Owen, J. L. (2002). A retrospective on behavioral approaches to human language: And some promising new developments. American Communication Journal, 5(3).
[Abstract]Early schools of behaviorism, namely, "classical" and "methodological," hold only limited implications for studies in human language behavior. In contrast, contemporary radical behaviorism is not only relevant, but it is dramatically more so due to its recent breakthroughs in the area of relational frame theory. Unfortunately, the few articles on behaviorism found in communication journals deal primarily with classical and methodological behaviorisms. References to radical behaviorism are rare, superficial, and out of touch with recent developments. A major purpose of this article is to draw some sharp distinctions among the three major behaviorisms: "classical," "methodological," and "radical"; and, to capture each of their unique perspectives on human language behavior. A second purpose is to show how radical behaviorism-especially in light of its recent progress in relational frame theory-provides the basis for a comprehensive behavioral theory of complex human language behavior. In doing so, it also provides a viable alternative to the cognitive theories that continue to dominate the field of communication studies.
[Citing Place (1997a)]  
Citing Place (1997a) in context (citations start with an asterisk *):
Section Radical Behaviorism and Language
* A history of interaction with particular listeners can influence virtually any aspect of our language behaviors: whether we talk or remain silent, whether we talk more or less, the content we contribute, the stylistic devices we use, our nonverbal responses, and so forth. A very comprehensive review of different communication behaviors and the ways in which they can be influenced by the reinforcing practices of listeners is available in Guerin (1997). Also, Guerin's ambitious study shows in detail the ways in which the three-term contingency model can provide a parsimonious way of unifying many of our otherwise diverse studies on human communication. In a similar vein, Place (1997) and Leigland (2000) illustrate how the three-term contingency analysis can complement contemporary efforts in the area of conversation analysis.