OPERANT CONDITIONING

Proponent: B.F. Skinner

He believed that the best way to understand

behavior is to look at the causes of an
action and its consequences.
Operant Conditioning deals with operants intentional actions that have an effect on the
surrounding environment. Skinner set out to
identify the processes which made certain
operant behaviours more or less likely to
occur.
Skinner's theory of operant conditioning was
based on the work of Thorndike (1905).
Edward Thorndike studied learning in
animals using a puzzle box to propose the
theory known as the 'Law of Effect'.
B.F. Skinner (1938) coined the term operant
conditioning; it means roughly changing of
behavior by the use of reinforcement which
is given after the desired response. Skinner
identified three types of responses or
operant that can follow behavior.
Neutral operants: responses from the
environment that neither increase nor
decrease the probability of a behavior being
repeated.
Reinforcers: Responses from the
environment that increase the probability of
a behavior being repeated. Reinforcers can
be either positive or negative.
Punishers: Responses from the environment
that decrease the likelihood of a behavior
being repeated. Punishment weakens
behavior.
We can all think of examples of how our
own behavior has been affected by
reinforcers and punishers. As a child you
probably tried out a number of behaviors
and learned from their consequences.
For example, if when you were younger you
tried smoking at school, and the chief
consequence was that you got in with the
crowd you always wanted to hang out with,
you would have been positively reinforced
(i.e. rewarded) and would be likely to repeat
the behavior. If, however, the main
consequence was that you were caught,
caned, suspended from school and your

parents became involved you would most

certainly have been punished, and you
would consequently be much less likely to
smoke now.
Positive Reinforcement
Positive reinforcement strengthens a
behavior by providing a consequence an
individual finds rewarding. For example, if
your teacher gives you 5 each time you
complete your homework (i.e. a reward) you
will be more likely to repeat this behavior in
the future, thus strengthening the behavior
of completing your homework.

Negative Reinforcement
The removal of an unpleasant reinforcer can
also strengthen behavior. This is known as
negative reinforcement because it is the
removal of an adverse stimulus which is
rewarding to the animal or person.
Negative reinforcement strengthens
behavior because it stops or removes an
unpleasant experience.
For example, if you do not complete your
homework, you give your teacher 5. You
will complete your homework to avoid
paying 5, thus strengthening the behavior
of completing your homework.
POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT - Reward presenting
the subject with something that it likes. E.g. Skinner
rewarded his rats with food pellets.
NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT - Reward in the
sense of removing or avoiding some aversive (painful)
stimulus. E.g.Skinner's rats learned to press the lever
in order to switch off the electric current in the cage.
PUNISHMENT - Imposing an aversive or painful
stimulus. E.g. Skinners rats were given electric
shocks.
PRIMARY REINFORCERS - These are stimuli which
are naturally reinforcing because they directly satisfy
a need. E.g. food, water.
SECONDARY REINFORCERS - These are stimuli,
which are reinforcing through their association with a
primary reinforcer. I.e. they do not directly satisfy a
need but may be the means to do so. E.g. Money!
You cannot eat it or drink it but if you have it you can
buy whatever you want. So a secondary reinforcer
can be just as powerful a motivator as a primary
reinforcer.

Classical Conditioning
The unconditioned stimulus is the
stimulus that naturally and
instinctively elicits the target
response, which, in the case of his
classic experiment is the meat powder.
The conditioned stimulus is the
stimulus that comes to elicit the target
response, which was the tone in
Pavlovs experiment.
The unconditioned and conditioned
responses are a little trickier to
identify in that they are often the
exact same behavior. For example in
Pavlovs experiment they are both
salivation.
The fundamental difference is that the
unconditioned response occurs as a
result of the unconditioned stimulus,
and the conditioned response occurs
in response to the conditioned
stimulus. In the Pavlov experiment,
the unconditioned response is
salivation in response to the meat
powder, and the conditioned response
is salivation in response to the tone.
(See Figure 1)
Unconditioned Stimulus (US) a
stimulus that unconditionally
(naturally and automatically) triggers
a response - Example: smell, taste,
sight of food Unconditioned Response
(UR) unlearned, natural response to
the unconditioned stimulus - Example:
salivation
Classical Conditioning: Conditioned
Stimuli and Responses
Conditioned Stimulus (CS) an
originally neutral stimulus that, after
association with an unconditioned
stimulus (US), comes to trigger a
conditioned response. - Example: tone,
bell ringing
Conditioned Response (CR) learned
response to a previously neutral (but
now conditioned) stimulus

Little Albert Experiment

(Phobias)
Ivan Pavlov showed that classical conditioning applied to
animals. Did it also apply to humans? In a famous
(though ethically dubious) experiment, Watson and
Rayner (1920) showed that it did.
Little Albert was a 9-month-old infant who was tested on
his reactions to various stimuli. He was shown a white
rat, a rabbit, a monkey and various masks. Albert
described as "on the whole stolid and unemotional"
showed no fear of any of these stimuli. However, what did
startle him and cause him to be afraid was if a hammer
was struck against a steel bar behind his head. The
sudden loud noise would cause "little Albert to burst into
tears.
When Little Albert was just over 11 months old the white
rat was presented and seconds later the hammer was
struck against the steel bar. This was done 7 times over
the next 7 weeks and each time Little Albert burst into
tears. By now little Albert only had to see the rat and he
immediately showed every sign of fear. He would cry
(whether or not the hammer was hit against the steel bar)
and he would attempt to crawl away.
In addition, the Watson and Rayner found that Albert
developed phobias of objects which shared
characteristics with the rat; including the family dog, a fur
coat, some cotton wool and a Father Christmas mask!
This process is know as generalization.
Watson and Rayner had shown that classical
conditioning could be used to create a phobia. A phobia
is an irrational fear, i.e. a fear that is out of proportion to
the danger. Over the next few weeks and months Little
Albert was observed and 10 days after conditioning his
fear of the rat was much less marked. This dying out of a
learned response is called extinction. However, even
after a full month it was still evident, and the association
could be renewed by repeating the original procedure a
few times.