Operant Conditioning Paper

Operant condition genus Vanessa Mejias November 28, 2011 Ross Seligman PSY/390 Operant Conditioning In a world that was ruled by psychoanalytical studies, and Thorndikes puzzle box to rationalize conductism, B. F. muleteer was a r growthary in the world of psychology. His studies and reports on operative learn has non only survived ridicule and in last in his term only when has alike survived the passage of time and social evolution to coordinated his theories several decades later.By skill from and expanding upon skinners memorandum of reward the world of social and academic skill has larnd from a puzzling forge to a learned process that could be mum the world over. During his enquiry mule driver essential a surmisal to modify behaviour believing that way fanny be cr eraseed beca defend use of of a incontrovertible or proscribely charged stimulus or environment, instead of serious instinctu everyy responding to stimuli, like scratching an itch. time he did not create the earthing of style modification, his research whollyowed him to expand upon already brisk theories developed by Pavlov and Thorndike.mule skinners opening night consisted of two characters of deportment, respondent and operant demeanour (Olsen & Hergerhahn, 2009). To go on with, and help modify un wanted deportment mule driver developed two types of condition. theatrical role S overly kn decl be as respondent teach and Type R also receiven as operant conditioning. Type S conditioning is the uniform to classic conditioning as draw by Pavlov and focuses primarily on the importation of the stimulus cralimentation a preferred repartee or air (Olsen & Hergerhahn, 2009).Whereas type R conditioning is similar to Thorndikes instrumental conditioning, by focusing upon the re sue after the stimulus (Olsen & Hergerhahn, 2009). The theory of operant conditioning focuses on the iv types of stimuli that brush aside elicit a response. corroborat ive backing is an act that adds to a funding that depart emit an increase in manner, while disallow financial backing is an act that defy aims away a accompaniment that go forth create an increase in demeanor.Whereas penalisation follows the corresponding guidelines with incontrovertible and negative penalisation that the discordence lies in the behavior. While bread and butter ordain increase behavior punishment is supposed to decrease behavior. quenching provided is the act of eliminating the strengthener or punishment to eliminate the behavior and go back to the behavior prior to act modification. The differences between dogmatic and negative reinforcements atomic number 18 not that profound. In actuality the similarities be unbroken than the differences.Reinforcement is the act of increasing behavior, however it is the type of reinforcement used that causes the differences. If positive reinforcement is used indeed the stimuli leave alone add to th e behavior, for grammatical case a cross is t nonagenarian to sit while the trainer pushes lot on the hind side. Once the furrow sits he or she is given a treat. Again the act is repeated with the same reinforcement given, so in this instance the dog is learning that once the necessitate behavior is preformed it will arrive a treat, the treat is adding to the increased and sought after behavior.However, in the form of negative reinforcement a stimuli is taken away to increase the desired behavior. For instance, if a tyke wants a halo but will not eat their food, then the c argiver will take away the donut and tell the tyke they need to eat their lunch beforehand they moderate their chomp. In this instance the snack is taken away so that the squirt will increase the behavior of eating what is required before unhealthy foods. Although reinforcement, punishment and extinction all consent their uses, it is knotty which is more(prenominal) effective.Skinner determined that punishment was not as effective as reinforcements. However the debate is whether positive or negative reinforcement is more effective. Upon review, it counts that positive and negative reinforcement has the same act yet need to be administered down the stairs different circumstances based upon the behavior required, the environment, per give-and-takeality and cultural mildews that melt portentous parts in an individuals behavior.Throughout Skinners research he created a method in which behavior modification could be observed. This is called a schedule of reinforcement. Although Pavlov started to experiment with partial reinforcement with classical conditioning, it was the comprehensive research that Skinner performed that closureed in the complete understanding and intensity of scheduled reinforcement.An example of operant conditioning that uses scheduled reinforcement is commode training. passel training incorporates operant and classical conditioning, however it is t hrough the use of reinforcement that creates a positive outcome. During grass training the squirt is introduced to the continuous reinforcement schedule, which mode that every time the child controls their bladder and uses the crapper a reinforcement will be given.After a time this schedule can be altered to incorporate the fixed interval reinforcement schedule, what this means is that after a set tot of time the child will use the restroom on their own and receive a reinforcement afterwards, so the child will learn to anticipate the reinforcement prior to the use of the toilet. Once toilet training is complete the child will go from operant conditioning using the toilet for reward, to classical conditioning using the toilet to scent relief from the discomfort of a bountiful bladder.Although Skinners methods use up been ridiculed and atomic number 18 abstract comp ard to some former(a) behaviorists theories, his research has allowed the field of battle of psychology to m ove onto other avenues of possibilities. Whereas, Thorndike, Hull, Pavlov and other known greats have set the foundation to psychology, it was Skinners methods and emphasis on operant conditioning that allowed mankind to evolve in the understanding of behavior in fleshlys and globe alike.As a result of Skinners radical views educators, animal trainers, psychologists, and caregivers are given hope that multifariousness in mavens behavior is attainable and eliminates the blame method of humanity. Skinners work makes what it means to be responsible for sensations own actions. References Olsen, M. , & Hergerhahn, B. R. (2009). An Introduction to Theories of schooling University of capital of Arizona Custom Edition eBook. speeding attach River, NJ Pearson Prentice Hall. Retrieved from University of Phoenix, PSY390 website.Operant Conditioning PaperOperant Conditioning Berline jean Baptiste PSY/390 March 4, 2013 Esther Siler-Colbert Abstract When thinking near conditioning in general, angiotensin converting enzymeness will, virtually(prenominal) plausibly, refer to classical, and operant conditioning proper(a) away. Furthermore, those who study psychology will interrelate classical conditioning with Ivan Pavlov who was a far-famed Russian psychologist and operant conditioning with B. F. Skinner, who was a very influential American psychologist. correct though both types of conditioning differ greatly from each other, they are pipe down equally significant to education.Operant Conditioning If one follows the assumptions of a behaviorist, then not all behavior is genetically determined. Since it is not, it is either a function of responded or operant conditioning. Skinner surely followed the footsteps of E. L. Thorndike, who used the term of instrumental conditioning instead of operant. Both, however, believed that animals and humans are capable of more conglomerate behavior, albeit gradually. According to Skinner, this form of learning was a conditioning one, but one that was of a different kind from the one proposed by Pavlov.For instance, in respondent behavior, one does something in a passive manner to the environment however, in operant conditioning, one does it because someplace in the past this kind of behavior was associated with a pleasing outcome or with pick uping to avoid the occurrence of an acerb one. Therefore, quite blow from what respondent behavior is, this kind of operant is ever so conditioned. genuinely fundamental to manoeuvre that the probability of a behavior occurring again, increases or decreases with the merit of its proceedss. Clearly, it can be said that one learns to connect an action to its consequence.The bond between the action and the consequence is referred to as contingency, which further declares ones behavior in the future(a) (Alloy, Riskind &038 Manos, 2005). In Skinners theory of operant conditioning there are three different equipment casualty, which are needed, and they are stimulus, response, and reinforcement, and as acknowledged by Skinner on several occasions, life is replete(p) of reinforces. There are different kinds of reinforces too, such(prenominal) as food or sex, to which one responds instinctively. These kinds of reinforces are known as patriarchal reinforces and do not need to be learned.However, one responds aroundly to reinforce that were conditioned, referred immediately to as secondary reinforces (Alloy, Riskind &038 Manos, 2005). There are three components in operant conditioning named positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment. According to Skinners theory, reinforcement is a consequence that will result in a behavior repeating punishment has the opposite effect. It is very important to know that the terms positive and negative do not refer to something being just benignant or unpleasant but instead, they indicate if a stimulus was added or taken away.To further simplify, in positive reinforcement th e behavior is strengthened by adding a stimulus and in negative reinforcement, the behavior is weakened by removing one. Still, it is very important to point out that negative reinforcement is very a great deal confused with punishment. unrivaled needs to keep in legal opinion that one kind strengthens behavior, such as the reinforcement, whereas the other one, the punishment, eliminates behavior (Alloy, Riskind &038 Manos, 2005). It is difficult to define clearly, which reinforcement is the most effective one.Two major factors, the organism itself and the kind of circumstances, come into play when trying to make a decision of this kind. While for some, positive reinforcement whitethorn work very well, for others the effectiveness of a negative reinforcement big businessman do more. In accession, the results one seeks could also influence which one might be the pause selection. So for instance, if one is in a restaurant and had a great dinner, he or she will most likely leav e a big tip. In this scenario, positive reinforcement will most likely have a great impact than a negative one.However, one would use negative reinforcement when trying to pull back something annoying, such as a loud noise. Using a seatbelt in a car will remove the annoying beep noise that is usually there when one is unbuckled. Therefore, using the seatbelt is strengthen because it removes a stimulus. In summary, it can be acknowledge that both kinds of reinforcement are very effective since they increase the accident of a future response. In addition to positive and negative reinforcement, there is also the positive and negative punishment.For instance, positive punishment can be one adding an hot under the collar(predicate) voice to an argument while negative punishment can be removing privileges, which parents often do when trying to punish their children for bountiful behavior. Once again, what kind of reinforcement, and thus far punishment, is the most effective, truly depends on different aspects (Schunk, 2008). The use of operant conditioning can be very often observed in parents raising their children. The same can be applied to me. I am a mom of two boys, one who is about two years hoary and the other who is two months old. They not only differ in their physical appearance but also in their character.It seems while negative reinforcement might work truly well on the 19 months old, it probably would not work well on my two months old when his older. Since my 19 months old is usually very active, behave extremely well, like to read his book, and due his periodic learning charts if this would suddenly spay, I would try to apply negative reinforcement to manakin his behavior. Even though my two months old is not yet old enough to take action towards, but if he starts crying after his diaper has been change and hes been fed then I will use positive reinforcement to shape his behavior.Knowing my 19 months old, I am assuming the only practic able way to shape his behavior and have him read his book and also have him do his daily learning charts invariably would be by having him spend more time indoors, instead of playing outside. Therefore, the choice to use negative reinforcement is the pure(a) one for him and for this kind of situation. If he wanted to go outside more and play, he would be able to gain more of this time back by not falling behind. Once doing so, he could go outside again and play with his friends. In this case, good behavior would decrease the time he would have to stay indoors.If my two months old decided not to unwrap crying and would require some attention, I would use attention to shape his behavior, which in this case would work as a positive reinforcement. Paying attention to him, demonstrate him that I am here even when he is not being held would make him feel more secure and wint mind lying in his swinger. In addition, depending on the situation, continuous reinforcement might not always be possible. For instance, I might not always have the time to give him all of my attention because I do have to share myself between him and my other son.Maybe extra strategies, such as the use of reinforcement schedules, might be necessary. There are four kinds of reinforcement schedules called fixed ratio, uncertain ratio, fixed interval, and variable interval. In my sons case, variable ratio might work well. He knows he will get the attention when I can however, he wont know when it will happen. However, if both, the positive and negative reinforcement, seem not to work, then there is the possibility of using punishment. In this case, I would take privileges away from both of them so that their behavior can be shaped (Martinez, 2010).References Alloy, L. , B. , Riskind, J. , H. &038 Manos, M. , J. (2005). deviate psychology Current perspectives (9th. ed. ) New York, NY The McGraw-Hills Companies Inc. Martinez, M. , E. (2010). Learning and cognition The design of the mind. Upp er file River, NJ Pearson Education Inc. Olson, M. , H. &038 Hergenhahn, B. , R. (2009). An Introduction to theories of learning. (8th. Ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ Pearson Education, Inc. Schunk, D. , H. (2008). Learning theories An educational perspective (5th. ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ Pearson Education Inc.