# Notation

**URL:** <http://discourse.iapct.org/t/notation/7759>\
**Category:** CSG1999\
**Created:** [November 21, 1999, 8:40pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/notation/7759 "1999-11-21T20:40:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Fred\_Nickols3](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/9de053/32.png) [@Fred\_Nickols3](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Fred_Nickols3)\
**Post date:** [November 21, 1999, 8:40pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/notation/7759/1 "1999-11-21T20:40:24Z")

</div>

[From Fred Nickols (991120.1530)] --

> Rick Marken (991119.0740)]
> 
> > Bruce Abbott (991118.1940 EST)
> 
> > The environment is the neglected side of PCT
> 
> What? I think it's far more accurate to say that the  
> environment is the neglected side of conventional  
> psychology. Conventional psychology looks \_only\_ at  
> the effect of the environment on the organism (b = f(e);  
> behavior is a function of the environment)

Y'all know I will readily confess to being a dilettante -- in lots of  
areas, not just PCT -- but I have spent a number of years digging around in  
lots of psychology books and not once have I ever come across the  
expression in the notation above. On numerous occasions, I have seen  
b=f(i...e...), expressing the notion that behavior is a function of  
individual and environmental variables.

So, Rick, can you point me to a source wherein the more limited version you  
gave us is presented?

> **···**
>
> --
> 
> Fred Nickols  
> The Distance Consulting Company  
> "Assistance at A Distance"  
> [http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm](http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm)  
> nickols@worldnet.att.net  
> (609) 490-0095

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![R\_Marken](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@R\_Marken](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/R_Marken)\
**Post date:** [November 21, 1999, 11:47pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/notation/7759/2 "1999-11-21T23:47:08Z")

</div>

[From Rick Marken (991121.1545)]

Fred Nickols (991120.1530) --

> On numerous occasions, I have seen b=f(i...e...), expressing  
> the notion that behavior is a function of individual and  
> environmental variables.
> 
> So, Rick, can you point me to a source wherein the more  
> limited version you gave us is presented?

Most statistics books -- especially those that describe the  
"general linear model" (there's a good old one by Mendenhall  
that I had back in the late 60s; probably published in 1968)--  
give the basic equation for behavior as

b = k1a1+k2a2...+knan+ e

This is a version of b = f(e) as is your (b = f(i..e..)).  
The independent variables in these equations can include  
environmental variables (like tone intensity), individual  
variables (like sex, height, ethnic group, test scores, etc)  
and "organismic" variables (like blood pressure). All of  
these variables can be called "environmental" because they  
are mathematically "outside" (and causally related to)  
behavior (whose value is presumed to be "dependent" on the  
values of these causal variables).

In control theory, the corresponding equation for behavior is:

p = f(r)

A perceptual variable (p) is the "dependent" (actually,  
"controlled") variable; its value is dependent on a  
variable (r) which is unobservable; a theoretical construct  
called the reference signal (variable). So one of the main  
goals of PCT research is to discover the function of  
environmental variables, (a variable called qi, where  
qi = g(e1, e2...en)), that corresponds to the variable p.

Best

Rick

> **···**
>
> --
> 
> Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313  
> Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net  
> [http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/](http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/)