Science and Human Behavior

Skinner introduces personal control as a type of social relation in which one individual deliberately alters another’s behavior to obtain reinforcement. The relationship need not be consciously understood by either party, as illustrated by the infant who learns to control a parent’s attention through crying.

He distinguishes personal control from the power exercised by organized agencies such as governments or schools, noting that as individuals, most people exert relatively limited influence. Exceptions exist—the wealthy, powerful, or especially charismatic—but personal control generally relies on sensitivity to the idiosyncrasies of others, tailoring reinforcements to immediate circumstances. The first task is often simply maintaining contact with the controllee, as seen in sales, counseling, or entertainment, where sustaining attention opens opportunities for further influence.

Skinner then reviews techniques of control, many of which parallel those described earlier in the context of self-control. These range from the direct use of physical force to the manipulation of stimuli through environmental arrangement, imitation, or verbal persuasion. Reinforcement, whether in the form of money, favors, labor, or sexual incentives, also plays a central role, often mediated by conditioned reinforcers like promises or praise. Other methods include aversive stimulation or punishment. Skinner notes that subtle strategies—such as pointing out contingencies, manipulating deprivation and satiation, cultivating emotional predispositions, or using drugs like alcohol to increase compliance—are all part of the repertoire of personal control.

The discussion emphasizes that these methods, while sometimes effective, often generate negative consequences for both the controller and the controllee. Since techniques such as punishment, exploitation, and undue influence are inherently aversive, individuals frequently resist. This countercontrol can take the form of anger, aggression, or collective opposition. The social dimension of control thus heightens resistance and reinforces cultural norms opposing overt manipulation.

The chapter concludes by addressing the reluctance within behavioral science and society to confront the issue of control. Many theorists, he argues, avoid acknowledging deliberate control due to its association with coercion and the value placed on freedom. However, he argues, “science implies prediction and, insofar as the relevant variables can be controlled, it implies control” (322). For Skinner, a clear, objective understanding of the techniques and consequences of personal control is essential, particularly for those most invested in limiting its abuses.

Skinner examines how the control exerted by a group is more powerful than that of any individual. Group control often emerges where competition for limited resources creates situations in which one individual’s reinforcement is another’s deprivation—for example, the “spoils of war” or a child taking a toy from another. In such cases, the affected individuals may unite as a controlling group, exerting collective influence over the offender.

The central technique of group control is the classification of behavior as “good” or “bad,” with corresponding reinforcement or punishment. Skinner defines these terms functionally: Behavior is “good” insofar as it reinforces other members of the group, and “bad” insofar as it is aversive. This classification may be consistent with actual effects, but it can also be arbitrary, accidental, or outdated. Reinforcing practices such as praise, gratitude, and approval, or punishing responses such as censure, ridicule, and criticism, constitute the informal codification of group norms. The emotional response of shame illustrates how punishment works not only through external consequences but also through conditioned aversive self-stimulation.

The rationale for group control is varied. Members may reinforce good behavior out of immediate affection, to secure future benefits, or because cultural practices have taught them to praise virtuous acts even when they are not directly affected. Punishment, too, may be driven by emotional predispositions such as anger or indignation, or by the operant reinforcement that occurs when objectionable behavior is temporarily suppressed. Educational institutions often formalize these practices, strengthening the group’s ability to regulate its members.

While group control restrains selfish or antisocial behavior and encourages altruism, it often disadvantages the individual by curtailing opportunities for direct reinforcement. Nonetheless, the individual also benefits as a participant in the controlling group. Even powerful figures are ultimately subject to the collective influence of the group.

Skinner addresses the ethical implications of group control. Rather than qualifying behaviors as “good” or “bad,” behaviorism analyzes them in terms of functional practices and their consequences. A science of behavior can describe and predict how group control operates but does not claim to resolve ethical questions about what ought to be maximized. What it can offer is a practical framework for examining the extent of control a group exerts, and the conditions under which such control becomes effective or oppressive.