• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

By Root 845 0

curve shows that the time it took the cats to escape gradually fell. The random movements disappeared until the cat learned that just stepping on the pedal caused the door to open. Thorndike called this instrumental learning, a form of associative learning in which a behavior becomes more or less probable depending on its consequences. He studied how the cats’ actions were instrumental or important in producing the consequences. His Law of Effect states that behaviors followed by satisfying or positive consequences are strengthened (more likely to occur) while behaviors followed by annoying or negative consequences are weakened (less likely to occur).

B. F. Skinner’s Training Procedures

B. F. Skinner called Thorndike’s instrumental conditioning operant conditioning because subjects voluntarily operate on their environment in order to produce desired consequences. Skinner was interested in the ABCs of behavior: antecedents or stimuli that are present before a behavior occurs, behavior that the organism voluntarily emits, and consequences that follow the behavior. He studied rats, pigeons, and other animals in operant conditioning chambers, also called Skinner boxes, equipped with levers, food dispensers, lights, and an electrified grid. In the boxes, animals could get food rewards or electrical shocks.

Skinner developed four different training procedures: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, punishment, and omission training. In positive reinforcement or reward training, emission of a behavior or response is followed by a reinforcer that increases the probability that the response will occur again. When a rat presses a lever and is rewarded with food, it tends to press the lever again. Praise after you contribute to a class discussion is likely to cause you to participate again. According to the Premack principle, a more probable behavior can be used as a reinforcer for a less probable one.

Negative reinforcement takes away an aversive or unpleasant consequence after a behavior has been given. This increases the chance that the behavior will be repeated in the future. When a rat presses a lever that temporarily turns off electrical shocks, it tends to press the lever again. If you have a bad headache and then take an aspirin that makes it disappear, you are likely to take aspirin the next time you have a headache. Both positive and negative reinforcement bring about desired responses and so both increase or strengthen those behaviors.

“I use the Premack principle whenever I study. After an hour of studying for a test, I watch TV or call a friend. Then I go back to studying. Knowing I’ll get a reward keeps me working.”—Chris, AP student

In punishment training, a learner’s response is followed by an aversive consequence. Because this consequence is unwanted, the learner stops emitting that behavior. A child who gets spanked for running into the street stays on the grass or sidewalk. Punishment should be immediate so that the consequence is associated with the misbehavior, strong enough to stop the undesirable behavior, and consistent. Psychologists caution against the overuse of punishment because it does not teach the learner what he/she should do, suppresses rather than extinguishes behavior, and may evoke hostility or passivity. The learner may become aggressive or give up. An alternative to punishment is omission training. In this training procedure, a response by the learner is followed by taking away something of value from the learner. Both punishment and omission training decrease the likelihood of the undesirable behavior, but in omission training the learner can change this behavior and get back the positive reinforcer. One form of omission training used in schools is called time-out, in which a disruptive child is removed from the classroom until the child changes his/her behavior. The key to successful omission training is knowing exactly what is rewarding and what isn’t for each individual.

Operant Aversive Conditioning

Negative reinforcement is often confused with punishment. Both are