Talk:Behavior analysis of child development

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, which collaborates on Psychology and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project. Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

This page has many factual and intepretative errors. I would suggest that Wikipedia request the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies (www.behavior.org) to edit it.

76.176.185.147 (talk) 20:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

How was this rated as high importance or was it just copied from the Child development page? Fainites ^barley 12:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

copied Paul foord (talk) 03:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality -Contingency/Attachment Bias?

I am not sure where the charge of biased comes in..The arguement is an old one- traditional developmental psychologist calculate contingency wrong. This is not new, it is thestandard critique of the Bell and Ainsworth (1972) study. Bell and Answorth (1972) collected data on distressed and nondistressed rates of infant crying in the first year of life. Their data produced a clear correlation between the frequency of mothers ignored crying and the frequency of infant crying. They concluded from it that maternal caretaking could not function as a reinforcer; however, they made no attempt to observe maternal contingent or noncontingent care taking. Obviously they were unaware of the point that congingency must be by two conditional probabilities. This critique is not new and has been a persistent one. Watson (1979) and Gerwirtz and Boyd (1977) both leveled the charge with very similar wording. It continues today with family psychologists stating that children need a structured environment, when the research that they state clearly suggests a contingent one. For example, if a person was to have an infant in the room, they could check on the infant every five minutes. This would be a highly structured environment but not a contingent one. The effects would be very diferent then if theparent only come into the room when the infant cried. The fact that many developmental texts still cite Bell and Ainsworth (1972) as an example that reinforcement and extinction do not effect crying in infants, is a perfect testiment to the point that traditional developmental psychologists do not get the concept of contingency. Thus, no bias in the statement...Jcautilli2003 (talk) 04:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC) References Bell, S.M. & Ainsworth, M.D.S. (1972). Infant crying and maternal responsiveness. Child Development, 43, 1171-1190.

Gerwitz, J.L. & Boyd, E.F.(1977). Experiments on mother-infants interaction underlying mutual attachment acquisition: The infant conditions the mother. In T. Alloway, P. Pliner, L. Krames (Eds.), Attachment behavior (pp. 109-143). New York: Plenum Press.

Martin, J.A.(1981). A longitudinal study of the consequences of early mother infant interaction: A micro-analytic approach. Child Development, 46(3),

Watson, J.S.(1979). Perception of contingency as a determinant of social responsiveness. In E.B. Thoman (Ed.), Origins of the infant's social responsiveness (pp. 33-64). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

No response so I removed the tagJcautilli2003 (talk) 23:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)