Palmer David C, Eshleman John, Brandon Paul, Layng T V Joe, McDonough Christopher, Michael Jack, Schoneberger Ted, Stemmer Nathan, Weitzman Ray, Normand Matthew
Anal Verbal Behav. 2004;20:111-28. doi: 10.1007/BF03392998.
In the fall of 2003, the authors corresponded on the topic of private events on the listserv of the Verbal Behavior Special Interest Group. Extracts from that correspondence raised questions about the role of response amplitude in determining units of analysis, whether private events can be investigated directly, and whether covert behavior differs from other behavior except in amplitude. Most participants took a cautious stance, noting not only conceptual pitfalls and empirical difficulties in the study of private events, but doubting the value of interpretive exercises about them. Others argued that despite such obstacles, in domains where experimental analyses cannot be done, interpretation of private events in the light of laboratory principles is the best that science can offer. One participant suggested that the notion that private events can be behavioral in nature be abandoned entirely; as an alternative, the phenomena should be reinterpreted only as physiological events.
2003年秋，作者们在言语行为特别兴趣小组的邮件列表上就私人事件这一主题进行了通信交流。该通信的摘录引发了一些问题，比如反应幅度在确定分析单位中的作用、私人事件是否可以直接进行研究，以及隐蔽行为除了幅度之外是否与其他行为有所不同。大多数参与者持谨慎态度，不仅指出了在研究私人事件时存在的概念陷阱和实证困难，还对关于它们的解释性练习的价值表示怀疑。其他人则认为，尽管存在这些障碍，但在无法进行实验分析的领域，根据实验室原理对私人事件进行解释是科学所能提供的最佳方法。一位参与者建议完全摒弃私人事件本质上可以是行为的这一观念；作为替代方案，这些现象应该仅重新解释为生理事件。
