Convicted of Our Relevance: An Introduction to the Special Issue

Abstract

“I'd warned her that intellectuals didn't count for much in the scheme of things: but academics are like the clergy in their blind conviction that their vocation has relevance to the rest of the world.” (McCauley, 1990).In the beginning, the founders of behaviour therapy were quite explicit about the link between basic laboratory research and their new therapies (Eysenck, 1960; Wolpe, 1958). Their claim that behaviour therapy was based on “modern learning theory” was not, however, without controversy (e.g., Breger & McGaugh, 1965; London, 1972); but while the logical necessity for appeal to laboratory research on learning might have been questioned (Breger & McGaugh, 1965), the historical contingencies linking Pavlov's dogs, Masserman's cats, and Wolpe's first systematic desensitisation patients can scarcely be questioned (American Psychological Association, 1980; Kazdin, 1978).It is equally clear that there was a similar close historical link between laboratory studies of operant behaviour, especially by Skinner and his students, and the development of behaviour modification applications such as reinforcement therapy and the token economy (Kazdin, 1978; Krasner 1971; Skinner, 1953). Again, the continuing necessity for behaviour modification to be linked to basic research in operant behaviour has been challenged (Azrin, 1977; cf. Deitz, 1978) but the historic fact of the relationship is well established (Krasner, 1971).