5.4 Operant Conditioning

THE JEREMY LIN SHOW

Rising Star Jeremy Lin appears on a 2012 cover of Sports Illustrated. This rookie player amazed the world on February 4 of that same year when he came off the bench and led the New York Knicks to victory against the New Jersey Nets. It was the beginning of a Lin-led winning streak—the beginning of “Linsanity.”
Sports Illustrated/Getty Images

Madison Square Garden, February 4, 2012: The New York Knicks are playing their third game in three nights, hoping to end a losing streak. But they are already trailing far behind the New Jersey Nets in the first quarter. That’s when Jeremy Lin, a third-string point guard who is dangerously close to being cut from his third NBA team, bounds off the bench and leads the Knicks to a stunning victory. By the end of the game, the crowd is going crazy, the Knicks players are laughing like giddy schoolboys, and the Pearl Jam song “Jeremy” reverberates through the stadium (Beck, 2012, February 4; Dalrymple, 2012). One commentator perfectly sums up the state of affairs: “It’s the Jeremy Lin Show here at Madison Square Garden” (Dalrymple, 2012, p. 24).

Jeremy Lin was an overnight sensation. People around the world were fascinated by him for many reasons. He was the fourth Asian American player in NBA history; he was the first Harvard graduate to play in the league since the 1950s; and he had previously been a benchwarmer, who was not even drafted out of college (Beck, 2011, December 28). Everyone was asking the same question: Would Jeremy be a one-game wonder or something bigger?

Jeremy ended up leading the Knicks through a seven-game victory spree, the highlights of which included scoring 38 points against the Los Angeles Lakers—he scored more points in that game than the Lakers’ mighty Kobe Bryant (ESPN. com, 2012, February 10). Suddenly, Jeremy’s face was everywhere—on the covers of TIME Magazine and Sports Illustrated (twice) and all over the Internet. More people were typing “Jeremy Lin” into Google than “Tiger Woods” or “David Beckham” (Dalrymple, 2012, p. xv; Google, 2012, February 15).

Where did this guy come from? Like any of us, Jeremy is a unique blend of nature and nurture. He was blessed with a hearty helping of physical capabilities (nature), such as speed, agility, and coordination. But he was also shaped by the circumstances of his life (nurture). This second category is where learning comes in. Let’s find out how.

201

Operant Conditioning and the Law of Effect

We Did It, Coach! Jeremy and his teammates from Palo Alto High School celebrate a victory that led them to the 2006 state finals. Pictured in the center is Coach Peter Diepenbrock, who has maintained a friendship with Jeremy since he graduated. Prior to Jeremy’s sensational season with the Knicks, Diepenbrock helped him with his track workouts.
Keith Peters/Palo Alto Weekly

When Jeremy started Palo Alto High School, he was about 5′3″ and 125 pounds—not exactly NBA material. During his sophomore year, he learned to dunk, and by senior year, he was over 6 feet tall and leading his team to victory in the Division II state championship (Dalrymple, 2012; Tennis, 2012, February 19). Jeremy was a big fish in a small pond—so big that he didn’t need to work very hard to maintain his level of success. However, college recruiters did not observe anything exceptional in his strength or overall athleticism (Viera, 2012, February 12). This may be the reason Jeremy did not receive any athletic scholarship offers from Division 1 colleges, despite his hoops prowess and 4.2 grade point average (McGregor, 2012, February 15; Spears, 2012, February 18).

Things changed when Jeremy found himself in a bigger pond, playing basketball at Harvard University. That’s when Coach Diepenbrock says the young player began working harder on aspects of practice he didn’t particularly enjoy, such as weight lifting, ball handling, and conditioning. After being picked up by the NBA, Jeremy’s diligence soared to a new level. While playing with the Golden State Warriors, he would eat breakfast at the team’s training facility by 8:30 a.m., three and a half hours before practice. “Then, all of sudden, you’d hear a ball bouncing on the floor,” Keith Smart, a former coach told The New York Times (Beck, 2012, February 24). Between NBA seasons, Jeremy returned to his alma mater Palo Alto High School to run track workouts with Diepenbrock. He also trained with a shooting coach and spent “an inordinate amount of time” honing his shot (P. Diepenbrock, personal communication, May 21, 2012).

Jeremy’s persistence paid off. The once-scrawny scrapper, now 6′3″ and 200 pounds (ESPN.com, 2013), is exploding with power and agility. According to Diepenbrock, “He has gotten to the point where now, as far as the strength and the athleticism, he is on par—or good enough—with veteran NBA athletes” (personal communication, May 21, 2012).

Operant Conditioning

What has kept Jeremy working so hard all these years? Psychologists might attribute Jeremy’s ongoing efforts to operant conditioning, a type of learning in which people or animals come to associate their voluntary actions with their consequences. Whether pleasant or unpleasant, the effects of a behavior influence future actions. Think about some of the consequences of Jeremy’s training—short-term results like seeing his free throw shot improve, and long-term rewards like victory, fame, and fortune. How do you think these outcomes might have shaped (and continue to shape) Jeremy’s behavior? Before addressing this question, we need to take a closer look at operant conditioning.

Jeremy: Coach Diepenbrock's answer - What is your favorite memory of Jeremy?

Thorndike and His Cats

LO 7     Describe Thorndike’s law of effect.

One of the first scientists to objectively study the effect of consequences on behavior was American psychologist Edward Thorndike (1874–1949). Thorndike’s early research focused on chicks and other animals, many of which he kept in his apartment. But after an incubator almost caught fire, his landlady insisted he get rid of the chicks (Hothersall, 2004). It was in the lab that Thorndike conducted his research on cats. His most famous experimental setup involved putting a cat in a latched cage called a “puzzle box” and planting enticing pieces of fish outside the door. When first placed in the box, the cat would scratch and paw around randomly, but after a while, just by chance, it would pop the latch, causing the door to release. The cat would then escape the cage to devour the fish (Figure 5.2). The next time the cat was put in the box, it would repeat this random activity, scratching and pawing with no particular direction. And again, just by chance, the cat would pop the latch that released the door and freed it to eat the fish. Each time the cat was returned to the box, the number of random activities decreased until eventually it was able to break free almost immediately (Thorndike, 1898).

FIGURE 5.2Puzzle BoxEarly psychologist Edward Thorndike conducted his well-known cat experiments using “puzzle boxes” like the one shown here. At the start of the experiment, Thorndike’s cats pawed around haphazardly until they managed to unlatch the cage and then eat the fish treats outside the door. As the trials wore on, the felines learned to free themselves more and more quickly. After several trials, the amount of time needed to escape the box dropped significantly (see graph above). Thorndike attributed this phenomenon to the law of effect, which states that behaviors are more likely to reoccur if they are followed by pleasurable outcomes.
Source: Adapted from Thorndike, 1898.

202

We should highlight a few important issues relating to this early research. First, these cats discovered the solution to the puzzle box accidentally, while exhibiting their naturally occurring behaviors (scratching and exploring). So, they initially obtained the fish treat by accident. The other important point to note is that the measure of learning was not an exam or basketball shoot-off; instead, the amount of time it took the cats to break free was the measure of learning.

The cats’ behavior, Thorndike reasoned, could be explained by the law of effect, which says that a behavior (opening the latch) is more likely to happen again when followed by a pleasurable outcome (delicious fish). Behaviors that lead to pleasurable outcomes will be repeated, while behaviors that don’t lead to pleasurable outcomes (or are followed by something unpleasant) will not be repeated. The law of effect is not limited to cats, however. When was the last time your behavior changed because of a pleasurable outcome that followed?

Most contemporary psychologists would call the fish in Thorndike’s experiments reinforcers, because the fish increased the likelihood that the preceding behavior (escaping the cage) would occur again. Reinforcers are consequences that follow behaviors, and they are a key component of operant conditioning. Our daily lives abound with examples of reinforcers. Praise, hugs, good grades, enjoyable food, and attention are all reinforcers that increase the probability the behaviors they follow will be repeated. Through the process of reinforcement, an organism’s behaviors become more frequent. A child praised for sharing a toy is more likely to share in the future. A student who studies hard to earn an A on an exam is more likely to prepare well for upcoming exams.

203

Behaviorism and the Shaping of Behavior

Some of the earliest and most influential research on operant conditioning came out of the lab of B. F. Skinner (1904–1990), an American psychologist. Like Pavlov, Skinner had not planned to study learning. Upon graduating from college, Skinner decided to become a writer and a poet, but after a year of trying his hand at writing, he decided he “had nothing to say” (Skinner, 1976). Around this time, he began to read the work of Watson and Pavlov, which inspired him to pursue a graduate degree in psychology. He enrolled at Harvard, took some psychology classes that he found “dull,” and eventually joined a lab in the Department of Biology, where he could study the subject he found most intriguing: animal behavior.

Skinner was devoted to behaviorism, which is the scientific study of observable behavior. Behaviorists believed that psychology could only be considered a “true science” if it was based on the study of behaviors that could be seen and documented. In relation to learning, Skinner and other behaviorists proposed that all of an organism’s behaviors—all acts, thoughts, and feelings—are shaped by factors in the external environment.

Radical Behaviorist American psychologist Burrhus Frederic Skinner, or simply B. F. Skinner, is one of the most influential psychologists of all time. Skinner believed that every thought, emotion, and behavior (basically anything psychological) is shaped by factors in the environment.
Nina Leen/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images

Shaping and Successive Approximations

LO 8     Explain shaping and the method of successive approximations.

Building on Thorndike’s law of effect and Watson’s approach to research, Skinner demonstrated, among other things, that rats can learn to push levers and pigeons can learn to bowl (Peterson, 2004). Since animals can’t be expected to immediately perform such complex behaviors, Skinner employed shaping, the use of reinforcers to change behaviors through small steps toward a desired behavior (see Infographic 5.2). Skinner used shaping to teach a rat to “play basketball” (by dropping a marble through a hole) and pigeons how to “bowl” (by nudging the ball). As you can see in the photo on this page, Skinner placed the animals in chambers, or “Skinner boxes,” which were outfitted with food dispensers the animals could activate (by pecking a target or pushing on a lever, for instance) and recording equipment to monitor these behaviors. These boxes allowed Skinner to conduct carefully controlled experiments, measuring behaviors precisely and advancing the scientific and systematic study of behavior.

You may be wondering how Skinner was able to teach pigeons to bowl. The first task was to break the bowling lessons into small steps that pigeons could accomplish. Next, he introduced reinforcers as consequences for behaviors that came closer and closer to achieving the desired goal—bowling a strike! Choosing the right increments for the behaviors was crucial for the success of his experiment. If his expectations started too high, the pigeons would never be given any reinforcers. If his expectations were too low, the pigeons would get reinforcers for everything they did—and again would be unable to make the critical connection between desired behavior and reward. So Skinner devised a plan such that every time the animals did something that brought them a step closer to completing the desired behavior, they would get a reinforcer (usually food). The first reward might be given for simply looking at the ball; the second might be given for bending down and touching it; and the third, for nudging the ball with their beaks. Since each incremental change in behavior brings the birds closer to accomplishing the larger goal of bowling, this method is called shaping by successive approximations. By the end of the experiment, the pigeons were repeatedly driving balls down miniature alleys, knocking down pins with a swipe of the beak (Peterson, 2004).

204

INFOGRAPHIC 5.2: Learning Through Operant Conditioning

Operant conditioning is a type of learning in which we associate our voluntary actions with the consequences of those actions. For example, a pigeon naturally pecks things. But if every time the pigeon pecks a ball, he is given a reinforcer, the pigeon will soon learn to peck the ball more frequently.

B. F. Skinner showed that operant conditioning could do more than elicit simple, isolated actions. Through the process of shaping, in which reinforcers are used to change behaviors toward a more complex behavior, Skinner taught his pigeons to perform behaviors involving a series of actions, like bowling and tennis. Today, shaping is used routinely by parents, teachers, coaches, and employers to train all kinds of complex behaviors.

Collection of four raw grains (broomcorn millet, wheat, rye, and sunflower seeds), Shutterstock; Gray dove on a white, Shutterstock; Ping pong; Shutterstock; Greek salad, Shutterstock; Boy with salad; Thinkstock; Two pigeons play a version of ping pong, Yale Joel/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images; Pigeons © Zoonar GmbH/Alamy

205

Successive approximations can also be used with humans, who are sometimes unwilling or unable to change problematic behaviors overnight. For example, psychologists have used successive approximation to change truancy behavior in adolescents (Enea & Dafinoiu, 2009). The truant teens were provided reinforcers for consistent attendance, but with small steps requiring increasingly more days in school.

It is amazing that the principles used for training animals can also be harnessed to keep teenagers in school. Is there anything operant conditioning can’t accomplish?

Musical Bunny Keller and Marian Breland observe one of their animal performers at the IQ Zoo in Hot Springs, Arkansas, circa 1960. Using the operant conditioning concepts they learned from B. F. Skinner, the Brelands trained ducks to play guitars, raccoons to shoot basketballs, and chickens to tell fortunes. But their animal “students” did not always cooperate; sometimes their instincts interfered with the conditioning process (Bihm, Gillaspy, Lammers, & Huffman, 2010).
The Central Arkansas Library System/Courtesy of Bob Bailey

THINK again

Chickens Can’t Play Baseball

Rats can be conditioned to press levers; pigeons can be trained to bowl; and—believe it or not—chickens can learn to dance and play the piano (Breland & Breland, 1951). Keller and Marian Breland, a pair of Skinner’s students, managed to train 6,000 animals not only to boogie but also to vacuum, dine at a table, and play sports and musical instruments (Breland & Breland, 1961). But as hard as they tried, the Brelands could not coax a chicken to play baseball.

Here’s a rundown of what happened: The Brelands placed a chicken in a cage adjacent to a scaled down “baseball field,” where it had access to a loop attached to a baseball bat. If the chicken managed to swing the bat hard enough to send the ball into the outfield, a food reward was delivered at the other end of the cage. Off the bird would go, running toward its meal dispenser like a baseball player sprinting to first base—or so the routine was supposed to go. But as soon as the Brelands took away the cage, the chicken behaved nothing like a baseball player; instead, it madly chased and pecked at the ball (Breland & Breland, 1961).

BASEBALL? NO. PIANO? YES.

How did the Brelands explain the chickens’ behavior? They believed that the birds were demonstrating instinctive drift, the tendency for instinct to undermine conditioned behaviors. A chicken’s pecking, for example, is an instinctive food-getting behavior. Pecking is useful for opening seeds or killing insects (Breland & Breland, 1961), but it won’t help the bird get to first base. Animal behavior can be conditioned, but instinct can interfere with the process.

The examples above involve researchers deliberately shaping behaviors with reinforcers in a laboratory setting. Skinner and others believe behaviors are being shaped all of the time, whether in a laboratory or not. Think of all the factors in the environment that might be involved in shaping your behavior.

Acquisition to Extinction, and Everything in Between

Both operant and classical conditioning are forms of learning, and they share many common principles (TABLE 5.2). As with classical conditioning, behaviors learned through operant conditioning go through an acquisition phase. When Jeremy Lin was a sophomore in high school, he learned how to dunk a basketball. Similarly, the cats in Thorndike’s puzzle boxes learned the skills they needed to break free. In both cases, the acquisition stage occurred through the gradual process of shaping. Using successive approximations, the learner acquires the new behavior over time.

Table : TABLE 5.2 CONDITIONING BASICS
Term Classical Conditioning Operant Conditioning
The Link Links different stimuli, often through repeated pairings. Links behavior to its consequence, often through repeated pairings.
Response Involuntary behavior. Voluntary behavior.
Acquisition The initial learning phase. The initial learning phase.
Extinction The process by which the conditioned response decreases after repeated exposure to the conditioned stimulus in the absence of the unconditioned stimulus. The disappearance of a learned behavior through the removal of its reinforcer.
Spontaneous Recovery Following extinction, with the presentation of the conditioned stimulus after a rest period, the conditioned response reappears. Following extinction due to the absence of reinforcers, the behavior reemerges in a similar setting.
These fundamental learning concepts apply to both classical and operant conditioning.

Behaviors learned through operant conditioning are also subject to extinction—that is, they may fade in the absence of reinforcers. A rat in a Skinner box eventually gives up pushing on a lever if there is no longer a tasty reinforcer awaiting. But that same lever-pushing behavior can make a sudden comeback through spontaneous recovery. After a rest period, the rat returns to his box and reverts to his old lever-pushing ways.

206

Do you think the cats in Thorndike’s experiments would stop trying to escape from the puzzle box if they stopped getting fish? Perhaps they would not, because escaping the confines of the box might be a reinforcer for them. We will return to the issue of what makes something a reinforcer a little later in this section.

Stimulus Generalization and Discrimination

With operant conditioning, stimulus generalization occurs when a previously learned response to one stimulus occurs in the presence of a similar stimulus. A rat is conditioned to push a particular type of lever, but it may push a variety of other lever types similar in shape, size, and/or color. Horses also show stimulus generalization. With successive approximations using a tasty oat-molasses grain reinforcer, a small sample of horses learned to push on a “rat lever” with their lips in response to the appearance of a solid black circle with a 2.5-inch diameter. After conditioning, the horses were presented with a variety of black circles of different diameters, and indeed stimulus generalization was evident; they pressed the lever most often when shown circles closer in size to the original (Dougherty & Lewis, 1991).

Stimulus discrimination is also at work in operant conditioning, as organisms can learn to discriminate between behaviors that do and do not result in reinforcement. With the use of reinforcers, turtles can learn to discriminate among black, white, and gray wooden paddles. A turtle was rewarded with morsels of meat for choosing the black paddle as opposed to the white, for example, and then subsequently chose the black paddle over other colored paddles (Leighty et al., 2013).

Stimulus discrimination even applies to basketball players. Jeremy Lin certainly has learned to discriminate between teammates and opponents. It’s not likely that he would get reinforcement from the crowd if he mistook an opponent for a teammate and passed the ball to the other team. Making a perfect pass to a teammate, on the other hand, would likely earn approval. This brings us to the next topic, positive reinforcement, where we start to see how classical and operant conditioning differ.

Jeremy: Coach Diepenbrock's answer - What was Jeremy's biggest strength and weakness?

207

Positive Reinforcement

LO 9     Identify the differences between positive and negative reinforcement.

We have already defined reinforcement as a process through which an organism learns to associate voluntary behaviors with their consequences. Any stimulus that increases a behavior is a reinforcer. What we haven’t addressed yet is that reinforcers can be added or taken away. In the process of positive reinforcement, reinforcers are added or presented following the targeted behavior, and reinforcers in this case are generally pleasant (see Infographic 5.3). By presenting positive reinforcers following the target behavior, we are increasing the chances that the target behavior will occur again in the future. If the behavior doesn’t increase after the stimulus is presented, that particular stimulus should not be considered a reinforcer. The fish treats that Thorndike’s cats received immediately after escaping the puzzle box and the morsels of bird feed that Skinner’s pigeons got for bowling are examples of positive reinforcement. In both cases, the reinforcers were added following the desired behavior and were pleasurable to the cats and pigeons.

There were also many potential positive reinforcers driving Jeremy Lin. The praise that his coaches gave him following his passing a ball to a teammate would be considered an example of positive reinforcement. Back in high school, Coach Diepenbrock rewarded players with stickers to provide feedback on their performance (“kind of middle schoolish,” he admits, but effective nonetheless). Each game statistic was assigned a value (for example, +2 points for making an assist, −2 for missing a shot, and so on); the sum of the positive and negative numbers gave players a numerical rating of their performance (Today I had a + 5 game). “[If] all your stats added up—the minuses and the pluses—and you ended up with a +20 or above, then you did very well,” explains the coach, noting that Jeremy averaged the highest of any player ever (P. Diepenbrock, personal communication, May 21, 2012). Did the sticker system have an effect on Jeremy? Coach Diepenbrock cannot be certain, but if it did, seeing his sticker-filled poster every day would have served as a positive reinforcer for him to practice.

You may be wondering if this approach could be used in a college classroom setting. The answer would inevitably depend on the people involved. What is a positive reinforcer to one person might not act that way for another. Remember, the definition of a positive reinforcer depends on the organism’s response to its presence (Skinner, 1953). You may love getting stickers, but your classmate may be offended by them. Thus, stickers could be a positive reinforcer for you, but not for your classmate. Keep in mind, not all positive reinforcers are positive in the sense that we think of them as pleasant; when we refer to positive reinforcement, we mean that something has been added. For example, if a child is starved for attention, any kind of attention (including a reprimand) would be experienced as a positive reinforcer; the attention is added. Every time the child misbehaves, she gets reprimanded, and reprimanding is a form of attention, which the child craves. The scolding just reinforces the misbehavior.

Good Work Georgia preschool teacher Inyite (Shell) Adie-Ikor with a bouquet of roses. She is the recipient of the Early Childhood Educator Award and a $10,000 check from the international education organization Knowledge Universe. Awards and money often reinforce the behaviors they reward, but every individual responds differently to reinforcement.
Craig Bromley/Getty Images for Knowledge Universe

208

Negative Reinforcement

We have established that behaviors can be increased or strengthened by the addition of a stimulus. But it is also possible to increase a behavior by taking something away. Behaviors can increase in response to negative reinforcement, through the process of taking away (or subtracting) something unpleasant. Skinner used negative reinforcement to shape the behavior of his rats. The rats were placed in Skinner boxes with floors that delivered a continuous mild electric shock—except when the animals pushed on a lever. The animals would begin the experiment scampering around the floors to escape the electric current, but every once in a while they would accidentally hit the lever and turn off the current. Eventually, they learned to associate pushing the lever with the removal of the unpleasant stimulus (the mild electric shock). After several trials, the rats would push the lever immediately, reducing the amount of time being shocked.

Remember that either category of reinforcement—positive or negative—has the effect of increasing a desired behavior. Think about some examples of negative reinforcement in your own life. If you try to drive your car without your seat belt, does your car make an annoying beeping sound? If so, the automakers have found a way to use negative reinforcement to increase your use of seat belts. The beeping provides an annoyance (an unpleasant stimulus) that will influence most people to quickly put on their seat belts (the desired behavior increases) to make the beeping stop, and thus remove the unpleasant stimulus. The next time you get in the car, you will put on your seat belt more quickly, having learned that the annoying sound goes away immediately after you do so. Another example is putting the lid on a garbage can to cover its awful smell. Here, the desired behavior is to put the lid on the can, and the unpleasant stimulus that goes away is the bad smell. Finally, think about a dog that constantly begs for treats. The begging (the annoying stimulus) stops the moment the dog is given a treat, a pattern that increases your treat-giving behavior. The problem is that the dog’s begging behavior is being strengthened through positive reinforcement; the dog has learned that the more it begs, the more treats it receives.

Notice that with negative reinforcement, the target behaviors increase in order to remove an unwanted condition. Returning to our example of Jeremy Lin, how might a basketball coach use negative reinforcement to increase a behavior? Of course, the coach can’t build an electric grid in the flooring (as Skinner did with his rats) to get his players moving faster. He might, however, start each practice session by whining and complaining (a very annoying stimulus) about how slow the players are. But as soon as their level of activity increases, he stops his annoying behavior. The players then learn to avoid the coach’s whining and complaining simply by running faster and working harder at every practice. Thus, the removal of the annoying stimulus (whining and complaining) increases the desired behavior (running faster). Keep in mind that the goal of negative reinforcement is to increase a desired behavior. Try to remember this when you read the section on punishment.

Primary and Secondary Reinforcers

LO 10     Distinguish between primary and secondary reinforcers.

There are two major categories of reinforcers: primary and secondary. The food with which Skinner rewarded his pigeons and rats is considered a primary reinforcer (innate reinforcer), because it satisfies a biological need. Food, water, and physical contact are considered primary reinforcers (for both animals and people) because they meet essential requirements. Many of the reinforcers shaping human behavior are secondary reinforcers, which means they do not satisfy biological needs but often derive their power from their connection with primary reinforcers. Although money is not a primary reinforcer, we know from experience that it gives us access to primary reinforcers, such as food, a safe place to live, and perhaps even the ability to attract desirable mates. Thus, money is a secondary reinforcer. The list of secondary reinforcers is long and varied, because different people find different things and activities to be reinforcing. Listening to music, washing dishes, taking a ride in your car—these would all be considered secondary reinforcers for people who enjoy doing them. Ready for a tongue twister? A reinforcer is only a reinforcer if the person receiving it finds it reinforcing. In other words, the existence of a reinforcer depends on its ability to increase a target behavior.

209

Secondary reinforcers are also evident in social interactions. Think about how your behaviors might change in response to praise from a boss, a pat on the back from a co-worker, or even a nod of approval from a friend on Facebook or Twitter.

SOCIAL MEDIA and psychology

Contagious Behaviors

In some respects, the behavioral effects of social media are obvious. Why do you keep glancing at your Facebook ticker, and what compels you to check your phone 10 times an hour? All those little tweets and updates you receive are reinforcing. It feels good to be re-tweeted, and it’s nice to see people “like” your wall posts and photo albums.

WHY DO YOU CHECK YOUR PHONE 10 TIMES AN HOUR?

With its never-ending supply of mini-rewards, social media often sucks away time that would otherwise be devoted to offline relationships and work—a clear drawback. But the reinforcing power of social media can also be harnessed to promote positive behaviors. A study by MIT researcher Damon Centola found that people are more likely to explore healthy behaviors when alerted that people in their social media networks are doing the same. This is especially true for those in “clustered” networks, where people share many of the same contacts. As Centola observed: “People usually require contact with multiple sources of ‘infection’ before being convinced to adopt a behavior” (Centola, 2010, p. 1194). Each of these sources of infection, it seems, provides social reinforcement for the positive behavior. Thus, if you want to develop a more healthy lifestyle, it can’t hurt to surround yourself with online friends who exercise, eat well, and don’t smoke.

Now that we have a basic understanding of operant conditioning, let’s take things to the next level and examine its guiding principles. Many of the principles of classical conditioning (acquisition, stimulus generalization, extinction, etc.) also apply to operant conditioning. Let’s find out how.

Infectious Goodness Standing before a giant red mailbox, London postal worker Imtiyaz Chawan holds the Guinness World Records certificate. The Royal Mail Group’s Payroll Giving Scheme incorporated a record-breaking 975 registered charities and causes (Guinness Book of World Records News, 2012, February 6). Charitable giving is the type of positive behavior that can spread through social networks. Many charities are now using social media for fundraising purposes.
David Parry/PA Wire

The Power of Partial Reinforcement

LO 11     Describe continuous reinforcement and partial reinforcement.

A year after graduating from Stanford, Ivonne moved back to New York City and began looking for a new activity to get her outside and moving. She found the New York Road Runners Club, which connected her with an organization that supports and trains runners with all types of disabilities, including paraplegia, amputation, and cerebral palsy. Having no running experience (apart from jogging on a treadmill), Ivonne showed up at a practice one Saturday morning in Central Park and ran 2 miles with one of the running club’s guides. The next week she came back for more, and then the next, and the next.

210

For the Love of Running Ivonne runs tethered to her husband, G. John Schmidt. She sets the pace, while he warns her of any changes in terrain, elevation, and direction. When Ivonne started running in 2001, her friends reinforced her with hot chocolate. These days, she doesn’t need sweet treats to keep her coming back. The pleasure she derives from running is reinforcement enough.
MICHAEL S. WIRTZ/The Inquirer/Daily News/Philly.com

Continuous Reinforcement

When Ivonne first started attending practices, her teammates promised to buy her hot chocolate whenever she increased her distance. “Every time they would try to get me to run further, they’d say, ‘We’ll have hot chocolate afterwards!’” Ivonne remembers. “They actually would follow through with their promise too!” The hot chocolate was given in a schedule of continuous reinforcement, because the reinforcer was presented every time Ivonne ran a little farther. Continuous reinforcement can be used in a variety of settings: a child getting a sticker every time she practices the piano; a spouse getting praise every time she does the dishes; a dog getting a treat every time it comes when called. You get the commonality: reinforcement every time the behavior is produced.

Partial Reinforcement

Continuous reinforcement comes in handy for a variety of purposes and is ideal for establishing new behaviors during the acquisition phase. But delivering reinforcers intermittently, or every once in a while, works better for maintaining behaviors. We call this approach partial reinforcement. Returning to the examples listed for continuous reinforcement, we can also imagine partial reinforcement being used in each instance: A child gets a sticker every other time she practices; a spouse gets praise almost all of the time she does the dishes; a dog gets a treat every third time it comes when called. The reinforcer is not given every time the behavior is observed, but only some of the time.

How might partial reinforcement have played a role in Ivonne’s athletic development? It was 2002 when Ivonne became passionate about running marathons. She and her friends went to cheer on some disabled athletes competing in the New York City Marathon. As she stood on the sidelines listening to the runners whoosh by and the crowds whoop and scream, she knew she wanted a piece of the energy. Determined to run a marathon, Ivonne extended and intensified her workouts. Soon she began to focus her training on achieving faster and faster “splits”—the times taken to run certain distances. “You get a feeling of fulfillment when you meet your splits, and when you meet your splits that means your training has paid off,” she says. “It makes you want to keep trying to improve.”

How was Ivonne reinforced for hard training? As noted, early on, she received a reinforcer from her training buddies for every workout she increased her mileage. But how might partial reinforcement be used to help someone increase mileage? Perhaps instead of hot chocolate on every occasion, the treat could come after every other successful run. Or, a coach might praise the runner’s hard work only some of the time. The amazing thing about partial reinforcement is that it happens to all of us, in an infinite number of settings, and we might never know how many times we have been partially reinforced for any particular behavior. Common to all of these partial reinforcement situations is that the target behavior is exhibited or a goal has been met (for example, running longer and faster), but the reinforcer is not supplied each time this occurs.

The hard work and reinforcement paid off for Ivonne. In 2003 she ran her first marathon—New York City—and has since competed in more than a dozen others.

211

Partial Reinforcement Effect

Partial reinforcement is more effective than continuous reinforcement when it comes to maintaining behaviors. When Skinner put the pigeons in his experiments on partial reinforcement schedules, they would peck at a target up to 10,000 times without getting food before giving up (Skinner, 1953). According to Skinner, “Nothing of this sort is ever obtained after continuous reinforcement”. And the same seems to be true with humans. In one study from the mid-1950s, researchers observed college students playing slot machines. Some of the slot machines provided continuous reinforcement, delivering pretend coins every time students pulled their levers. Others followed partial reinforcement schedules, dispensing coins only some of the time. After the students played eight rounds, all of the machines stopped giving coins. Without any coins to reinforce them, the students stopped pulling the levers—but not at the same time. Those who had received coins with every lever pull gave up more quickly than did those rewarded intermittently. In other words, their lever-pulling behavior was less likely to be extinguished when established through partial reinforcement (Lewis & Duncan, 1956). Psychologists call this phenomenon the partial reinforcement effect: Behaviors take longer to disappear (through the process of extinction) when they have been acquired or maintained through partial or intermittent, rather than continuous, reinforcement.

Hope Springs Eternal Why are slot machines so enticing? The fact that they deliver rewards occasionally and unpredictably makes them irresistible to many gamblers. Slot machines take advantage of the partial reinforcement effect, which states that behaviors are more persistent when reinforced intermittently, rather than continuously.
David Sacks/Getty Images

Imagine how long it would take Skinner’s pigeons to learn the first step in the shaping process (looking at the ball) if they were rewarded for doing so only 1 in 5 times. The birds learn fastest when reinforced every time, but their behavior will persist longer if they are given partial reinforcement thereafter. Here’s another example: Suppose you would like to house train your puppy. The best plan is to start the training process with continuous reinforcement (praise the dog every time it goes outside), but then shift to partial reinforcement once the desired behavior is established.

But there are exceptions to every rule. Not all people respond well to partial reinforcement. Some research suggests that children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) tend to become more frustrated than their non-ADHD peers when placed under partial reinforcement schedules. For these children, continuous reinforcement may be more effective (Aase & Sagvolden, 2006; Douglas & Parry, 1983).

Timing is Everything: Reinforcement Schedules

LO 12     Name the schedules of reinforcement and give examples of each.

Skinner identified various ways to administer partial reinforcement, called partial reinforcement schedules (Figure 5.3). As often occurs in scientific research, he stumbled on the idea by chance. Late one Friday afternoon, Skinner realized he was running low on the food pellets he used as reinforcers for his laboratory animals. If he continued rewarding the animals on a continuous basis, the pellets would run out before the end of the weekend. With this in mind, he decided only to reinforce some of the desired behaviors (Skinner, 1956, 1976). The new strategy worked like a charm. The animals kept performing the desired behaviors, even though they weren’t given reinforcers every time. But how often should research subjects be given reinforcers for the target behavior? Four different reinforcement schedules can be used: fixed-ratio, variable-ratio, fixed-interval, and variable-interval (Figure 5.3).

FIGURE 5.3Schedules of ReinforcementContinuous reinforcement is ideal for establishing new behaviors. But once learned, a behavior is best maintained with only partial reinforcement. Partial reinforcement can be delivered according to four different schedules of reinforcement, as shown here. Starbursts indicate that reinforcement has been given. Notice that fixed-interval and fixed-ratio graphs demonstrate a characteristic dip in the reinforced behavior after each reinforcement, as the learner seems to anticipate that reinforcement won’t follow immediately.

212

Fixed-Ratio Schedule

In some situations, the best approach to reinforcement is a fixed-ratio schedule. With this arrangement, the subject must exhibit a predetermined number of desired responses or behaviors before a reinforcer is given. A pigeon in a Skinner box may have to peck a spot five times in order to score a delicious pellet (5:1). A third-grade teacher might give students prizes when they pass three multiplication tests (3:1). The students quickly learn this predictable pattern. Generally, the fixed-ratio schedule produces a high response rate, but with a characteristic dip immediately following the reinforcement. Pigeons peck away at the target with only a brief rest and students study for multiplication tests following the same pattern.

nilovsergey/shutterstock

Variable-Ratio Schedule

Other times, it is best to use reinforcement that is unpredictable. In a variable-ratio schedule, the number of desired responses or behaviors that must occur before a reinforcer is given changes across trials and is based on an average number of responses to be reinforced. If the goal is to train a pigeon to peck a spot on a target, a variable-ratio schedule can be used: Trial 1, the pigeon gets a pellet after pecking the spot twice; Trial 2, the pigeon gets a pellet after pecking the spot once; Trial 3, the pigeon gets a pellet after pecking the spot three times; and so on. In the classroom, the teacher might not tell the students in advance how many tests they will need to pass to get a prize. She may give a prize after two tests, then the next time after seven tests. This variable-ratio schedule tends to produce a high response rate (pecking and studying in our examples) and behaviors that are difficult to extinguish because of the unpredictability of the reinforcement schedule.

213

Fixed-Interval Schedule

In some cases, researchers may determine that it is important to focus on the interval of time between reinforcers, as opposed to the number of desired responses. In a fixed-interval schedule, the reinforcer comes after a preestablished interval of time; the target behavior is only reinforced after the given time period is over. A reinforcer is given for the first target behavior that occurs after the time interval has ended. If a pigeon is on a fixed-interval schedule of 30 seconds, it can peck at the target as often as possible once the interval starts, but it will only get a reinforcer following its first response after the 30 seconds has ended. With a 1-week interval, the teacher gives prizes only on Fridays for children who do well on their math quiz that day, regardless of how they performed during the week on other math quizzes. With this schedule, the target behavior tends to increase as each time interval comes to an end. The pigeon pecks the spot more often when the time nears 30 seconds, and the students study harder as Friday approaches.

Variable-Interval Schedule

In a variable-interval schedule, the length of time between reinforcements is unpredictable. In this schedule, the reinforcer comes after an interval of time goes by, but the length of the interval changes from trial to trial (within a predetermined range based on an average interval length). As with the fixed-interval schedule, reinforcement follows the first target behavior that occurs after the time interval has elapsed. Training a pigeon to peck a spot on a target using a variable-interval schedule might include: Trial 1, the pigeon gets a pellet after 41 seconds; Trial 2, the pigeon gets a pellet after 43 seconds; Trial 3, the pigeon gets a pellet after 40 seconds; and so on. In each trial, the pigeon must respond after the interval of time has passed (which varies from trial to trial). The third-grade teacher might think that an average of 4 days should go by between quizzes. So, instead of giving reinforcers every 7 days (that is, always on Friday), she gives quizzes separated by a variable interval. The first quiz might be after a 2-day interval, the next after a 3-day interval, and the students do not know when to expect them. The variable-interval schedule tends to encourage steady patterns of behavior. The pigeon tries its luck pecking a target once every 30 seconds or so, and the students come to school prepared to take a quiz every day (their amount of study holding steady).

So far, we have learned about increasing desired behaviors through reinforcement, but not all behaviors are desirable. Let’s turn our attention to techniques used to suppress undesirable behaviors.

The Trouble with Punishment

In contrast to reinforcement, which makes a behavior more likely to recur, the goal of punishment is to decrease or stop a behavior (Infographic 5.3). Punishment is used to reduce unwanted behaviors by instilling an association between a behavior and some unwanted consequence (for example, between stealing and going to jail, or between misbehaving and a spanking). Punishment isn’t always effective, however; people are often willing to accept unpleasant consequences to get something they really want.

214

INFOGRAPHIC 5.3: Learning: Punishment and Reinforcement

Red sports cars, © lenka - Fotolia.com; Police officer writing a ticket, © Lisa F. Young - Fotolia.com; Flags, © FreeSoulProduction - Fotolia.com; Green Traffic Light, Thinkstock; Red Traffic Light, Thinkstock; Wrench, Thinkstock; Green highway sign isolated, Thinkstock; Speed limit road sign with post and different numbers, © Thomaspajot/Dreamstime.com; Red flashing light on a white background, © Fotovika/Dreamstime.com; Trophy, Comstock/Thinkstock; Falling money, istockphoto/Thinkstock; Vector design set of racing flags, freesoulproduction/Shutterstock

test yourself

Which process matches each of the following examples?

Choose from positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment.

Question 5.7

Carlos’ parents grounded him the last time he stayed out past his curfew, so tonight he came home right on time.

Question 5.8

Jinhee spent an entire week helping an elderly neighbor clean out her basement after a flood. The local newspaper caught wind of the story and ran it as an inspiring front-page headline. Jinhee enjoyed the attention and decided to organize a neighborhood work group.

Question 5.9

The trash stinks, so Sheri takes it out.

Question 5.10

Gabriel’s assistant had a bad habit of showing up late for work, so Gabriel docked his pay.

Question 5.11

During food drives, the basketball team offers to wash your car for free if you donate six items or more to the local homeless shelter.

Question 5.12

Claire received a stern lecture for texting in class. She doesn’t want to hear that again, so now she turns off her phone when she enters the classroom.

Answers

1. negative punishment, 2. positive reinforcement, 3. negative reinforcement, 4. negative punishment, 5. positive reinforcement, 6. positive punishment

215

Positive and Negative Punishment

There are two major categories of punishment: positive and negative. With positive punishment, something aversive or disagreeable is applied following an unwanted behavior. For example, getting a ticket for speeding is a positive punishment, the aim of which is to decrease driving over the speed limit. Paying a late fine for overdue library books is a positive punishment, the goal of which is to decrease returning library books past their due date. In basketball, a personal foul (for example, inappropriate physical contact, like shoving) might result in positive punishment, such as a free throw for the opposing team. Here, the addition of something aversive (the other team getting a wide open shot) is used with the intention of decreasing a behavior (pushing, shoving, and the like).

The goal of negative punishment is also to reduce an unwanted behavior, but in this case, it is done by taking away something desirable. A person who drives while inebriated runs the risk of negative punishment, as his driver’s license may be taken away. This loss of driving privileges is a punishment designed to reduce drunken driving. If you never return your library books, you might suffer the negative punishment of losing your borrowing privileges. The goal is to decrease the number of lost or stolen library books. What kind of negative punishment might be used to rein in illegal conduct in basketball? Just ask one of Jeremy Lin’s former teammates, superstar Carmelo Anthony, one of many players suspended for participating in a 2006 brawl between the Knicks and the Denver Nuggets. Anthony, a Nuggets player at the time (how ironic that he was later traded to the Knicks), was dealt a 15-game suspension (and no salary for those games not played) for slugging a Knicks player in the face (Lee, 2006, December 19). Anthony’s suspension is an example of negative punishment, because it involves subtracting something desirable (the privilege to compete and his salary for those games) to decrease a behavior (throwing punches on the court).

Punishment may be useful for the purposes of basketball, but how does it figure into everyday life? Think about the last time you tried using punishment to reduce unwanted behavior. Perhaps you scolded your puppy for having an accident, or snapped at your housemate for leaving dirty dishes in the sink. If you are a parent or caregiver of a young child, you may try to reign in misbehavior with various types of punishment, such as spanking.

CONTROVERSIES

Spotlight on Spanking

Were you spanked as a child? Would you or do you spank your own children? Statistically speaking, there is a good chance your answer will be yes to both questions. Studies suggest that about two thirds of American parents use corporal (or physical) punishment to discipline their young children (Gershoff, 2008; Regalado, Sareen, Inkelas, Wissow, & Halfon, 2004; Socolar, Savage, & Evans, 2007). But is spanking an effective and acceptable means of discipline?

TO SPANK OR NOT TO SPANK…

There is little doubt that spanking can provide a fast-acting fix: If a child is beating up his brother, a swift slap on his bottom will probably make him stop pronto. But think about the larger lesson the boy learns in the process. His parents are trying to teach him not to be aggressive toward his brother, but in doing so, they demonstrate an aggressive behavior (hitting). Children are experts at mimicking adults’ behaviors (see the next section on observational learning), and several studies suggest that spanking is associated with future aggression and other antisocial behaviors (Gershoff, 2002; Taylor, Manganello, Lee, & Rice, 2010).

216

Apart from sending children the message that aggression is okay, corporal punishment may promote serious long-term mental health problems. Harsh physical punishment, which includes spanking, grabbing, and pushing, has been linked to an elevated risk for developing mood, anxiety, and personality disorders, as well as problems with drugs and alcohol. It may also interfere with cognitive development, retarding growth in various parts of the frontal lobes (Tomoda et al., 2009), a region of the brain that processes complex thoughts. One study even found that spanked children score lower on intelligence tests than their nonspanked peers (Straus & Paschall, 2009).

CONNECTIONS

In Chapter 2, we noted the primary roles of the frontal lobes: to organize information processed in other areas of the brain, orchestrate higher-level cognitive functions, and direct behaviors associated with personality. Here, we note that harsh physical punishment interferes with normal development of the frontal lobes—a good example of the ongoing interaction between nature (physical development of the brain) and nurture (physical punishment).

Critics argue that studies casting a negative light on spanking are primarily correlational, meaning they show only a link—not a cause-and-effect relationship—between physical punishment and negative outcomes (Larzelere & Baumrind, 2010). They point to other factors that might explain some of the problems spanked children seem to develop. Perhaps these children are aggressive and antisocial to begin with (that would explain why they were spanked in the first place), or maybe their parents are more likely to be abusive, and the abuse (not the spanking) is to blame (Baumrind, Larzelere, & Cowan, 2002). Spanking, which means striking the extremities or the bottom with an open hand without causing injury, may be an effective way to modify young children’s behavior, according to some experts (Baumrind, Larzelere, & Cowan, 2002; Larzelere & Baumrind, 2010). But it must be delivered by a parent whose approach is “warm, responsive, rational, and temperate” (Baumrind, 1996, p. 857).

Scholars on both sides make valid points, but the debate is somewhat lopsided, as an increasing number of studies suggest that spanking is ineffective and emotionally damaging (Gershoff & Bitensky, 2008; Smith, 2012; Straus, 2005).

Time-Out Sending a child to a corner for a “time-out” is an example of negative punishment because it involves removing something (the privilege to play) in order to decrease an unwanted behavior. Spanking is a positive punishment because it involves the addition of something (a slap on the bottom) to discourage an undesirable behavior.
Design Pics/Ron Nickel/Getty Images

Punishment Versus Negative Reinforcement

LO 13     Explain how punishment differs from negative reinforcement.

Punishment and negative reinforcement are two concepts that students often find difficult to distinguish (TABLE 5.3 also see Infographic 5.3). Remember that punishment (positive or negative) is designed to decrease the behavior that it follows, whereas reinforcement (positive or negative) aims to increase the behavior. Operant conditioning uses reinforcers (both positive and negative) to increase target behaviors, and punishment applies aversive stimuli to decrease unwanted behaviors.

Table : TABLE 5.3 REINFORCEMENT VERSUS PUNISHMENT
Term Defined Goal Example
Positive Reinforcement Addition of a pleasant stimulus following a target behavior Increase desired behavior Students who complete an online course 15 days before the end of semester receive 10 points of extra credit.
Negative Reinforcement Removal of an unpleasant stimulus following a target behavior Increase desired behavior Students who have perfect attendance for the semester do not have to take the final exam.
Positive Punishment Addition of something unpleasant following an unwanted behavior Decrease undesired behavior Students who are late to class more than two times have to write an extra paper.
Negative Punishment Removal of something pleasant following an unwanted behavior Decrease undesired behavior Students late to class on exam day are not allowed to use their notes when taking the exam.
The positive and negative forms of reinforcement and punishment are easy to confuse. Above are some concrete definitions, goals, and examples to help you sort them out.

If all the positives and negatives are confusing you, just think in terms of math: Positive always means adding something, and negative means taking it away. Punishment can be positive, which means the addition of something viewed as unpleasant (“Because you made a mess of your room, you have to wash all the dishes!”), or negative, which involves the removal of something viewed as pleasant or valuable (“Because you made a mess of your room, no ice cream for you!”). For basketball players, a positive punishment might be adding more wind sprints to decrease errors on the free throw line. An example of negative punishment might be benching the players for brawling on the court; taking away the players’ court time decreases their fighting behavior.

217

THINK again

Think Positive Reinforcement

With all this talk of chickens, basketball players, and triathletes, you may be wondering how operant conditioning applies to you. Just think about the last time you earned a good grade on a test after studying really hard. How did this grade affect your preparation for the next test? If it made you study more, then it served as a positive reinforcer. A little dose of a positive reinforcer goes a long way when it comes to increasing productivity. Let’s examine three everyday dilemmas and brainstorm ways we could use positive reinforcers to achieve better outcomes.

REINFORCEMENT STRATEGIES YOU CAN PUT TO GOOD USE

  • Problem 1: Your housemate frequently goes to sleep without washing his dinner dishes. Almost every morning, you walk into the kitchen and find a tower of dirty pans and plates sitting in the sink. No matter how much you nag and complain, he simply will not change his ways. Solution: Nagging and complaining are not getting you anywhere. Try positive reinforcers instead. Wait until a day your housemate takes care of his dishes and then pour on the praise. You might be pleasantly surprised the next morning.
  • Problem 2: Your child is driving you crazy with her incessant whining. She whines for milk, so you give it to her. She whines for someone to play with, so you play with her. Why does your child continue to whine although you are responding to all her needs? Solution: Here, we have a case in which positive reinforcers are driving the problem. When you react to your child’s gripes and moans, you are reinforcing them. Turn off your ears to the whining. You might even want to say something like, “I can’t hear you when you’re whining. If you ask me in a normal voice, I’ll be more than happy to help.” Then reinforce her more mature behavior by responding attentively.
  • Problem 3: You just trained your puppy to sit. She was cooperating wonderfully until about a week after you stopped rewarding her with dog biscuits. You want her to sit on command, but you can’t keep doling out doggie treats forever. Solution: Once the dog has adopted the desired behavior, begin reinforcing unpredictably. Remember, continuous reinforcement is most effective for establishing behaviors, but a variable schedule (that is, giving treats intermittently) is a good bet if you want to make the behavior stick (Pryor, 2002).

218

Classical and operant Conditioning: What’s the Difference?

Students sometimes have trouble differentiating classical and operant conditioning (Figure 5.4). After all, both forms of conditioning—classical and operant—involve forming associations. In classical conditioning, the learner links different stimuli; in operant conditioning, the learner connects her behavior to its consequences (reinforcement and punishment). Another key similarity is that the principles of acquisition, stimulus discrimination, stimulus generalization, extinction, and spontaneous recovery apply to both types of conditioning.

FIGURE 5.4Differences Between Classical and Operant Conditioning show what you know

But there are also key differences between classical and operant conditioning. In classical conditioning, the learned behaviors are involuntary, or reflexive. Ivonne cannot control her heart rate any more than Pavlov’s dogs can decide when to salivate. Operant conditioning, on the other hand, concerns voluntary behavior. Jeremy Lin had power over his decision to practice his shot, just as Skinner’s pigeons had control over swatting bowling balls with their beaks. In short, classical conditioning is an involuntary form of learning, whereas operant conditioning requires active effort.

Another important distinction is the way in which behaviors are strengthened. In classical conditioning, behaviors become more frequent with repeated pairings of stimuli. The more often Ivonne smells chlorine before swim practice, the tighter the association she makes between chlorine and swimming. Operant conditioning is also strengthened by repeated pairings, but in this case, the connection is between a behavior and its consequences. Reinforcers strengthen the behavior; punishment weakens it. The more benefits (reinforcers) Jeremy gains from succeeding in basketball, the more likely he will keep practicing.

Often classical conditioning and operant conditioning occur simultaneously. A baby learns that he gets fed when he cries; getting milk reinforces the crying behavior (operant conditioning). At the same time, the baby learns to associate milk with the appearance of the bottle. As soon as he sees his mom or dad take the bottle out of the refrigerator, he begins salivating in anticipation of gulping it down (classical conditioning).

Classical and operant conditioning are not the only ways we learn. We have one major category of learning yet to cover. Try to guess what it might be using these hints. How did you learn to tie your shoes, dance, rake leaves, and kick a soccer ball? Somebody must have shown you.

show what you know

Question 5.13

1. According to Thorndike and the ___________, if a behavior is followed by a pleasurable outcome, the likelihood that the behavior will happen again increases.

Question 5.14

2. A third-grade teacher gives her students prizes for passing math tests. Not only do the students improve their math scores; they also begin to study more to improve their spelling scores as a result of this reinforcement schedule. Their increased studying of spelling is a good example of:

  1. classical conditioning.
  2. an unconditioned response.
  3. an unconditioned stimulus.
  4. stimulus generalization.

Question 5.15

3. A child disrupts class and the teacher writes her name on the board. For the rest of the week, the child does not act up. The teacher used ___________ to decrease the child’s disruptive behaviors.

  1. positive punishment
  2. negative punishment
  3. positive reinforcement
  4. negative reinforcement

Question 5.16

4. Think about a behavior you would like to change (either yours or someone else’s). Devise a strategy using positive and negative reinforcement to change that behavior. Also contemplate how you might use successive approximations. What reinforcers would you use?

CHECK YOUR ANSWERS IN APPENDIX C.

219