Operant conditioning - Chapter 6

Law of effect was proposed by WHO

Edward Thorndike

Law of effect

Any behaviour that leads to a “satisfying state of affairs” is likely to occur again, and any behaviour taht leads to an “annoying state of affairs” is less likely to occur again

Law of effect: the likelihood of the occurrence of a behaviour is influenced by its WHAT

Law of effect: the likelihood of the occurrence of a behaviour is influenced by its CONSEQUENCES

B.F. Skinner

• Elaborated on Thorndike’s WHAT

• Invented the WHAT

• Developed the theory of WHAT

B.F. Skinner

• Elaborated on Thorndike’s LAW of EFFECT

• Invented the OPEANT CHAMBER

• Developed the theory of OPERANT CONDITIONING

Classical conditioning: A type of learning in which a WHAT stimulus acquires the ability to evoke an WHAT (reflexive) response that was originally WHAT by another stimulus.

Classical conditioning: A type of learning in which a NEUTRAL stimulus acquires the ability to evoke an INVOLUNTARY (reflexive) response that was originally EVOKED by another stimulus.

Operant conditioning: A form of learning in which WHAT responses come to be controlled by their WHAT

Operant conditioning: A form of learning in which VOLUNTARY responses come to be controlled by their CONSEQUENCES

If its POSITIVE you WHAT

get something

If its NEGATIVE you WHAT

Something is removed

Reinforcement

will DO this again

Punishment

Will NOT do this again

Get something good, will do this again is labelled WHAT

Get something good, will do this again, is labelled POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT

Examples:

• You go to a restaurant. The food is good. You will go to this restaurant again.

• You pay your bill on time. You get a discount.

• You will pay your bill on time again.

Get something bad, will not do this again this is labelled as: WHAT

Get something bad, will not do this again this is labelled as: POSITIVE PUNISHMENT

Examples:

• You wear a new shirt. People make fun of you. You will not wear this shirt again.

• You go to a restaurant. The food is bad. You will not go to this restaurant again.

Something bad is removed, will do this again this is labelled as: NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT

Something bad is removed, will do this again this is labelled as: NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT

Examples:

• You call in sick. Your anxiety goes away. Next time when you need to do a presentation, you will call in sick again.

• You drink coffee. Your headache disappears. You will drink coffee again when you have a headache

Something good is removed, will not do this again this is labelled as: WHAT

Something good is removed, will not do this again this is labelled as: NEGATIVE PUNISHMENT

Examples:

• You drive over the speed limit. You get a speeding ticket and lose $100. You will not speed again.

• You pay your bill late. You lose the discount.

• You will not pay your bill late again

Positive Reinforcement

Behavior is followed by a FAVOURABLE stimulus; frequency of behaviors INCREASES

Negative Reinforcement

Behavior is followed by the REMOVAL of an UNFAVOURABLE stimulus; frequency of behaviors INCREASES

Positive Punishment

Behavior is followed by an UNFAVOURBALE stimulus; frequency of behaviors DECREASES

Negative Punishment

Behavior is followed by the REMOVAL of a FAVOURABLE stimulus; frequency of behaviors DECREASES

Skinner’s Demonstration: It’s all a matter of consequences

Process: Positive reinforcement

Antecedent: WHAT

Behaviour (response): Press lever

Consequence (stimulus): WHAT

Effect on behaviour: WHAT

Skinner’s Demonstration: It’s all a matter of consequences

Process: Positive reinforcement

Antecedent: FEELING HUNGRY

Behaviour (response): Press lever

Consequence (stimulus): FOOD DELIVERED

Effect on behaviour: Tendency to press lever INCREASES

Skinner’s Demonstration: It’s all a matter of consequences

Process: Negative reinforcement

Antecedent: WHAT

Behaviour (response): Press lever

Consequence (stimulus): WHAT

Effect on behaviour: WHAT

Skinner’s Demonstration: It’s all a matter of consequences

Process: Negative reinforcement

Antecedent: Presence of electric shock/ loud noises

Behaviour (response): Press lever

Consequence (stimulus): Turn off electric shock/loud noises

Effect on behaviour: Tendency to press lever INCREASES

Skinner’s Demonstration: It’s all a matter of consequences

Process: Punishment (positive)

Antecedent: WHAT

Behaviour (response): Press lever

Consequence (stimulus): WHAT

Effect on behaviour: WHAT

Skinner’s Demonstration: It’s all a matter of consequences

Process: Punishment (positive)

Antecedent: Feeling hungry

Behaviour (response): Press lever

Consequence (stimulus): turn on electric shock

Effect on behaviour: Tendency to press lever decreases

For punishment to be effective, we need to consider

• WHAT

• WHAT

• WHAT

For punishment to be effective, we need to consider

• Timing

• Intensity

• Consistency

Timing

• Apply punishment WHEN after the WHAT

Timing

• Apply punishment IMMEDIATELY after the MISBEHAVIOUR

Intensity

• The intensity of the punishment should match the intensity of the WHAT (eg, if a parking ticket costs less than the parking fee, nobody will pay for parking)

Intensity

• The intensity of the punishment should match the intensity of the MISBEHAVIOUR (eg, if a parking ticket costs less than the parking fee, nobody will pay for parking)

Consistency

• Apply WHAT every time the misbehaviour occurs

• Inconsistency leads to WHAT between the punishment and the misbehaviour. The misbehaviour tends to continue

Consistency

• Apply PUNISHMENT every time the misbehaviour occurs

• Inconsistency leads to WEAK ASSOCIATION between the punishment and the misbehaviour. The misbehaviour tends to continue