eram trocados por nada (Condição 3). Subseqüentemente, os participantes com história de FR e DRL foram expostos a um programa de reforço em FI 10 s e os participantes submetidos inicialmente ao FI 10 s tiveram o parâmetro do FI alterado para 5, 20 ou 30 s, por três sessões de 15 minutos cada. Os participantes da Condição 3-Pontos, expostos a histórias de responder em FR ou DRL, foram submetidos a cinco sessões de Extinção após as sessões de FI. Os participantes expostos ao FR apresentaram um padrão de responder em taxa alta e constante independentemente do tipo de reforçador utilizado. Quando a contingência mudou de FR para FI a taxa de respostas permaneceu alta para os participantes das Condições 1-Fotocópia e Condição 2-Dinheiro, mas diminuiu para a maioria dos participantes da Condição 3-Pontos. Os participantes expostos inicialmente ao DRL apresentaram um responder em taxa baixa tanto sob a contingência de DRL quanto sob a de FI subseqüente, independentemente da condição de reforço. Apesar desse efeito de persistência comportamental, houve uma diminuição no IRT quando a contingência mudou, o que sugere que o responder era controlado também pela contingência de FI presente. O tipo de reforçador empregado parece ter afetado a probabilidade de que os participantes expostos inicialmente a um programa de reforço em FI 10 s exibissem uma taxa de respostas alta (participantes da Condição 2-Dinheiro) ou baixa (participantes da Condição 3-Pontos). O tipo de reforçador empregado parece ter afetado também o padrão de responder dos participantes quando a parâmetro do FI mudou de 10 para 5, 20 ou 30 segundos. O padrão de responder da maioria dos participantes das Condições 1 e 3 (Fotocópia e Pontos, respectivamente) mudou quando o parâmetro do FI foi alterado, enquanto que o padrão dos participantes da Condição 2-Dinheiro permaneceu o mesmo. Quando a contingência de reforço dos participantes da Condição 3-Pontos foi alterada de FI para extinção houve uma mudança no padrão comportamental tanto dos participantes que tinham história de responder sob FR quanto daqueles com história de responder em DRL. Tomados em conjunto os resultados sugerem que: (a) o comportamento dos participantes foi controlado tanto pela história de reforço quanto pelas contingências presentes; (b) a natureza do reforçador empregado pode favorecer o responder em taxa alta e constante sob FI – tanto após exposição a uma contingência de FR quanto quando o FI é programado desde o início (i.e., sem história experimental prévia a nenhuma outra contingência de reforço). Os resultados do presente estudo assemelham-se àqueles obtidos em outros estudos com organismos humanos e não-humanos respondendo sob programas de reforço e sugerem que as diferenças entre o comportamento de humanos e não-humanos sob programas de reforço podem ser atribuídas tanto à história de condicionamento quanto a diferenças de procedimento entre os estudos com humanos e não-humanos. Os resultados também sugerem que a natureza do reforçador é uma variável importante para modular os efeitos da história experimental sobre o comportamento de seres humanos. / In the present study it was investigated how the nature of reinforcer affects the human behavior on FI reinforcement schedule under different histories of reinforcement. College students were initially exposed to one of three reinforcement schedules: FR 40, DRL 20 s or FI 10 s for 15 minutes each. A computer software, ProgRef, was used to program contingencies of reinforcement. So, if the subject gave a click on the left button of mouse, a number correspondent to the number of reinforced response pop out on the monitor screen. That number was equivalent to points, and some students could exchange their points for photocopies (Condition 1), other for money (Condition 2), and other could not exchange for anything (Condition 3). Later, students whose behaviors have been reinforced in FR and DRL schedules (histories) went to a FI 10 s reinforcement schedule and the ones who had already been exposed to the FI 10 s had their FI parameter altered to 5, 20 or 30 s during three sessions of 15 min each. Before being exposed to histories of responding in FR or DRL, Condition 3-Points participants were exposed to five Extinction sessions after being exposed to FI 10 s sessions. All students exposed to FR had high rates of responding, independently of the nature of reinforcer. When the contingencies changed from FR to FI, response rates remained high in the Conditions 1 and 2 (Photocopies and Money), but it deeply decreased in the Condition 3. Students exposed to DRL history presented a low rate of response under both DRL and FI contingencies, independently of the nature of reinforcement. Despite this behavioral persistence effect, the IRT decreased when contingency changed from DRL 20 s to FI 10 s. This suggests that the pattern responding was also under controlling of contingency of reinforcement current. The nature of reinforcer affected the students’ behavior in FI 10 s even then had no previous experimental history. A high rates of responses was produced by students in the Condition 2-Money while a low rates of responses was produced by most students in the Condition 3-Points. The nature of reinforcer also influenced the students’ behaviors pattern as FI value changed from 10 to 5, 20 or 30 s. Results show that students’ behaviors pattern changed as FI value was altered as in the sequence before in the Conditions 1 and 3. However, it did not change at the same way as FI value was altered in the Condition 2. As contingencies of reinforcement, in the Condition 3, were altered from FI to extinction schedules, subjects’ behaviors under FR and DRL schedules showed a different pattern. Taken as a whole the results suggests that: first, participants’ behavior seemed to be controlled either by reinforcement history or by contingency of reinforcement; Second, the nature of reinforcement may be produced both high and low rates of response under FI – both after FR contingency exposure and when FI is programmed from the beginning (i.e., with no previous experimental history to no other reinforcement contingency). The results of the present study are in agreement to most those studies carried out with human and non-human responding under reinforcement schedules and suggest that the discrepancies between the behavior of humans and non-humans on schedules of reinforcement maybe attributed to both conditioning history and procedural differences between human and non-human research procedures. Also, the results here presented suggest that the nature of reinforcer is an important variable to modulate the effects of experimental history on the human behaviors.

Abstract not available

<p>Det här arbetet är en studie av fysikläroböcker och teorier om hur lärande går till. Jag har undersökt två lärandeteorier som haft inverkan på skolan och dess utveckling, nämligen behaviorismen och konstruktivismen, och försökt utröna hur de kan komma till uttryck i en fysiklärobokstext. De olika teorierna skiljer sig i grunden åt, men i sin framställning kan de ändå likna varandra. Det är därför svårt att koppla ett visst sätt att skriva en lärobok på till en viss syn på lärande.</p><p>Jag har också sett på om och hur dessa lärandeteorier kommer till uttryck i fem olika fysikläroböcker, där den äldsta är utgiven 1848 och den nyaste är från 1997. Jag har där upptäckt både likheter och olikheter mellan alla böcker. Textmassan har blivit betydligt mer omfattande och är från mitten av 1900-talet mer inriktad på att utreda och resonera än att beskriva, vilket tyder på ett mer konstruktivistiskt arbetssätt. Man använder också bilder på ett annat sätt, för att skapa förståelse, och övningsuppgifter är inte längre lika fokuserade på att klara en beräkning, utan är i större utsträckning kvalitativt orienterade.</p><p>Jag har sammanfattningsvis funnit att läroböckerna fått fler konstruktivistiska och färre behavioristiska inslag, men även att utvecklingen sedan mitten av 1900-talet är i mitt urval inte stor.</p>