Learning theories: Behaviourism and Ecological Psychology.

Ecological psychology and behaviourism are both approaches within psychology that focus on understanding human and animal learning and behaviour. They are also both descendants of American naturalism, but they differ significantly in their theoretical foundations and methodologies.

Similarities.

Both ecological psychology and behaviourism prioritise observable behaviours and acknowledge the importance of the interaction between the individual and the environment. They both recognise that behaviour is influenced by environmental factors and reject the reliance on internal mental processes (abstract models and representations) that are a feature of cognitive theories including constructivism and social constructivism.

Both ecological psychology and behaviourism reject Cartesian dualism, the idea that the mind and body are separate. Instead, they see mental processes as intrinsically linked to physical and environmental contexts, reinforcing a naturalistic worldview. Both use scientific methods to study psychology, relying on empirical data to draw conclusions about behaviour.

Although both approaches recognise the importance of the environment in shaping behaviour, behaviourists study how external stimuli influence responses, while ecological psychologists examine how people and animals interact with the affordances in their environment. The concepts of stimuli in behaviourism and affordances in ecological psychology represent foundational ideas in their respective frameworks, and they highlight key differences in how each approach understands the environment’s influence on behaviour.

Differences.

Theoretical Foundations:

Behaviourism is rooted in the work of figures like John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner (1), focusing primarily on the links between stimuli and responses. It discounts internal mental states, arguing that behavior can be understood purely in terms of conditioning (both classical and operant).

A stimulus is a discrete event in time and space that causes, or can be conditioned to cause, a response. A stimulus is an external event or object that elicits a specific response. It refers to any environmental factor that can trigger a behavioural reaction, such as sounds, lights, or other observable phenomena.

Ecological Psychology was developed by psychologist James J. Gibson* (2), influenced by behaviourism and sharing roots from American naturalism, it emphasises the relationship between individuals and their environments, focusing on how organisms perceive and act within specific contexts. The concept of stimuli is replaced by the concept of affordances, which describe the opportunities for action that the environment offers the individual.

Affordances are not considered causal like stimuli, but invitational, relational (to individual abilities and intentions), and act over multiple scales of time, events, and space.

An affordance refers to the potential actions or uses that an environment or object offers to an individual based on its characteristics and the capabilities of the individual. It emphasises the interactive relationship between the organism and its environment, highlighting a dependance on the specific context and the individual’s perception, embodying the idea that the same object can afford different actions to different beings, or different actions to the same being at different times or in different contexts (e.g., a wall may afford leaning against for a human, jumping over or avoiding for a horse, or walking along for a cat; a patch of grass may afford eating by a horse, lying on by a human, or digging a hole in by a dog).

From an ecological psychology perspective, perception is not merely a response to a stimulus but involves active engagement with the environment, allowing the organism to recognise opportunities for action based on its own abilities and intentions.

The primary differences between the concept of a stimulus in behaviourism and the concept of affordances in ecological psychology lie in their definitions, methodologies, and the frameworks within which they operate. While behaviourism centres around external stimuli and conditioned responses within discrete scales of time, ecological psychology emphasises the active role of perception and interaction between organisms and their environments through affordances, over nested scales of time. 

Nature of Learning:

Behaviourism views learning primarily as conditioning. This can be through reinforcement and punishment (operant conditioning) or through pairing a conditioned stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus, leading to a conditioned response (classical conditioning). In both cases the focus is on observable behaviours rather than internal processes. Ecological Psychology emphasises learning as an active process of perceiving and adapting to affordances in the environment. It considers the dynamic interactions between organisms and their settings.

 

Action and Agency:

Behaviourism tends to downplay the role of agency, arguing that behaviour is largely a result of external stimuli without accounting for individual internal intentions. Ecological Psychology highlights the active role of individuals in perceiving and interacting with their environments, emphasising agency and intention.

Nature of Study:

Behaviourism often involves controlled experiments in laboratories or simplified environments to study behaviour in response to specific stimuli, often ignoring the broader context of real-world environments and longer scales of time. Ecological Psychology tends to engage in more naturalistic observations, studying behaviour in real-world settings and focusing on the interplay between organisms and their environments. 

Conclusion:

In summary, while both behaviourism and ecological psychology recognise the role of the environment in shaping behaviour, they diverge significantly in how they conceptualise learning, the nature of interaction, the role of agency, and the complexity of measurement in understanding behaviour. Behaviourism emphasises observable stimulus-response relationships, while ecological psychology focuses on affordances and the active, perceptual engagement of individuals with their environments.

Ecological psychology accounts for nested scales of influence in behaviour and learning, recognising that actions are influenced by broader contextual factors and different timeframes. This allows for a more comprehensive understanding of learning processes that incorporates various environmental and situational influences.

Where next?

In the next blog, we will explore ecological dynamics (the fusion of ecological psychology and dynamical systems theory) to highlight how this theoretical framework can be used in the design of learning environments and practice activities.

Related podcast

Part 1. Exploring Learning Theories with David Farrokh: From Behaviourism to Ecological Psychology.

If you enjoy these blog posts, please subscribe below (and share them too).

References

1. Akpan, B. (2020). Classical and Operant Conditioning—Ivan Pavlov; Burrhus Skinner. In: Akpan, B., Kennedy, T.J. (eds) Science Education in Theory and Practice. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9_6 accessed online at https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9_6
2. Lobo L, Heras-Escribano M, and Travieso D. (2018). The History and Philosophy of Ecological Psychology, Frontiers in Psychology (9),  URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02228.

* James Gibson’s wife Eleanor was also a developmental psychologist and contributed extensively to the field  of ecological psychology, continuing to develop their work after James’ death.