Abstract

The history of psychology has seen recurrent controversies on the circularity of reinforcement explanations, and behavior analysis disagree among themselves as to whether the concept of operant reinforcement is explanatory or descriptive. Some behavior theorists argue that the concept of reinforcement is merely descriptive, whereas others maintain that reinforcement explanations are acceptable provided extra precautions are taken. The issue of the circularity of reinforcement also has become embroiled in a more general problem, that of understanding what a scientific explanation is. Here I argue that the issue of demarcating scientific explanation from description takes two forms, and that once these two forms are distinguished most controversies vanish. Like the majority of scientific concepts, the concept of operant reinforcement is both descriptive and explanatory, and reinforcement explanatios are never circular