Introduction to classical and operant conditioning - Essay Example

? Introduction to Psychology Introduction to ical and Operant Conditioning The perception ical conditioning was fundamentally composed by a physiologist from Russia named Ivan Pavlov. According to this physiologist, the notion of classical conditioning is a kind of learning which is primarily based upon the alliance of a stimulus. It is a learning procedure which generally takes place through alliances between a naturally happening stimulus and an ecological stimulus. It has been apparently observed that the chief constituent present in classical conditioning is association. It implies that if in excess of one stimulus is constantly experienced together then they would become associated. For instance, if a particular student periodically meets with unlikable stimuli particularly in his/her Science class which includes unfriendly teachers, large number of homework and hard questions, the student might learn to dislike the subject of Science. The idea of classical conditioning is regarded to be one of the best-known facets of the theory of behavioral learning relating to the field of psychology. The theory of classical conditioning which is hypothesized by Ivan Pavlov focused upon the fact that an unconditioned stimulus will generally produce an unconditioned response. He discovered this theory by conducting an experiment upon the dogs in order to measure the saliva that the dogs produce when the food i.e. meat is given to them. While conducting the experiment, Ivan Pavlov identified that the dogs were salivating prior to the food i.e. meat was given to them. This type of response or reaction can be illustrated as the stage of classical conditioning (The Learning Domain, n.d.). The conception of operant conditioning was coined by an American inventor, psychologist as well as author named B. F. Skinner in the year 1938. According to Skinner, the aspect of operant conditioning is such a learning form in which the behavior of any individual is altered by consequences. The theory represents that when certain behavior takes place in a particular circumstance, it will follow a few consequences. The various facets of operant conditioning are positive as well as negative reinforcement, extinction and punishment. In this similar context, the feature of positive and negative reinforcement reinforces a certain behavior, whereas, the facets such as extinction and punishment simply do the reverse one i.e. weaken a certain behavior. The idea of operant conditioning is also acknowledged as instrumental conditioning which acts as a process for altering a behavior. Skinner noticed that there lie different kinds of operant or responses which can pursue as well as modify behaviors. The responses include neutral operants, punishers and reinforcers. In this regard, the neutral operants are considered to be those responses that neither enlarge nor diminish the probability of a behavior while being repetitive. The reinforcers are regarded to be those responses that enlarge the possibility of a behavior being repetitive. Conversely, the punishers are viewed to be those responses that diminish the prospect of a behavior being repetitive. Thus, on the basis of the above discussion, it can be stated that the behavior of the individuals can be modified or changed by consequences (McLeod, 2007). Comparison between Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning The vital distinction between classical conditioning and operant conditioning is that the former establishes an association between more than one stimulus and the latter forms an alliance between a behavior and a consequence. The notion of classical conditioning normally transacts with instinctive or reflexive responses which include emotional or physiological responses. Conversely, the idea of operant conditioning generally deals with certain voluntary behaviors which comprise active behaviors that work on the environment. In the case of operant conditioning, reinforcers perform as incentives for learning, whereas, classical conditioning does not offer any sort of incentives. The supposition of operant conditioning depends upon the learner in order to take part actively in the learning procedure as it emphasizes upon consequences and behavior. In contrast, classical conditioning does not depend upon the learner for the purpose of actively participating in the learning procedure as it focuses upon the alliance between the stimuli. The reinforcement in classical conditioning theory neutrally makes stronger the conditional response. In contrary, the reinforcement in operant conditioning positively or negatively strengthens the conditional response (Nicholas, 2009). Classical conditioning generally considers the important facets like discrimination, generalization, spontaneous recovery and extinction. Conversely, operant conditioning normally considers the vital aspects which include positive as well as negative reinforcement along with punishment. In the case of classical conditioning, an involuntary response is usually being preceded by a stimulus, whereas, in operant conditioning, a voluntary response is being pursued by a reinforcing stimulus. It has been apparently observed that the feature of extinction occurs in the field of classical conditioning because the conditioned stimulus (CS) is no longer accompanied by unconditioned stimulus (US). In contrast, the facet of extinction happens in operant conditioning because the behavior of an individual is not being reinforced. It has been observed that operant conditioning was instigated quite well before classical conditioning. Moreover, operant conditioning is exercised in order to train the organisms for performing any specific act. In contrast, classical conditioning is utilized in order to make the organisms to stop carrying out any particular activity (Nicholas, 2009). Strengths and Weaknesses of Classical Conditioning The greatest strength of classical conditioning is that it is much more effectual in comparison with operant conditioning. The other strength of classical conditioning is that it has a positive impact upon research methodology as it draws deliberate attention to observation as well as the measurement of behaviors. Additionally, the other strength of classical conditioning is that it enables to reveal the significance of association which is quite logical or sensible by demonstrating an experiment relating with the saliva of the dogs. Pavlov experimented with the dogs by employing different stimuli such as meat or bell in order to trigger the salivation response of the dogs. It has been viewed that the therapists use the guiding principles of classical conditioning in order to alter behavior and also to address the difficulties arising from any fear or panic. Apart from the strengths, there also lie certain weaknesses of classical conditioning theory. In this regard, one of the weaknesses of this theory is that it is considered as a reductionist approach. This is due to the reason of not learning all behaviors and the theory disregards the cognitive factors. Another weakness of classical conditioning theory is that it deeply realizes upon animal research and was somewhat unethical to test upon the animals i.e. dogs in order to measure their saliva production (Weseley & McEntarffer, 2010). Strengths and Weaknesses of Operant Conditioning The key strength of operant conditioning is that the theory offers the educators with uncomplicated as well as effectual tactics in order to teach them new behaviors and skills proficiently and rapidly. Moreover, the theory of operant conditioning is much helpful for teaching any sort of action sequences like driving a car and cleaning teeth among others. Additionally, the theory emphasizes upon valuable factors like behaviors and consequences which ultimately help to manage as well as to organize any kind of undesirable behaviors. Apart from the major strengths, the theory of operant conditioning also possesses certain crucial weaknesses. One of the imperative weaknesses of the theory is that it ignores the contribution which is made by the cognition as well as the cognitive skills to learning. The other important weakness of operant conditioning theory is that it is viewed to be inadequate for demonstrating composite behavioral forms like problem solving. Furthermore, it has been apparently observed that certain concerns of operant conditioning theory fail to impose a positive impact upon long-term development of an individuals’ behavior (Weseley & McEntarffer, 2010). References McLeod, S. (2007). Operant conditioning. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html Nicholas, L. (2009). Introduction to psychology. South Africa: Juta and Company Ltd. The Learning Domain. (n.d.). Learning theories – behaviorism. Retrieved from http://peoplelearn.homestead.com/BEduc/Chapter_4.pdf Weseley, A. J., & McEntarffer, R. (2010). Barron's AP psychology. New York: Barron's Educational Series. Read More