Hayne Waring Reese: A Remembrance

Hayne Reese, Centennial Professor Emeritus at West Virginia University (WVU) and supporter of behavior analysis in both the United States and Mexico, died in Fort Worth, Texas on February 27, 2022 at age 91. What follows is a precis of his life’s work, with a particular emphasis on the relation of that work to behavior analysis.

Academic History

Hayne remained a proud Texan all his life, returning to his native state on his retirement from academia in 2000. He graduated with honors in 1953 from the University of Texas at Austin. This was followed by service in the United States Army, which was required of all young and fit male citizens of that era. He returned to Austin to earn his M.A. in psychology from his alma mater in 1955. He then moved further north to complete his Ph.D. degree, at the State University of Iowa. At that time Iowa was a hotbed of both the methodological behaviorism, represented by Kenneth Spence and his followers, and child psychology as promulgated by the well-known Iowa Child Welfare Research Station. Hayne received his Ph.D. in experimental psychology from Iowa in 1958. The title of his doctoral dissertation was “Transfer to a discrimination task as a function of amount of stimulus pretraining and similarity of stimulus names.” Its supervisor was Charles D. Spiker (see Lipsitt & Cantor, 1986).

Hayne’s first academic position took him even further from Texas - at the State University of New York at Buffalo. It was there that he published seminal research and conceptual analyses of the problems of transpositional learning (Reese, 1968). That research resonates to the kinds of questions posed by Murray Sidman and colleagues (e.g., Sidman, 1986; Sidman & Cresson, 1973; Sidman & Tailby, 1982) in their seminal research on stimulus equivalence. The basic question posed by Hayne was “under what conditions those subject populations learn to transpose a relational equivalence between sets of stimuli differing in size from one another, but in different iterations, retaining their proportional differences?

A contemporary of Hayne’s from graduate school days at Iowa, Frances Degen Horowitz, was appointed the position of founding chair of the Department of Human Development and Child Study at the University of Kansas (KU) in in 1968. Perhaps to achieve some academic diversity in a program that would become enthusiastically behavioral —it was, after all, the crucible for the development of applied behavior analysis under the leadership of Baer, Wolf, Risley (Baer et al., 1968)— Horowitz recruited Hayne to KU, first as visiting professor, subsequently with a regular, full-time appointment. Hayne in later years reflected that one could not but be caught up in the enthusiasm of those applied behavior analysts at work building a better world with behaviorism, but that he sometimes felt intellectually isolated.

Just as there were exciting events transpiring at KU during Hayne’s tenure there, at WVU in Morgantown, West Virginia equally exciting events of another sort were transpiring. West Virginia University was in this period just beginning to develop doctoral training. A small, state-supported university, WVU’s administration in this period began committing to increasing the visibility and prestige of its programs, and thereby the university as a whole (Doherty & Summers, 1982). In 1963, the Department of Psychology had established two doctoral programs, one preparing psychologists for careers in “the teaching of general psychology” and the other for “clinical service in institutions, clinics, or schools” (West Virginia University Catalog, 1963). In 1966, the Department created a doctoral program in Life-Span Developmental Psychology, subsequently recognized by Ernest Hilgard (1987) in his history of (North) American psychology textbook as the first such program in the United States. One of the first recruits to that program was K. Warner Schaie, who became its leader and also Chair of the Department (In which role he also hired the present author, in 1972). To celebrate WVU’s 100^th year of existence, the university created a few “Centennial Professorships,” awarding one of them to psychology. Schaie used that position to recruit Hayne from KU to join the WVU Life-Span Developmental Program. Hayne did so in 1970 and became the coordinator of that program in 1973. He remained a Centennial Professor and Program Coordinator until his retirement in 2000.

A Scholar of Breadth and Depth

The body of Hayne’s professional work considered ensemble followed three paths: empirical, methodological, and theoretical/conceptual. Empirically, that work covered problems as diverse as memory, perception, imagery, language, problem solving, verbal behavior, and creativity. Methodologically, he critiqued developmental and behavioral research (e.g., Baltes & Reese, 1977; Morris et al., 1982; Reese, 1997; Reese 1998; Reese, 1999). His theoretical/conceptual contributions emphasized the relations between psychologies grounded in development, the cognitive sciences, and behaviorism with particular, but not exclusive, emphasis on behavior analysis.

Hayne was, above all, a systematizer and taxonomist —an organizer of ideas around general themes and principles. Among his most influential works are those, written with William Overton, on world views in psychology (e.g., Overton & Reese, 1973; Reese & Overton, 1970; Reese & Overton, 1972). The first such article appeared in the same year as Thomas Kuhn’s (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions, which suggested a view of the organization of science related to that developed by Reese and Overton (1970). Kuhn emphasized the incompatibility of competing paradigms, but, unlike Kuhn, Reese and Overton suggested that these competing world views could and do coexist, and do so because of different assumptions. The view also related to those of Lakatos and of Laudan (see, e.g., Gholson & Barker, 1985), and was influenced by Pepper’s (1942) analysis of world hypotheses. Of these world views, he observed the following:

World views are also called cosmologies, ontologies, paradigms, presuppositions, world hypotheses, world theories, and weltschauugen ... . They do not provide alternative approaches to the scientific collection of facts, which as shown later always involves careful observation under known conditions. Rather, they provide alternative approaches to the interpretation or explanation of facts. (Reese, 1986a, p. 159)

Earlier, however, Reese and Overton (1972) suggested that world views are conceptually of greater scope than paradigms, at least in the Kuhnian sense of the latter: “There is good reason to believe that the model of reality identified as a paradigm is determined categorically by—that is, of necessity conceptually consistent with—some larger world view ....” (p. 1197).

Although Hayne identified himself as a developmental psychologist, he could equally claim identity with cognitive science, methodological behaviorism, and radical behaviorism, all of which he understood well. He appreciated each for what it represented —a different world view— and also for its limitations. He observed that “explicating the underlying presumptions [of a world view] is an effective way to make alternative psychologies comprehensible. Perhaps it is the only way” (Reese, 1986a, p. 159). It was not possible to pigeon-hole Hayne by any of the conventional taxonomic labels applied to psychologists, either by subdiscipline or by conceptual orientation. Ironically, he transcended taxonomic classification despite the fact that this activity was a primary professional one.

Two practices important to his development as a systematist were pragmatism and dialectical materialism. Whether these ideas became important because of his breadth of consideration of the psychological sciences or they were responsible for that breadth of consideration cannot be determined. The pragmatic truth criterion likely was appealing to Hayne because he saw how different world views met the criterion of useful working within each particular such world view. Dialectical materialism “is a more general philosophy, or model, [than historical materialism] in which progress is attributed to the resolution of contradictions” (Reese, 1986a, p. 181). An example is the relation between the person and the environment:

The relation between the person and the environment is also a unity in which both the person and the environment are active participants. This conception avoids the extreme environmentalism of behaviorism and the extreme mentalism of dialectical idealism. According to dialectical materialism, behavioral change reflects a reciprocal interaction between the person and the environment. The actions of persons change the environment, and the changed environment changes the person’s actions (Reese, 1986a, p. 184)

Aging, of course, across the lifespan is a major variable in the changing, evolving relation between environment and organism, Hayne’s analysis also will sound familiar to both radical behaviorists and, particularly, Kantorian interbehaviorists.

Beginnings of Involvement with Behavior Analysis

In leaving KU to come to WVU, Hayne went, conceptually speaking, “from the frying pan into the fire.” In 1976, the WVU Department of Psychology underwent a major reorganization that transformed its Ph.D. program in general-experimental psychology into one in behavior analysis. Don Hake was hired as its first coordinator, a role he retained until his untimely death in 1982 (Lattal, 1983). Jon Krapfl was recruited to WVU in 1973 to head its Master’s degree program in rural mental health. Krapfl, who later became Department Chair, was both an astute clinical psychologist and radical behaviorist. The Ph.D. program in clinical psychology also was reorganized under Jon’s leadership, to reflect what became, except for the Life-Span Developmental Ph.D. program, a strongly behaviorally oriented department. Unlike his description of his reaction to KU, Hayne was embraced by behavior analysis, and he reciprocated.

Soon after the reorganization period, Jon and Hayne together created and co-taught a graduate course in “behavior theory and philosophy.” A version of that course continues to the present. From its inception until his retirement, Hayne was a Supporting Faculty member of the Behavior Analysis program. He was the Discussant at a symposium on “Behavior analysis and developmental psychology” (chaired by E. K. Morris) at the 1979 American Psychological Association meeting. His history with the Association for Behavior Analysis International dates to 1980, when he presented an invited address titled “On the theory and practice of behavior analysis” (see Reese, 1986b). Hayne thus was drawn closer to behavior analysis during this period of Departmental change. He remained engaged with behavior analysis, including but certainly not limited to involvement with ABAI, for the remainder of his life.

A Broad and Deep Relationship with Behavior Analysis

Hayne’s relationship with behavior analysis is perhaps best described as one of “objective observer” rather than necessarily “enthusiastic embracer,” although he both understood well and was sympathetic to a behavior-analytic world view. As noted in the previous section, Hayne’s reach within the psychological sciences was broad and varied. He participated in behavior analysis both as a mentor as to how certain problems, for example, reductionism (Reese, 1996), might be approached and a critic of its practices (e.g., Baltes & Reese, 1972).

In 1980, Linda Parrott (later, Linda Hayes) joined the WVU faculty as a visiting professor. Linda was, and is, an articulate spokesperson for J. R. Kantor’s interbehavioral approach to psychology (e.g., Kantor, 1936; Kantor, 1959), which advocates a very contextualistic position concerning the relation between environment and behavior. An intellectual attraction between Hayne and Linda seemed to develop around their mutual interest in relativism and contextualism. They co-edited a volume on “Behavior science: Philosophical, methodological and empirical advances” (Reese & Parrott, 1986c). The exchange of ideas between Linda, Steve Hayes, and Hayne resulted in an influential review of Stephen Pepper’s World Hypotheses in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (Hayes et al., 1988), in which they suggested a contextualist, rather than a mechanist, frame for behavior analysis, setting into play a discussion that continues (see Marr, 1993; Morris, 1993) as to the nature of behavior analysis.

In the years following a conference on the analysis of verbal behavior organized by Linda Hayes and Phil Chase, in which Hayne and Emilio Ribes, among many prominent behavior-analytically inclined observers participated, Hayne produced a number of chapters and articles concerning behavior analysis as it relates to other psychologies, commenting on such things as problem solving, rule-governance, verbal behavior, contextualism and mechanism, and other issues related to a behavior-analytic world view. All this he did while continuing to write extensively on many topics unrelated to behavior analysis from developmental and cognitive perspectives.

Over the years, Hayne lectured at universities, institutes, and conferences in many countries: Brazil, Italy, Germany, Mexico, Japan, Spain, and China. His first presentation in Mexico was to the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM-Iztacala) in 1981, when he gave a five-session seminar on “Modern systems of psychology.” Between 1992 and 2006, he presented at each of the eight Conferences on Behaviorism and the Sciences of Behavior, organized by Emilio Ribes and Peter Harzem, including the two that occurred in Mexico (in Guadalajara and Xalapa). The topics of these talks were philosophical and historical in nature. In conjunction with the 1992 conference, he also presented, with L. P. Lipsitt, on the topic of research in developmental psychology at a student-oriented seminar at the University of Guadalajara. He was Honorary President of the 2006 conference, held in Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

Hayne contributed three articles to the Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis. Two were methodological and are cited elsewhere in this review. The third (Reese, 2013) was an analysis of the influences of John B. Watson’s behaviorism on child psychology. It was an invited contribution to a número monográfico of the Journal in celebration of the centennial of the publication of “Psychology from the Standpoint of a behaviorist (Watson, 1913). The article was classic Hayne Reese: astute, insightful, and beyond extensively researched, the latter exemplifying a broader observation that Hayne never took on a scholarly task lightly. As an example of the latter, at some point before his retirement, he became interested in the fate and circumstances of Watson and Rayner’s (1920) famous (in psychological circles at least) Little Albert. He spent several years discussing with his colleagues his research into seemingly every aspect of Albert and the controversies surrounding the research in which Albert was the subject. Hayne produced a manuscript of well over 100 pages and submitted to a psychological journal - the present author does not know which one. Sometime later, Hayne announced that the manuscript had been rejected, with the recommendation that it be revised and published as a book because the Editor felt it was too long for the journal to publish. As was the fate of an earlier manuscript Hayne prepared on the topic of scientific writing, the manuscript seems to have been retired without further consideration for its publication. The timing of his Albert manuscript in relation to other revelations and controversies about Albert (e.g., Beck et al., 2009; Powell et al., 2014) may have influenced his decision to not pursue publication (but see Reese, 2010).

Summing Up: Reflections on a Full, Rich Life

The observations in the last paragraph about Hayne’s thoroughness as a scholar/researcher brought fear to the hearts of graduate students who enrolled in his classes. Hayne was for several years assigned to teach the Department’s graduate history of psychology course. At the time, it was required of students in both clinical programs, so escape was not an option. There was no textbook, only assigned articles for each class period. This was in the pre-pdf days when students had to go to a copy center to purchase copies of the articles assigned for a class. When students in his history class showed up at the copy center, they were greeted by a five-inch (~ 13 cm) high stack of readings of original research articles by the likes of Wilhelm Wundt, E.B. Titchener, John Dewey, and John Watson, as well as original philosophical writings of thinkers from the ancient Greeks through the early 20^th century. Hayne was determined to ensure that the students received a thorough exposure to the broad panorama that is the history of psychology.

When it came to formal teaching, lecturing seemed his preferred modality. A story of legendary proportions in the Department of Psychology at WVU is that he once had a single student enrolled in a graduate course that the student needed to graduate. For an entire semester, Hayne and the student met in a classroom, where Hayne proceeded to deliver the same lectures he previously had given to much larger numbers of enrollees in the class.

Hayne was a major force at WVU for all of his 30 years in its Department of Psychology. He was a scholar, teacher, leader, mentor, colleague, and role model par excellence. He was omnipresent in the department. He came to work before almost everyone else and worked a full day, every day. He was meticulously organized in terms of both time and materials. As part of a discussion involving how faculty members were spending their time, Hayne took the initiative in recording his activity, regardless s of what he was doing, each day throughout the work week in 15 min blocks. As the end date of such recording approached, he decided that he sufficiently liked the recording process and outcome that he continued recording his behavior similarly at least until the time of his retirement. One of my own favorite stories about Hayne involves a notorious file drawer in a cabinet to the right of his desk. Whenever I would go to Hayne’s office —he was always there, usually with a hot cup of coffee on his desk— with a question about some matter related to either a departmental administrative issuer or a matter of scholarly substance, Hayne would open the middle drawer of that infamous file cabinet —no matter what the question— and miraculously pull out the answer ... or so it seemed.

Hayne kept the Department’s faculty in perspective. He was the Keeper of Ancient Knowledge, and when he didn’t have the evidence for what we needed, he would improvise, fairly certain of what should be done anyway. He always acted in good faith and with good humor and even better intentions, no matter what the situation. For many years in succession, he was elected to serve as the Chair of the Department’s faculty evaluation committee. When discussion would turn to whether a faculty member being evaluated was doing enough of this or that, Hayne often would have to remind the committee of the “Whistling Dog”: A man with a dog goes into a bar, where he engages another patron in a conversation that ends with the dog owner telling the patron that his dog can whistle “Yankee Doodle.” Wagers are made and the dog is beckoned to whistle the tune. Whistle it he does. At its conclusion, however, the patron refuses to pay the bet. When asked why he refuses to pay, the patron replies that, although the dog whistled, it did so out of tune. Hayne’s wit was a gentle reminder to the committee to keep peoples’ work and activities in perspective. The whistling dog story, along with many others with Hayne at their center, found its way into Departmental lore. As was discussed earlier in this remembrance, perspective taking defined Hayne’s approach to psychological theory, but he also applied it broadly to things unrelated to disciplinary matters, and in so doing taught his friends and colleagues its importance across the spectrum of life.

References

Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 91-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91

Baltes, M. M., & Reese, H. W. (1977). Operant research in violation of the operant paradigm? In B. C. Etzel, J.M. LeBlanc, & D. M. Baer (Eds.), New developments in behavior research (pp. 11-30). Erlbaum.

Beck, H. P., Levinson, S., & Irons, G. (2009). Finding Little Albert: A journey to John B. Watson’s infant laboratory. American Psychologist, 64 (7), 605– 614. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017234

Doherty, W. T., Jr., & Summers, F. T. (1982). West Virginia University: Symbol of unity in a sectionalized state. West Virginia University Press.

Gholson, B., & Barker, P. (1985). Kuhn, Lakatos, and Laudan: Applications in the history of physics and psychology. American Psychologist, 40 (7), 755-769. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.40.7.755

Hayes, S. C., Hayes, L. J., & Reese, H. W. (1988). Finding the philosophical core: A review of Stephen C. Pepper’s World hypotheses: A study in evidence. Journal of the Experimental analysis of Behavior, 50 (1), 97-111. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1988.50-97

Hilgard, E. R. (1987). Psychology in America: A historical survey. Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.

Kantor, J. R. (1936). An objective psychology of grammar. Principia Press.

Kantor, J. R. (1959). Interbehavioral psychology. Principia Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.

Lattal, K.A., (1983). Don Hake, behavior analyst: A memorial. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39 (1), 4-5. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1983.39-4

Lipsitt, L. P., & Cantor, J. H. (Eds.) (1986). Experimental child psychologist: Essays and experiments in honor of Charles C. Spiker. Erlbaum.

Marr, M. J. (1993). Contextualistic mechanism or mechanistic contextualism?: The straw machine as tar baby. The Behavior Analyst, 16 (1),59-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392662

Morris, E. K., Hursh, D. E., Winston, A. S., Gelfand, D. M., Hartmann, D. P., Reese, H. W., & Baer, D. M. (1982). Behavior analysis and developmental psychology. Human Development, 25 (5), 340-364. https://doi.org/10.1159/000272818

Morris, E. K. (1993). Behavior analysis and mechanism: One is not the other. The Behavior Analyst, 16 (1), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392606

Overton, W. F., & Reese, H. W. (1973). Models of development: Methodological implications. In J. R. Nesselroade & H. W. Reese (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: Methodological issues (pp. 65-86). Academic Press.

Pepper, S. C. (1942). World hypotheses: A study in evidence. University of California Press.

Powell, R. A., Digdon, N., Harris, B., & Smithson, C. (2014). Correcting the record on Watson, Rayner, and Little Albert: Albert Barger as “Psychology’s lost boy.” American Psychologist, 69(6), 600-611. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036854

Reese, H. W. (1968). The perception of stimulus relations: Discrimination learning and transposition. Academic Press.

Reese, H. W. (1986a). Behavioral and dialectical psychologies. In L. P. Lipsitt & J. H. Cantor (Eds.), Experimental child psychologist: Essays and experiments in honor of\Charles Spiker (pp. 157-195). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Reese, H. W. (1986b). On the theory and practice of behavior analysis. In H. W. Reese & L. J. Parrott (Eds.), Behavior science: Philosophical, methodological, and empirical advances (pp. 1-33). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Reese, H. W., & Parrott, L. J. (Eds.) (1986c). Behavior science: Philosophical, methodological, and empirical advances. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Reese, H.W. (1996). How is physiology relevant to behavior analysis? The Behavior Analyst, 19 (1), 61-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392739

Reese, H. W. (1997). Counterbalancing and other uses of repeatedmeasures Latin-square designs: Analyses and interpretations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64 (1),137-158. doi: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1006/jecp.1996.2333

Reese, H. W. (1998). Utility of group methodology in behavior analysis and developmental psychology. Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis, 24 (2), 137-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.5514/rmac.v1.i2.27099

Reese, H. W. (1999). Strategies for replication research as exemplified by replications of the Istomina study. Developmental Review, 19 (1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1998.0473

Reese, H. W. (2010). Regarding little Albert. American Psychologist, 65(4), 300–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019332

Reese, H. W. (2013). Influence of John B. Watson’s behaviorism on child psychology. Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis, 39 (2),4880. https://doi.org/10.5514/rmac.v39.i2.63918

Reese, H. W., & Overton, W. F. (1970). Models of development and theories of development. In L. R. Goulet & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: Research and theory (pp. 115- 145). Academic Press.

Reese, H. W., & Overton, W. F. (1972). On paradigm shifts. American Psychologist, 27 (12), 1197-1199. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0038064

Sidman, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal classes. In T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.). Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213-245). Erlbaum.

Sidman, M., & Cresson, O. (1973). Reading and transfer of crossmodal stimulus equivalences in severe retardation. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 77 (5), 515-523.

Sidman, M., & Tailby, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: An expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1982.37-5

Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20 (2), 158‒177. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0074428

Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3 (1), 1-14. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0069608

WVU Catalog (1963). West Virginia University.