Are theories of learning necessary?

By B. Skinner, B. Skinner. Psychology Review, 2013

1,710 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1272d4ce87b97ac5b12659823206174a8d519b14

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

Teaching and Researching Computer-Assisted Language Learning (2003, background): “Skinner (1968) promotes Pressey’s work, suggesting that Pressey was ahead of his time, and supports the idea of machine instruction as a way of”
Can ‘Blended Learning’ Be Redeemed? (2005, background): “Cognitivism, for example, was an attempt to challenge Skinner’s position – which forms a central tenet of behaviourism – that we do not need a theory of mind to explain learning (Skinner, 1950).”
The Tree of Knowledge System and the Theoretical Unification of Psychology (2003, background): “Observationally based description and control formed the cornerstone of his philosophy of science, and all else was deemed extraneous (Skinner, 1950).”
Contextual Behavioral Science: Creating a science more adequate to the challenge of the human condition (2012, background): “Theories of this kind avoid the classic pragmatic problems of hypothetico-deductive theories (Skinner, 1950) and stay rooted to the contextual features so”
Musical Motivation: Towards a model synthesising the research (2002, background): “…were mediated through the need to work to earn money to pay for food, shelter, etc. Behaviourists, taking an environmentalist position, viewed motivation as being driven primarily by drives such as hunger but also by external forces such as rewards and punishments (Skinner, 1950; Thorndike, 1913).”
Reward learning: Reinforcement, incentives, and expectations (2000, background): “(Skinner, 1950, p. 78).”