Reinforcement Theory and the Study of Human Behavior - Research Proposal Example

Reinforcement Theory Reinforcement Theory Introduction Humans are precarious creatures. On the one hand, we are the most intelligent species on the face of the planet, yet on the other we have become painfully aware of our weaknesses and limitations throughout time. One of these areas that has limited us is in terms of our motivation to excel and progressively move forward. Long ago we learned that, absent a certain level of reinforcement given in exchange for positive behavior, we are quite content to stay the status quo and not contribute anything of value or substance to society. Thankfully, there are now reinforcers put into place throughout human civilization that have enabled us to aspire towards greatness, and this is a field of psychology that continues to expand our horizons in terms of helping us understand the power that resides within each human being. The reinforcement theory helps people to better understand this process. First proposed by BF Skinner, industrial and organizational psychologists have long since been keenly aware of the power that certain reinforcers have in terms of motivating people towards positive action. The reinforcement theory itself stipulates that the behavior that an individual expresses is actually a direct function and reflection of its consequences. In essence, the reinforcement theory is predicated on the notion of law and effect, whereby an individual that receives positive consequences after their behavior tends to repeat that same behavior, yet individuals you receive negative consequences work hard to not repeat that same behavior. At the same time, there are certain limitations to the reinforcement theory that must be taken into consideration as well, such as the reality that the theory itself overlooks the internal state of the individual in question. This includes the inner feelings and drives that individuals tend to have throughout their lives, yet these are overlooked by Skinners original theory and subsequent discussions. The theory itself is designed to focus upon what happens to a person when he or she undertakes a given action, so the external environment that exists should be designed in an effective and positive manner so that people are motivated to act. In today’s increasingly modern, global, and competitive atmosphere, this is most commonly reflected in an organizations ability to inspire and motive employees to excellence. As such, the reinforcement theory can certainly be seen to be an effective tool in terms of analyzing and controlling mechanisms that correspond to behaviors the individuals tend to exhibit in both their person and professional lives. The theory does stop short, however, of explaining the exact causes related to an individual’s behavior, so this should be a subject of discussion as well. Major Theoretical Propositions One of the main suppositions of the reinforcement theory revolves around the need for positive reinforcement in terms of influencing proper behavior within and throughout society. This notion implies that the giving of a positive response to an individual that demonstrates positive behavior that is considered to be within societal or organizational norms is highly beneficial. An example of this would be the rewarding of an employee that comes early to work by lavishing verbal praise on him or her (Adams, 1963). Doing so will increase the likelihood that said behavior will continue again and again. In this way, it is demonstrated that rewards can be used as a positive reinforcer, even though this is not always the case. In actuality, this theory supports the notion that a reward can only be viewed as a positive reinforcer if the particular reward can be specifically linked to an improvement in the behavior of the individual. In essence, positive reinforcement can serve to stimulate the level of occurrence of a particular behavior, but it should be noted that the more spontaneous the actual distribution of the reward is, the more value will be attached to the actual reinforcement of the behavior. The theory is also predicated on the counterargument that negative reinforcement is a reality in our society as well. This is not what it sounds like, however, as this part of the theory entails taking away negative consequences that were previously received as a result of behavior that went against the norms or mores of the organization or society in which the individual was acting in (Adams, 1963). As a result, they are given a negative consequence, which motivates to improve their behavior in the next instance. If they do, a reward would be given, thereby demonstrating that the negative reinforcement succeeded in altering the behavior of the individual. If negative behavior were to continue, however, the reinforcement theory advocates that giving of a punishment to the offender in hopes of changing their behavior for the good moving forward. The punishment aspect of the reinforcement stage involves the removal of positive consequences previously granted to an individual in an effort to lower the likelihood that undesirable behavior that has crept into the actions of the person in question will be repeated in the future. In essence, punishment advocates the application of undesirable consequences in return for an individuals propensity to demonstrate undesirable behavior. An example of this within an organization would be the suspension of an employee from all work duties if he or she were found to be repeatedly breaking important rules of the organization. In the end, the most prudent course of behavior would be to equalize the effects of a punishment by subsequently offering a form of positive reinforcement from an alternative source once the terms of the punishment have been successfully completed by the individual. Much of society, and organizations as well, will not move to invoke any types of reinforcements mentioned under the reinforcement theory. In such cases, extinction occurs, which in itself implies the absence of any reinforcements. When present, extinction actually works to lower the probability that an undesired behavior will be lowered because the reward for that behavior has been removed (Locke, 1968) If, for example, an employee no longer received verbal recognition for positive aspects of his or her work, the person might feel that their behavior is not being noticed and they will stop going the extra mile for the organization. According to Skinner, this would be an unintended result of extinction because positive behavior would not be enhanced as a result of extinction. Other scholars point out, however, that this negates any notion of intrinsic motivation, which invokes the idea that individuals can find their own internal motivation to complete tasks, independent of the need for any external recognition (Locke, 1968). Brief Literature Review Within literature, the reinforcement theory is also based upon the concept of operant conditioning, which is predicated on the work of John Watson in the 1920s. Watson looked at developing other explanations for human behavior, largely different from the notion of classical conditions. While scholars generally view the work of Watson to be a bit extreme, Skinner came along and narrowed the perspective a bit more within the field of psychology by focusing in specifically on the concept of reinforcers. While Skinner certain advocated the notion of free thinking individuals who could make up their own minds in terms of which behaviors they would actually act upon, he also felt it was prudent to study observable behavior to determine how, if at all, those same behaviors are influenced by the environment in which one finds him or her self (Landauer, 1969). In the end, Skinner believed that the best way to actually analyze and understand human behavior is to look at the various factors that result in an individual completing a particular action, and the resultant consequences that occur thereafter, either positive or negative. This process is known as operant conditioning and is generally considered to be the precursor to the reinforcement theory itself. Skinner’s theory of operating conditioning is adapted from and builds upon the published work of Thornidike back in the early 1900s (Landauer, 1969). Thorndike himself began his groundbreaking work by studying the behavior of animals by using a puzzle box. This morphed in a theory known as the ‘Law of Effect’ and formed much of the basis for Skinner to begin observing human behavior by incorporating some of the very same principles. In essence, research has proven that behavior that is reinforced tend to be repeated, or strengthened. In reverse, behavior that is not reinforced actually has been observed to be eliminated, extinguished, or weakened. Obviously, this theory does not work the same for all people, and many critics of Skinner’s work contends that it negates the process of the human mind and its capability to think for him or her self, one of the very concepts that Skinner work so hard to support. In essence, many would argue that the reinforcement theory negates any type of free thinking in terms of deciding how to act and in what way, as we truly become a product of our environment (Alderfer, 1972). Some would argue that this is a Marxist way of thinking whereby all of society thinks and acts in a certain way. In essence, the will of the state would win out as governments reward only the behavior that it sees to be beneficial to greater society, while working to stifle and dissenting behavior that might arise. Even with the critics, however, there is little denying that many humans do have a propensity to respond positively to positive reinforcement, while working to stay away from behavior that results in negative reinforcement or punishment. Skinner coined the term operant conditioning in order to identify the way that an individual’s behavior tend to change upon the introduction of a reinforcement, eventually resulting in what the person perceives to be the desired behavior. Within this thought process lies neutral operants, which are responses from the environment that neither increase nor decrease the likelihood that a behavior will be repeated. In essence, this is behavior that results irrespective of the environmental conditions, or the motivation or influence of others (Alderfer, 1972). An individual responding to a neutral operant tends to select his or her behavior based upon their desires or what they see to be the most prudent course of action. This would, in effect, be Skinner’s answer to critics that reject the reinforcement theory as explaining the way that all humans behave, as it negates the individuals that truly choose their actions on their own, completely independent of others around them. What Remains to be Studied Psychology is interested in the study of humans, the way they think, act, and react to different circumstances. A great part of this involves the manner in which a person choose to behave. We are a civilization that is predicated on the ability of the majority to conform to certain organizational and societal objectives, yet it is often difficult to determine how this has occurred. Skinner realized that all humans have the propensity to think for themselves, yet he also postulated that most individuals tend to behave as the group around them conditions them to do. This juxtaposition of human thought and action is what influenced the work of Skinner, and continues to provide much thought provoking discussion amongst scholars in the field of behavioral psychology (Bevan & Adamson, 1960). Skinner’s own theory is based upon the notion that learning is actually a function of change in behavior that is observable in both time and space. In essence, we can see this throughout the history of mankind, as over time entire societies and civilizations alter their course depending on what is acceptable behavior, choosing to punish any actions that are not considered to be accepted. An area of further study needs to be focused upon this group think process whereby an entire community, over time, can being to change the behavior and actions of the majority based upon the reinforcers that are distributed to the masses. Skinner did demonstrate that changes in behavior are most commonly seen to be the result of the stimuli introduced to an individual and that naturally occur within the environment in which the action is based. A response can be seen in terms of consequences given in response to simple events, such as defining a word, hitting a ball, or solving a problem. Once an individuals realizes a certain pattern in the stimuli introduced to them based upon their actions, they begin to determine internally how to act in a way that will lead to positive consequences. A distinguishing characteristic of operating conditioning, and the corresponding reinforcement theory, when compared to other theories of behaviorism involve its ability to examine an individual from the perspective that is can emit responses to other, instead of only eliciting reposes that are directly caused by an external stimulus (Brauer & Tittle, 2012). This aspect of the reinforcement theory is groundbreaking and must be considered further in the future. One are that can be focused upon is in the area of behavioral testing within the field of psychology. This has shown great promise in terms of determining how an individual is like to behave, or act, in a given situation with a contained environment. Most people have heard of IQ testing. This is a theoretical model that has been developed and refined over the years to measure the general intelligence level of a person. Such tests do not, however, measure actual intelligence. Rather, they are meant to measure what society believe to be importance factors and components related to intelligence. Within this type of assessment, there are two types of tests. One measure intelligence only, and the other is a neuropsychological assessment. The most common types of intelligence tests are the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler. The neuropsychological assessment is much more comprehensive and can take up to 2 days to complete. This test if focused not only on intelligence but also on discovering the various cognitive strengths and weaknesses that a person possesses. This type of test is usually administered to individuals who have suffered some type of brain damage, such as having a brain hemorrhage. Personality assessments, as their name implies, are meant to help a psychologist (or other type of helping professional) better understand the individual’s own personality. The development of one’s personality is actually dependent upon numerous factors that the individual encounters during their lifespan - up to the point of the assessment. These factors can be a combination of genetics and environment and social factors, such that a personality is not determined by one factor alone. Within this type of assessment, the two main types of objective and projective tests. Objective tests are typically given to people who want to better understand themselves, and for professionals to determine what type of approach is best when dealing with certain situations or people. Behavioral assessments seek to observe individuals and measure their behavior in order to determine why they act the way that they do. This assessment usually occurs after a clinical assessment and is completed more in narrative form, with the psychologist taking detailed notes along the way about what they observe taking place. This has great application to the reinforcement theory and operand conditioning. Naturally, any assessment that is given needs to be both reliable and valid. In the case of the clinical interview and behavioral assessment, this means that they examiner needs to be from bias and not affected by any outside influences that could cloud their judgement. The conclusions reached need to be highly objective and based only on the facts as presented by the client. For the IQ and Personality assessments, the instruments themselves have been proved valid through years of testing and empirical evidence. In the end, however, their reliability depends on the ability of the individual to answer each question objectively and honestly. Conclusion The study of human behavior continues to fascinate scholars in the field of psychology. It is important to conduct such studies with the code of ethics of the APA in mind, which this study will certainly do. Building upon past research and scholarly information readily available in texts and psychology journals, the researcher can aim to build upon this data and conduct new research that will hopefully, in the end, building upon the existing body of knowledge in the field. The reinforcement theory has shown great promise in not only helping broader society better understand why individuals act the way that they do, and it has also helped to help individuals within an organization or community work to change the behaviors of those individuals that may not currently be in compliance. This study will build upon this knowledge. References Adams, J. (1963). Toward an understanding of equity. Journal or Abnormal and Social Psychology, 11. Alderfer, C. (1972). Existence, relatedness, and growth: Human needs in organizational settings. New York: Free Press. Bevan, W. and Adamson, R. (1960). Reinforcers and reinforcement: Their relation to maze performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(4), 226-232. Brauer, J. and Tittle, C. (2012). Social learning theory and human reinforcement. Sociological Spectrum, 32(2), 157-177. Landauer, T. (1969). Reinforcement as consolidation. Psychological Review, 76(1), 82-96. Locke, E. (1968). Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5. Read More