The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review Lecture - The technology of teaching
Abstract
More than 60 years ago, in his Talks to teachers on psychology, William James (1899) said: ‘You make a great, a very great mistake, if you think that psychology, being the science of the mind’s laws, is something from which you can deduce definite programs and schemes and methods of instruction for immediate schoolroom use. Psychology is a science, and teaching is an art; and sciences never generate arts directly out of themselves. An intermediary inventive mind must make the application, by using its originality.’ In the years which followed, educational psychology and the experimental psychology of learning did little to prove him wrong. As late as 1962, an American critic, Jacques Barzun (1962), asserted that James’s book still contained ‘nearly all that anyone need know of educational method’. Speaking for the psychology of his time James was probably right, but Barzun was clearly wrong. A special branch of psychology, the so-called experimental analysis of behaviour, has produced if not an art at least a technology of teaching from which one can indeed ‘deduce programs and schemes and methods of instruction’. The public is aware of this technology through two of its products, teaching machines and programmed instruction. Their rise has been meteoric. Within a single decade hundreds of instructional programmes have been published, many different kinds of teaching machines have been offered for sale, and societies for programmed instruction have been founded in a dozen countries. Unfortunately, much of the technology has lost contact with its basic science.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957) · doi:10.1037/10627-000 · Cited by 4,894
Self-citation
Cited by
An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x09339057 · Cited by 2,721
The role of expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned helplessness.
Dweck, C. S. (1975) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0077149 · Cited by 1,315
Feedback : all that effort, but what is the effect?
Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., & O'Donovan, B. (2010) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930903541007 · Cited by 735
Mentored Learning to Teach According to Standards-Based Reform: A Critical Review
Wang, J., & Odell, S. J. (2002) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543072003481 · Cited by 587
Feedback in Written Instruction
Kulhavy, R. W. (1977) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543047002211 · Cited by 571
Metadata
- Authors
- Skinner, B. F.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1965-07-27
- Volume
- 162
- Issue
- 989
- Pages
- 427-443
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 2053-9193
- OpenAlex
- W2041405793
- Cited by
- 1,396
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 44.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Review Lecture - The technology of teaching. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.1965.0048
- The paper
- Skinner, B. F. (1965). Review Lecture - The technology of teaching. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1965.0048
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.