ABSTRACT
A behavioristic approach has influenced the animal-learning theorist in his efforts to assimilate the facts of his science, namely, the functional relationships between observable stimulus and response events. As a matter of recourse and strategy, the learning theorist has typically assumed that the process underlying learned reactions entails the formation of an association, or "bond," and that the elements which are associated are functionally equivalent or isomorphic to those designated in the observed stimuli and responses relationship. From the standpoint of a behavioristic philosophy, the singular difficulty with a position espousing a cognitive or a cues and consequences relationship is that the inferred associative process is devoid of a behavioral referent. Thus, subject to Guthrie's criticism of the rat's being "buried in thought," cognitive theory seems to lose by default. The chapter provides evidence of the nature, and suggests that cognitive interpretations to account more fully for the learning and performance of lower animals.
