dor_id: 4111681

506.#.#.a: Público

590.#.#.d: Los artículos enviados a la Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta se juzgan por medio de un proceso de revisión por pares

510.0.#.a: Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACyT), Sistema Regional de Información en Línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal (Latindex), Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), SCOPUS

561.#.#.u: http://www.psicologia.unam.mx/

650.#.4.x: Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud

336.#.#.b: article

336.#.#.3: Artículo de Investigación

336.#.#.a: Artículo

351.#.#.6: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rmac

351.#.#.b: Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta

351.#.#.a: Artículos

harvesting_group: RevistasUNAM

270.1.#.p: Revistas UNAM. Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial, UNAM en revistas@unam.mx

590.#.#.c: Open Journal Systems (OJS)

270.#.#.d: MX

270.1.#.d: México

590.#.#.b: Concentrador

883.#.#.u: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/front/

883.#.#.a: Revistas UNAM

590.#.#.a: Coordinación de Difusión Cultural

883.#.#.1: https://www.publicaciones.unam.mx/

883.#.#.q: Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial, UNAM

850.#.#.a: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

856.4.0.u: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rmac/article/view/77884/68862

100.1.#.a: Colombo dos Santos, Bruna; de Carvalho Neto, Marcus Bentes

524.#.#.a: Colombo dos Santos, Bruna, et al. (2020). B. F. Skinner’s evolving views of punishment: II. 1940-1960. Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta; Vol 46, No 2 2020. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4111681

245.1.0.a: B. F. Skinner’s evolving views of punishment: II. 1940-1960

502.#.#.c: Sociedad Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta

561.1.#.a: Sociedad Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta

264.#.0.c: 2020

264.#.1.c: 2020-12-16

653.#.#.a: Punishment; 1950s; b.f. skinner; punishment; 1950s; b.f. skinner; punishment; 1950s; b.f. skinner

506.1.#.a: La titularidad de los derechos patrimoniales de esta obra pertenece a las instituciones editoras. Su uso se rige por una licencia Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 Internacional, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es, fecha de asignación de la licencia 2020-12-16, para un uso diferente consultar al responsable jurídico del repositorio por medio del correo electrónico editor_general@rmac-mx.org

884.#.#.k: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rmac/article/view/77884

001.#.#.#: oai:ojs.phoenicis.tic.unam.mx:article/77884

041.#.7.h: eng

520.3.#.a: The reserve concept was the basis for skinner considering punishment asymmetrical to reinforcement in the 1930’s. in this paper we explore why he abandoned the reflex reserve concept in the 1950’s, and what the implications of that were for his view on punishment. skinner continued to claim that punishment was asymmetrical to reinforcement. we conclude that, although the reserve concept was nominally abandoned, its logic remained. we also discuss the terminology and defini- tion of punishment and its explanatory mechanisms.|the reserve concept was the basis for skinner considering punishment asymmetrical to reinforcement in the 1930’s. in this paper we explore why he abandoned the reflex reserve concept in the 1950’s, and what the implications of that were for his view on punishment. skinner continued to claim that punishment was asymmetrical to reinforcement. we conclude that, although the reserve concept was nominally abandoned, its logic remained. we also discuss the terminology and defini- tion of punishment and its explanatory mechanisms.|the reserve concept was the basis for skinner considering punishment asymmetrical to reinforcement in the 1930’s. in this paper we explore why he abandoned the reflex reserve concept in the 1950’s, and what the implications of that were for his view on punishment. skinner continued to claim that punishment was asymmetrical to reinforcement. we conclude that, although the reserve concept was nominally abandoned, its logic remained. we also discuss the terminology and defini- tion of punishment and its explanatory mechanisms.

773.1.#.t: Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta; Vol 46, No 2 (2020)

773.1.#.o: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rmac

046.#.#.j: 2021-05-27 00:00:00.000000

022.#.#.a: ISSN: 0185-4534; ISSN electrónico: 2007-0802

310.#.#.a: Cuatrimestral

264.#.1.b: Sociedad Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta

758.#.#.1: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rmac

doi: https://doi.org/10.5514/rmac.v46.i2.77884

handle: 1cc370388c807622

harvesting_date: 2021-04-09 00:00:00.0

856.#.0.q: application/pdf

file_creation_date: 2020-12-21 20:58:08.0

file_modification_date: 2020-12-21 20:58:08.0

file_name: c8e750a60f6bd8f7e24aec1ffa75e0aac134158db29b71a1947ec3206d5b8ee8.pdf

file_pages_number: 26

file_format_version: application/pdf; version=1.3

file_size: 928880

245.1.0.b: B. F. SKINNER’S EVOLVING VIEWS OF PUNISHMENT: II. 1940-1960

last_modified: 2021-06-30 20:30:00

license_url: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es

license_type: by-nc-nd

No entro en nada

No entro en nada 2

Artículo

B. F. Skinner’s evolving views of punishment: II. 1940-1960

Colombo dos Santos, Bruna; de Carvalho Neto, Marcus Bentes

Sociedad Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta, publicado en Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta, y cosechado de Revistas UNAM

Licencia de uso

Procedencia del contenido

Cita

Colombo dos Santos, Bruna, et al. (2020). B. F. Skinner’s evolving views of punishment: II. 1940-1960. Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta; Vol 46, No 2 2020. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4111681

Descripción del recurso

Autor(es)
Colombo dos Santos, Bruna; de Carvalho Neto, Marcus Bentes
Tipo
Artículo de Investigación
Área del conocimiento
Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud
Título
B. F. Skinner’s evolving views of punishment: II. 1940-1960
Fecha
2020-12-16
Resumen
The reserve concept was the basis for skinner considering punishment asymmetrical to reinforcement in the 1930’s. in this paper we explore why he abandoned the reflex reserve concept in the 1950’s, and what the implications of that were for his view on punishment. skinner continued to claim that punishment was asymmetrical to reinforcement. we conclude that, although the reserve concept was nominally abandoned, its logic remained. we also discuss the terminology and defini- tion of punishment and its explanatory mechanisms.|the reserve concept was the basis for skinner considering punishment asymmetrical to reinforcement in the 1930’s. in this paper we explore why he abandoned the reflex reserve concept in the 1950’s, and what the implications of that were for his view on punishment. skinner continued to claim that punishment was asymmetrical to reinforcement. we conclude that, although the reserve concept was nominally abandoned, its logic remained. we also discuss the terminology and defini- tion of punishment and its explanatory mechanisms.|the reserve concept was the basis for skinner considering punishment asymmetrical to reinforcement in the 1930’s. in this paper we explore why he abandoned the reflex reserve concept in the 1950’s, and what the implications of that were for his view on punishment. skinner continued to claim that punishment was asymmetrical to reinforcement. we conclude that, although the reserve concept was nominally abandoned, its logic remained. we also discuss the terminology and defini- tion of punishment and its explanatory mechanisms.
Tema
Punishment; 1950s; b.f. skinner; punishment; 1950s; b.f. skinner; punishment; 1950s; b.f. skinner
Idioma
eng
ISSN
ISSN: 0185-4534; ISSN electrónico: 2007-0802

Enlaces