In of a conceptual map. Tolman pointed out

In the 1920’s, there were behaviorally inclined psychologists who did not agree with the radicalism of Watson’s formulation. Many were willing to fully accept the methodology, but they did not agree to reduce the behavior to the strict formula of “Stimulus-Response.”  A group of American psychologists made up of professionals such as Edward Tolman and Clark Leonard Hull developed the current of neo-behaviorism. This movement is based on the basic principles of behaviorism (environmentalism, mechanism, conditioning, non-introspective or mentalist approach) used intermediate variables such as purposes, cognitions, impulses and habits, to be able to analyze, predict and control behavior.The neo-behaviorists expanded, modified and formalized Watson’s behaviorism. In Watson, the rejection of the use of introspection appears very clearly, as something that is irrelevant in psychological research. Neobehaviorism uses protocols, the product of introspection, not to reach true internal processes, but as a verbal reaction that can be correlated with other externally measurable variables.Neobehaviorism is more interested in deep research on the phenomenology of learning than in a study that demonstrates that one can easily discover the neurophysiological correlations of psychic processes. The experimental method uses animals to explain human behavior. They reject the expression of feelings.There is a main divergence between the neobehaviorists and Watsonian behaviorism. Neobehaviorism considers how the environment influences the person and in return, brings about changes in their behavior. In behaviorism, this factor is not considered at all.  In its case, it is simply based on what is the known: sum of stimulus + response + conditioning.Tolman was especially interested in the intentional aspect of behavior, that is, in goal-oriented behavior which was categorized as “purposive behaviorism”.  He proposed that all behavior is composed of actions that end up directing the individual towards an objective. The behavior is purposive and not a learned sequence. It also claimed that we establish cognitive maps to achieve these objectives and use them as a learning mechanism. In his most important work, Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men (1932), he exposed the main body of his cognitive theory of learning, based on experiments with rats that, according to him, learned to leave a maze thanks to the construction of a conceptual map. Tolman pointed out that reinforcement is not a necessary condition for learning and that behavior has its own direction and purpose.  In relation to this, he introduced the concept of latent learning, that occurs before a stimulus without reinforcement in between.Tolman was a learning theorist who adopted a cognitive perspective. In Tolman’s time, the main theories of learning were the stimulus-response concepts, but he proposed that cognition were the intervening variables between S and R. Tolman showed how expectations are acquired and how, once acquired, they affect motivation and conduct.  Instead of an S-R theory, Tolman’s is an S-O-R theory.  It is an act of behavior initiated by environmental stimuli and physiological states. (S) – (stimulus) independent variable(0) – (for organism) Certain processes interfere the intervening variable(R) – (response) and behavior emerges. Dependent variableTolman was especially interested in the intentional aspect of behavior, that is, in goal-oriented behavior which was categorized as “purposive behaviorism”.  He proposed that all behavior is composed of actions that end up directing the individual towards an objective. The behavior is purposive and not a learned sequence. It also claimed that we establish cognitive maps to achieve these objectives and use them as a learning mechanism. In his most important work, Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men (1932), he exposed the main body of his cognitive theory of learning, based on experiments with rats that, according to him, learned to leave a maze thanks to the construction of a conceptual map. Tolman pointed out that reinforcement is not a necessary condition for learning and that behavior has its own direction and purpose.  In relation to this, he introduced the concept of latent learning, that occurs before a stimulus without reinforcement in between.Tolman was a learning theorist who adopted a cognitive perspective. In Tolman’s time, the main theories of learning were the stimulus-response concepts, but he proposed that cognition were the intervening variables between S and R. Tolman showed how expectations are acquired and how, once acquired, they affect motivation and conduct.  Instead of an S-R theory, Tolman’s is an S-O-R theory.  It is an act of behavior initiated by environmental stimuli and physiological states. (S) – (stimulus) independent variable(0) – (for organism) Certain processes interfere the intervening variable(R) – (response) and behavior emerges. Dependent variableThe main difference between classical and operant conditioning is that the former refers to learning information about a stimulus, while the latter involves learning about the consequences of the response.  Skinner believed that behavior was much easier to modify if its consequences were manipulated than if stimuli were simply associated with it, as in classical conditioning. Classical conditioning is based on the acquisition of reflex responses, which explains a lower amount of learning and its uses are more limited than those of the operant, since it refers to behaviors that the subject can control at will.The instrumental or operant conditioning is a learning procedure that is based on the probability that a given response depends on the expected consequences. In operant conditioning, behavior is controlled by discriminative stimuli present in the learning situation that transmit information about the probable consequences of the response. Given the importance and effectiveness of positive reinforcement, operant techniques to develop behaviors have a demonstrated utility. The the most relevant among these procedures are:• Techniques of instigation:  Inciting techniques are those that depend on the manipulation of discriminative stimuli to increase the likelihood of a behavior occurring.  It focuses on teaching directly to the subject how he/she has to perform a certain action, either verbally or physically.• Molding:  Shaping is considered especially useful for establishing behaviors in subjects who cannot communicate verbally, such as people with profound intellectual disabilities or animals.• Fading:  It is one of the key concepts of operant conditioning, since it allows the progress made in therapy or training to be generalized to many other areas of life.  This procedure consists essentially of replacing a discriminative stimulus with a different one.• Chain:  In certain aspects, a good part of the skills that are considered talents for showing a high degree of skill and specialization in them (such as playing a musical instrument very well, dancing very well, etc.) can be considered as fruit of some form of chaining, since from the basic skills it is progressing until reaching other much more worked.• Reinforcement programs:  In an operant learning procedure, reinforcement programs are the guidelines that establish when the behavior will be rewarded and when it will not.When applying operant techniques to reduce or eliminate behaviors, it is always preferable to use the less aversive ones when possible. Likewise, these techniques are preferable to positive punishments.  This is a list of these techniques in order from least to greatest potential to generate aversion:• Extinction:  It stops rewarding a behavior that had been reinforced before. This decreases the likelihood that the response will happen again.  A basic example of extinction is getting a child to stop kicking by simply ignoring him until he realizes that his behavior does not have the desired consequences (for example, the anger of the parents, which would work as a reinforcer) and get fed up.• Omission training:  In this procedure, the subject’s behavior is followed by the absence of the reward; that is, if the answer is given, the reinforcer will not be obtained.  In educational settings, it also serves to encourage people to value more the efforts that other people make to please the little ones and that these, having become accustomed to these deals, do not value.• Differential reinforcement programs:  They are a special subtype of reinforcement program that is used to reduce (not eliminate) the target behaviors by increasing other alternative responses. For example, a child could be rewarded for reading and for exercising and not for playing the console if the latter behavior is intended to lose reinforcing value.• Time out:  Time out consists of isolating the subject, in general children, in a non-stimulating environment in case the problematic behavior occurs. Also, a variant of the negative punishment, it differs from the response cost in that what is lost is the possibility of accessing the reinforcement, not the reinforcer itself.• Saciation:  The reinforcement obtained by carrying out the behavior is so intense or substantial that it loses the value it had for a subject. This can take place by satisfying response or mass practice (repeat the behavior until it ceases to be appetitive) or by stimulus satiation (the reinforcer loses its appetite for excess).• Overcorrection:  Overcorrection involves applying a positive punishment related to the problem behavior. For example, it is widely used in cases of enuresis, in which the child is asked to wash the sheets after urinating on it during the night.