Stimulus/Response Versus Input/Output Theory: An Orientation to the Syntax of Scientific Literature :: Biology Essays Research Papers

Stimulus/Response Versus Input/Output Theory: An Orientation to the Syntax of Scientific Literature There appears to be a steady desire within the scientific and lay community to explain events which occur in the universe in a concrete absolute fashion. This most likely extends from an unconscious (or conscious) need to control the world around us. Such control can give a sense of security regarding our future. If we can explain why events happen, we can attempt to predict when and for what reason events will precipitate sometime in the future. Being able to predict the future leads to a greater feeling of security and control. However, it has been shown through decades of research that behavioral events are not predictable. Researchers tend to conclude that if they are to truly understand behavior then they must be able to develop a system which allows them to forecast the occurrence of certain behavior patterns. Conversely, if they are unable to state consecutively when and why a pattern is presented then they have failed to understand the event. In order to retain a sense that the universe is orderly the unpredictable results are often explained through the fault of the experimenter, that adequate control was not kept over the experimental situation. Through the Harvard Law of Animal Behavior ("under carefully controlled experimental circumstances, an animal will behave as it damned well pleases.") these "failed" experiments are incorporated into a succinct postulate which allows for the exploration of reason and desirability of such unpredictability (1). Through lectures, reading, and World Wide Web research done during the current semester I am moving from a stimulus/response theory to an input/output theory. The stimulus/response theory let experimenters believe that the unpredictable behaviors (responses) they had observed were due to inadequately controlled stimuli. An input/output theory allows for, and seems to rest on, the fact that many behaviors originate from the internal (spontaneous) generation of outputs. Internal origination is fundamental to many aspects of commonly observed behavior (biological clocks, innate endogenous rhythm, and other innate behaviors) and the presence of these behaviors seems to rest on something other then concrete stimuli from the external world. The syntax of many of the studies found on the Web leads me to conclude that these scientists are searching for an input/output behavioral system yet are unable to adequately document such a clear relationship. This inability most likely stems from the recently discussed phenomena of bidirectionality within and outside the most broad input/output box (Lecture, Bio 202).