Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:51:39.500Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A not-so proximate account of cleansing behavior

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2021

Jonathan Sigger Open the ORCID record for Jonathan Sigger [Opens in a new window]  and
Thomas E. Dickins Open the ORCID record for Thomas E. Dickins [Opens in a new window]
Jonathan Sigger
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Middlesex University, LondonNW4 4BT, [email protected]; [email protected]; https://www.mdx.ac.uk/about-us/our-people/staff-directory/profile/sigger-jonathan; http://tomdickins.net/
Thomas E. Dickins
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Middlesex University, LondonNW4 4BT, [email protected]; [email protected]; https://www.mdx.ac.uk/about-us/our-people/staff-directory/profile/sigger-jonathan; http://tomdickins.net/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this commentary we outline perceptual control theory and suggest this as a fruitful way for Lee and Schwarz (L&S) to fully embody their account of cleansing behavior. Moreover, we take issue with the command control approach that L&S have taken seeing this as an unnecessary cognitive commitment within an embodied model of cleansing behavior.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 44 , 2021 , e24
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Day, W. (1983). On the difference between radical and methodological behaviorism. Behaviorism, 11(1), 89–102.Google Scholar
Mansell, W., & Carey, T. A. (2015) Perceptual control theory: Will it lead to a revolution in psychology?. The Psychologist, 28, 896–899.Google Scholar
Mansell, W., & Marken, R. S. (2015). The origins and future of control theory in psychology. Review of General Psychology, 19(4), 425–430. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marken, R. S. (2009). You say you had a revolution: Methodological foundations of closed-loop psychology. Review of General Psychology, 13(2), 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marken, R. S., & Mansell, W. (2013). Perceptual control as a unifying concept in psychology. Review of General Psychology, 17, 190–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powers, W. T. (1973a). Behavior: The control of perception. New York: Hawthorne.Google Scholar
Powers, W. T. (1973b). Behaviourism and feedback control. Science (New York, N.Y.), 181, 1118–1120.Google Scholar
Powers, W. T. (1978) Quantitative analysis of purposive systems. Psychological Review, 85, 417–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powers, W. T. (2008). Living control systems III: The fact of control. New Caan, CT: Benchmark Publications.Google Scholar