Theory of Operant Conditioning

Running header: Operant Conditioning

Operant Conditioning

Ben Matias

University of Phoenix (online)

Psychology 390

June 13, 2011

Dennis Plunkett, MC, CC

Operant Conditioning

Theory of Operant Conditioning

B. F. Skinner believed that animal and humans alike were capable of more complex behavior, coined as albeit gradually. Skinners belief was that this form of learning was conditioning and thus was different than that proposed by Pavlov. For example, respondent behavior was when one does something in that of a passive form depending on the environment. Whereas in operant condition it was because of something in which occurred in the past, with this said it would associate an act with something pleasing or with something in which they would want to avoid due to an unpleasant outcome. This is opposite of that of respondent behavior due to the fact that it is conditioned. It is also important to understand that in the end it is the amount of occurrences in which determine one operant conditioning, whereas the increase or decrease of the behavior would show the behavior. It can be understood that one learns by the associating an act with the consequences it would bring. It is the bond between an action and consequence in which one associate's contingency, thusly it declares one's behavior in the future (Alloy, Riskind & Manos, 2005).

Skinner's theory of operant conditioning showed three different terms and they were stimulus, response, and reinforcement. Skinner noted on several occasions that life was full of many rein forcers. The different kinds of reinforcers were food and/or sex and one would respond instinctively to one or the other. These reinforcers were known also as primary reinforcers and needed not by learned. Moreover, one would respond mainly to reinforcers in which were conditioned; today this is referred to as secondary reinforcers (Alloy, Riskind & Manos, 2005).

Compartment and Contrast of Positive and Negative Reinforcement

There are three different areas in operant conditioning and they are positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment. In Skinner's theory reinforcement is a concern in which the result of a behavior that is repeated would be a deterrent; punishment would therefore have the opposite effect. It is important to understand that positive and negative are not always unpleasant or pleasant but on the other hand it shows whether a stimulus was there or if it was not present. To make positive reinforcement simpler behavior can be stronger by adding a stimulus and on the other hand where negative reinforcement in inputted in the behavior it is thus weaker, whereas the stimulus is that of a negative matter. However, it becomes important to know that negative reinforcement is confused for punishment. It is important to understand that one strengthens the behavior, the other one would such as punishment removes the behavior (Alloy, Riskind & Manos, 2005).

Determination of the Effectiveness of Reinforcement

It is without question difficult to define which reinforcement is the best one. There are two major points in which must be known to the organism, and it is important when making a decision of which one to use. For some positive reinforcement would work well for some the outcome of using negative reinforcement may be better for others. Moreover, it is also the type of result one is seeking which would determine which is the best choice. For example, when one goes to a restaurant and has a great meal the tip would be bigger. In this scenario, the positive reinforcement would be better that of a negative one. For a negative reinforcement in the removing of an annoying