paper due in 9 hours

PolkaDot/Thinkstock

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Describe the importance of behaviorism in the development of scientific psychology.

• Discuss Edward Thorndike’s impact on psy- chology, and explain his law of effect.

• Describe Ivan Pavlov’s discovery of classical conditioning, and explain the learning model he discovered in his studies on dogs.

• Explain the impact that John B. Watson and his demonstrations with Little Albert had on our understanding of the acquisition of fears and other forms of learning.

• Describe B. F. Skinner’s view that psychology should concern itself with what is observable and the effect this notion had on the study of consciousness and personality.

• Explain Skinner’s learning model of operant conditioning and the importance of the sched- ule of reinforcement.

Behavioral Models of Personality 5

Chapter Outline Introduction

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism • Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning • Watson’s Application of Classical Condition-

ing to Humans • Operant Conditioning

5.2 The Neobehaviorists • Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism • Skinner’s View on Personality

5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality • Salter’s Conditioned Reflex Theory • Dollard and Miller’s Learning Theory • Mowrer’s Two-Factor Theory • Wolpe’s Behavioral Applications • Applied Behavior Analysis

• Discuss how Dollard and Miller advanced behavioral theory by explaining how personality can be conceptualized using learning principles.

• Explain Wolpe’s systematic desensitization and how it can be used for behavior change.

• Explain why some phobias/fears are more likely to be acquired and maintained.

• Explain Martin Seligman’s concept of learned helplessness and how it might be used to explain depression.

• Use behavioral principles, to describe how anxiety can affect personality adaptation.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 133 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

Introduction In a disturbing but classic film, A Clockwork Orange (1971), director Stanley Kubrick depicts a gang of men who, in futuristic Britain, terrorize others, savagely beating men and raping women. The gang’s leader, Alex, is apprehended, and he volunteers for an experimental, government-developed, aversion therapy. The approach was modeled after the behavioral principles that were quite popular in the 1970s, and the intent was to eradicate society’s problem with crime by asso- ciating aversive responses (such as physical illness induced by drugs) with aggres- sive behavior.

Although this was a fictional account, it captured the belief and some of the fears associated with the assumption that controlling behavior using scientific methods would lead to the betterment of humankind. Of course, subsequent research indi- cated that such fears were not well-founded, as behavior is not quite as pliable as the filmmaker suggests. Nevertheless, many modern-day applications of behav- ioral principles are used to shape behavior. For example, Antabuse (also known as Disulfiram) is an FDA-approved drug used to create an aversive association (e.g., nausea, vomiting, headaches, syncope, vertigo, blurred vision) with the con- sumption of alcohol for those diagnosed with either alcohol dependence or alco- hol abuse (see Kitson, 1977; Rosenthal, 1973). More recent research suggests that naltrexone and especially acamprosate may be especially effective at achieving abstinence, though these compounds function in different ways by altering brain neurochemistry associated with addiction (see Rosenthal, 2006). Buzzer pants are used to help children with enuresis (bed wetting), by associating the urge to uri- nate with waking up prior to wetting the bed. Even outside of the therapeutic context, behavioral principles are widely seen, sometimes with intentional pair- ings, and sometimes not. If you enjoy McDonald’s, there’s a good chance that you might salivate when you see the golden arches or hear the phrase, “I’m loving it” (assuming that advertisers have done their job well). A pizza box is also likely to elicit the same salivation response. If you have a dog, picking up the keys is a surefire way to get him or her to the door. In all likelihood, whatever tone or signal your smartphone has to indicate an incoming text or email results in what is now a well-trained behavioral response by you (checking the device). In fact, even if you hear that tone from another source, you might find yourself automatically check- ing your own phone for a text out of habit.

Introduction

5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory • Seligman’s Concept of Learned

Helplessness • Goldfried and Merbaum: Changing

Behavior Through Self-Control • Barlow: The Nature of Anxiety

5.5 Assessment Strategies and Behavioral Tools • Assessing With Applied Behavior

Analysis • Behavioral Assessments of Children

and Adolescents • Behavioral Assessments of Adults

Summary

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 134 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Such attempts to modify or control behavior raise many questions with regard to personality, of course. Are we really completely controlled by our environments? Do we have any autonomy at all in terms of how we think, what we value, who we are? Does the very concept of personality exist at all? In contrast to the psycho- analytic and humanist perspectives (see Chapters 2 and 9, respectively), behavior- ism prompts us to look more closely at the world outside of ourselves to see what factors and conditions influence how we behave and who we are.

This chapter provides an overview of behavioral theory, some of its applications, and the assessment tools commonly employed, as well the research attempting to evaluate its accuracy.

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

When it emerged as a movement in psychology, behaviorism (also referred to as learning theory) was not interested in the mind or personality. What it offered was a radically different approach to understanding behavior—an approach that was the polar oppo- site of the psychoanalytic model. Whereas the psychoanalytic model dealt with invisible, internal processes, behaviorism dealt with objective, observable events. Not only was the emphasis on behavior, but in its most radical formulations (see the work of B. F. Skinner), cognition and affect (thought and emotion) were essentially characterized as epiphenomena—in other words, they only exist secondarily, as effects of behaviors, rather than as the causes of behaviors.

In general, the behaviorists rejected any formalized theory of human behavior. There is inher- ent tension in personality science related to the fact that theorizing often seems to require that theorists engage in speculation—that they move beyond empirical and clinical data. However, not everyone would agree that this endeavor is worthwhile. Many believe that theorizing without empirical support is pseudoscience. In fact, when the field was dominated by psychodynamic the- ory, many proponents of behaviorism would not consider personality theory relevant and worthy of scientific investigation. As a result, none provide a cohesive explanation of personality.

Behaviorism has its roots in empiricism and animal behavior because animals can be experimented on and, therefore, yield more concrete data. It rapidly became popular with the promise that it would make a true science out of psychology (Hunt, 2007). As an objective science concerned with what could be observed and measured, behaviorism has largely rejected the overly theoretical, speculative thinking of other models of personality. Its emphasis on studying only what is observ- able has challenged psychology and personality researchers to meet higher empirical standards. This emphasis on science and on clear empirical standards is vitally important to the development of a science. In the absence of scientific evidence against which to check our beliefs, there is a high potential for error and bias (Lilienfeld & O’Donohue, 2007).

Behaviorism is based mainly on inductive reasoning: It starts with data, often related to simple relationships, and induces laws of human behavior from this data. A simple example can illustrate this form of reasoning. If you observe that every time you eat shellfish you swell up and find it hard to swallow (the data), you might conclude that you are allergic to shellfish (the law). This perspective seeks the simplest explanation for behaviors, following the law of parsimony. Some of the laws it has generated have proven to be fundamentally important for understanding behavior.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 135 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

In fact, a great deal of behavioral research has been designed spe- cifically to explore various com- ponent systems of personality, such as learning, anxiety, learned helplessness, and conditioning. Results of this research continue to influence our understanding of how personality is formed and how it can be modified by various external factors.

The behavioral perspective can be organized into two broad types of learning: (1) classical condition- ing and (2) operant conditioning. Classical conditioning involves a simpler form of learning by tem- poral association, and it focuses only on reflexive actions. In contrast, operant conditioning involves nonreflexive action and learning as a result of consequences that are typically not occurring at the same point in time (i.e., temporal associations are no longer necessary). Both types of conditioning can be referred to as forms of associative learning—that is, a process by which an association is made between two stimuli or between a behavior and a stimulus. The next sections review methods for the acquisition and maintenance of behavior.

Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning During the course of his research with dogs, Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov observed that dogs would begin to salivate not only when they were being fed, as would be expected, but even prior to feeding, at the mere sight of the assistant who fed them. In 1902, Pavlov began to study this occurrence, designing a demonstration of what may well be the best-known of all phenomena in psychology: classical conditioning. What he did was implant a tube in one of the dog’s salivary

glands, connecting it to a mea- suring device. The dog was then placed in a harness and given a small amount of food, often in the form of food powder that could be injected directly into the dog’s mouth (see Figure 5.1). When the food was delivered, the dog would automatically begin to sal- ivate. Pavlov termed this behav- ior an unconditioned reflex (or response) because it was a natu- ral response wired into the ani- mal’s physiological system (Pav- lov, 1927).

Beyond the Text: Classic Writings

In this early paper, John Watson, one of the founders of the behavioral movement in the United States, writes about how the process of learning in animals (and presumably some understanding of their mental life) can be helpful to our understanding of human behavior. Read it at http://psych classics.yorku.ca/Watson/Animals/index.htm.

Reference: Watson, J. B. (1907). Studying the mind of animals. The World Today, 12, 421–426.

Beyond the Text: Ethical Considerations

According to the American Psychological Association (APA), 7–8% of research in psychology uses animals as its subjects, and the vast majority of these studies (90%) use rodents or birds. The APA has published a position paper on the use of animals in psychological research, and includes a discussion of such issues as how animal models have helped inform our understanding of human phenomena and the ethical issues and safeguards in place for animal research. Read it at http:// www.apa.org/research/responsible/research-animals.pdf.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 136 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

A device similar to the one shown here was used to capture and quantify the saliva produced by a dog in response to stimuli such as food. The saliva is captured in the tube and a balancing mechanism is activated, which in turn records the amount on the revolving drum. The window was used to pair other visual stimuli with the food.

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Figure 5.1: Pavlov’s research documenting an unconditioned reflex

In the next phase of the demonstration, Pavlov would present the dog with a neutral stimulus (one that would not create salivation in and of itself) such as a bell or buzzer. When presented alone, the neutral stimulus would produce only a raising of the dog’s ears. When paired on sev- eral occasions with the delivery of food (e.g., food-bell, food-bell, food-bell), a conditioning (i.e., learning) process occurred. Following this, the sound (bell) alone would now produce salivation. At this point, the sound of the bell or buzzer has become a conditioned stimulus (meaning that it was learned), which now leads to the conditioned response (meaning a learned response, which Pavlov also called a conditioned reflex) of salivating to the sound of the bell. See Figure 5.2 for an illustration of this type of associative learning.

NS

Bell

BEFORE CONDITIONING

UCS

Food UCR

Salivation

• elicits No response (or neutral response)

• elicits

CS

Bell

AFTER CONDITIONING

CR Salivation

• elicits

CS

Bell

CONDITIONING PROCESS (REPEATED SIMULTANEOUS PAIRING)

+ UCS

Food UCR

Salivation • elicits

Figure 5.2: An illustration of Pavlov’s classical conditioning

The images in panel 1 illustrate that the dog naturally salivates (unconditioned response) to the food (unconditioned stimulus), but does not salivate to the handler (neutral stimulus). In panel 2, we see the repeated pairings of the food with the handler. In panel 3, the dog eventually learns to salivate (now a conditioned response) to the handler alone (now a conditioned stimulus). Pavlov noticed this association, and it was considered a serendipitous example of classical conditioning. He recorded the same responses when using bells and buzzers as the neutral (and eventually conditioned) stimuli.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 137 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Now that the bell is able to produce the salivation in the dog (this is what makes the bell a condi- tioned stimulus), it is possible to consider the consequence of repeatedly ringing the bell and not delivering any food. Eventually, the bell will stop producing the salivation response, and at that point in time, it can be said that the response has become extinct. Therefore, extinction in this context is defined as when the conditioned stimulus (the bell) is no longer able to produce the conditioned response (the dog salivating). Interestingly, it is possible for the conditioned response to reoccur, and this can happen even without having to again pair the food with the bell. Instead, sometimes the response will return even if the dog is simply given a break from the conditioning environment, and this is known as spontaneous recovery (i.e., the previously learned response, which had become extinct, returns without any additional pairing with the food).

So what other types of learning can occur from this basic paradigm of classical conditioning? One option is to pair the conditioned stimulus (in the current example, the bell) with another neutral stimulus (e.g., a light) until this neutral stimulus also produces the conditioned response (bell-light, bell-light, bell-light). Notice that the secondary stimulus is never paired with the unconditioned stim- ulus. This form of learning is termed higher order conditioning, or secondary conditioning. Here, a conditioned stimulus (the bell) is paired with a neutral stimulus (e.g., a light), until that neutral stimulus also becomes a conditioned stimulus by producing the conditioned response (salivating).

Consider what would happen if Pavlov used a stimulus that was similar to, but not exactly the same as, the original conditioned stimulus. For example, if Pavlov rang a bell that was pitched differently, would the dog salivate? Discrimination occurs when the conditioned response is only produced for a very specific conditioned stimulus. In an example of discrimination, the dog would only salivate in response to the exact bell that was used originally, and no other similar-sounding bells would pro- duce a salivation response. Generalization is said to occur when the conditioned response is pro- duced in response to a similar conditioned stimulus. In a situation of generalization, the dog would also salivate to similar-sounding bells. Generalization can be an adaptive function that allows an organism to rapidly respond to new stimuli that are related in some way to a previously learned stimulus. In this way, an individual doesn’t have to experience learning with every single stimulus, and this means learning can be more efficient. However, generalization can also be maladaptive. For example, imagine a child who is viciously attacked by a neighbor’s new pet Rottweiler. As a result of this attack, the child is now afraid of all dogs. On the surface, this might seem adaptive, as the dog that attacked him was clearly a threat. However, being afraid of familiar dogs, even docile dogs, and perhaps even other pets (e.g., cats) represents a form of generalization that is not adap- tive. What would be more adaptive would be the child generalizing his learning to a smaller range of stimuli, such as a growling dog, or a dog that bares its teeth and moves forward aggressively. Unfortunately, we don’t get to choose when we generalize and when we don’t.

The above-mentioned example also helps illustrate another important concept in learning theory: one-time conditioning. This refers to learning that occurs after only one trial (as opposed to the numerous trials needed to make an association in the typical classical conditioning research). This is a very unique type of learning because it involves more rapid acquisition, and it tends to be much more resistant to extinction. Returning to the dog-attack example, the child did not require repeated instances in order to acquire the fear of dogs (note that this type of rapid learning can be adaptive, as repeated trials would be life threatening), but now it will take some time and effort to extinguish the fear response.

Classical conditioning can therefore be a very powerful model for explaining the development of many maladaptive behaviors and clinical disorders, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). For example, when fear is triggered in a truly threatening situation, the stress-response system may activate anxiety, which may later be triggered by previously neutral stimuli (such as smells,

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 138 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

sights, or sounds) that were present at the time of the threat. The concept of generalization could also be used to explain PTSD, as the individual might learn to generalize a fear response to other similar stimuli, even if they were never directly associated with the initial learning experience.

Beyond the Text: Research Spotlight

How does the concept of generalization manifest in human learning with respect to post-traumatic stress disorder?

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a psychiatric illness involving an acute and severe anxiety response to a stressor. The stressor could result from a number of experiences, including witness- ing or experiencing some form of abuse, a physical assault, disaster, or war. PTSD can involve such symptoms as an exaggerated startle response, avoidance of situations that are similar to the original stressor/trauma, and the re-experiencing of the original stressor/trauma in the form of flashbacks or possibly nightmares; symptoms must last for at least one month and result in some form of dysfunc- tion (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). PTSD can also be conceptualized as a form of general- ization, as the individual experiences a generalized fear response to situations/stimuli that are similar to the original stressor/trauma.

In an interesting study, researchers examined whether heart rate (HR) responses to trauma-related pictures (i.e., a generalization response) can be used to differentiate between trauma survivors with and without acute PTSD (Ehlers et al., 2010). Participants were 162 individuals who had survived either a motor vehicle accident (n 5 98) or a physical assault (n 5 64) and were recruited from the emergency room of a major hospital between 2004 and 2006. Sixty-six individuals (approx. 41%) met PTSD criteria one month following the trauma (the acute PTSD group) using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), an instrument discussed in Chapter 1. Ninety-six individuals (approx. 59%) did not meet criteria for PTSD.

The PTSD group showed greater HR responses to trauma-related pictures than those without PTSD (less pronounced mean deceleration, greater peak response, and a greater proportion showing HR acceleration of more than one beat per minute). No group differences in HR (i.e., fear) response emerged for the generally threatening or neutral pictures (Ehlers et al., 2010). The current findings are consistent with research showing that HR acceleration to trauma-specific cues (reminders) pre- dicts the duration of PTSD symptoms (e.g., Elsesser, Sartory, & Tackenberg, 2005).

This study illustrates both generalization and discrimination of a fear response. First, it appears that those with acute PTSD can be defined as showing generalization (as measured by heart rate) to threat-related stimuli relative to those who experienced trauma, but did not meet criteria for PTSD. However, both groups demonstrated discrimination in that they did not show the fear response to nonspecific stimuli or to neutral stimuli. The research also offers some insights into potential inter- ventions. For example, could repeated exposure to the threat-specific (feared) pictures result in extinction of the fear response when the participant habituates to the image? Of course, because researchers did not measure HR response to the stimuli prior to the trauma and because group assignment was not randomized, the findings are necessarily limited.

Critical Thinking Questions:

• PTSD emerges from trauma exposure, but this study and desensitization treatments treat the disorder with further exposure. In what important ways do the two forms of exposure differ that results in such different outcomes? What do you think are some of the personality traits or other factors that determine who is more predisposed to experiencing PTSD symptoms after trauma exposure?

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 139 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Watson’s Application of Classical Conditioning to Humans Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select—doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant- chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations and race of his ancestors. (Watson, 1930, p. 104)

The spread of behaviorism in the United States owes much of its acceptance and popularity to the efforts of John B. Watson, who applied Pavlov’s work to humans. Watson believed that psychol- ogy should deal only with actual behavior and not with mental states, heralding a dramatic shift away from the use of introspection and the study of consciousness. As noted in the above quote, Watson believed that the environment was the critical factor in predicting behavior.

Watson and James R. Angell are both given credit for coining the term behaviorist. But Watson’s use of the label in the title of an article he published in 1913 (“Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It”) was in essence a declaration that behaviorism was independent of other schools of psy- chology that were interested in the mental processes of individuals (Hunt, 2007). The behaviorist manifesto, as it later came to be known, made three fundamentally important points: (1) that psychology should concern itself with behavior, not consciousness; (2) objective methods should be used rather than introspection; and (3) the primary focus should be the prediction and control of behavior, rather than trying to understand the meaning of mental events (Hunt, 2007).

Watson began studying conditioned reflexes in infants in 1916 while a professor at Johns Hopkins University. Working at the Harriet Lane Hospital in Baltimore, he observed over 200 babies, cata- loguing their reflexes (for example, sneezing, sucking, grasping, and reaching) and studying their emotional responses (such as fear, rage, and love). Note that each of these reflexes and emo- tions has observable behavioral components—such as crying and cooing in the case of emotions.

The experiment that brought Watson the greatest attention was one he conducted with his assistant, Rosalie Rayner. He and Rayner attempted to produce a conditioned fear response in an 11-month-old boy who became known as Little Albert (J. B. Wat- son & Rayner, 1920). First, they placed a white rat near 9-month- old Albert; he showed absolutely no fear of the animal. Then they hit a steel bar with a hammer right behind little Albert, and the sudden, very loud noise fright- ened him. They repeated this procedure a number of times on

Beyond the Text: Research Spotlight

There is no record that Watson and Rayner made any effort to extinguish the experimentally produced fear they had cre- ated. By today’s ethical standards for human experimenta- tion, the type of experiment conducted on Little Albert would never be approved. Now all institutions that conduct human as well as animal research are required to follow strict ethi- cal guidelines. All research proposals need to be approved by a committee of peers, ensuring that harmful treatment is avoided or at least minimized. Recently, a team led by Dr. Sharman Levinson identified Little Albert as Douglas Mer- ritte, who died at age 6 of acquired hydrocephalus, a condi- tion unrelated to the conditioning experiments. For more details, see “ ‘Little Albert’ Regains His Identity,” published in the 2010 edition of the APA Monitor, available online at http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/01/little-albert.aspx.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 140 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

different occasions, always pairing the rat with the frightening noise. Within a very short period of time, Albert’s behavior had changed drastically. Now, whenever he saw the white rat, he would begin to cry and attempt desperately to crawl away.

Thus, the conditioning of fear in Little Albert paralleled the conditioning of salivation in the dog by Pavlov. In this situation, the unconditioned stimulus (US) is the loud noise. It is termed uncondi- tioned because it reliably leads to a response (in this case, fear) in the absence of any prior learn- ing. For the same reason, the fear reaction in response to the noise is an unconditioned response.

In this demonstration, the neutral stimulus (one that does not elicit the unconditioned response of fear) is the white rat. The neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) as a result of being paired with the US over a number of trials. It is now a conditioned stimulus because it reli- ably elicits the fear response after having been paired with the loud noise. Fear of the white rat is then defined as a conditioned response (a learned response), which can be elicited by the condi- tioned stimulus. Continued investigations showed that Albert had developed conditioned fear to a number of other furry white things, such as a rabbit and a seal coat, or Watson wearing a Santa Claus mask. Thus, they had demonstrated how generalization might be used to experimentally induce a form of “neurosis” or intense fear.

Watson (J. B. Watson, 1924, 1930) used the term “habit system” to refer to various categories or clusters of individual habits, which are the building blocks of personality. Because he believed that personality is largely learned (through conditioning), he also believed that it is malleable: No indi- vidual’s personality remains consistent over time. Watson thought that concepts from normal or experimental psychology could be expanded to explain abnormal behavior (Rilling, 2000).

Modern psychology has retained some of Watson’s fundamental assumptions. There has been a clear shift to experimental methods of research and a distinct move away from introspection (research is no longer published based on this method). Modern psychologists have multiple out- comes of interest, including behavior, cognition, and affect, and there is a strong interest in chang- ing behavior. Perhaps one area where psychology has remained close to its pre-behavioral roots is the strong emphasis that is still placed on understanding psychological phenomena, as opposed to simply predicting behavior.

Operant Conditioning As noted earlier, operant conditioning applies to nonreflexive actions, and it suggests that the incidence of a behavior is tied to its consequence(s). Importantly, the consequences don’t have to be temporally associated; they can occur considerably later, provided the organism connects the consequence to the behavior. Terms such as reinforcer and punisher (i.e., categories of conse- quences) have became common concepts in psychology. By relying heavily on the elemental laws of learning, it has become possible to account for a much wider range of behaviors.

Thorndike’s Elemental Laws of Learning

One of the major influential figures in the development of behaviorism was Edward Lee Thorn- dike. In the basement of his home, Thorndike created mazes of stacked books and studied how chicks found their way to reinforcers such as food, water, and other chicks, typically improving their performance with repeated trials. He later did research at Columbia, building puzzle boxes

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 141 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

from vegetable crates to study how cats, and sometimes dogs, figured out how to escape from their cages.

On the basis of these studies, Thorndike formulated two fundamental laws of learning. These laid the foundation for a model of psychology applicable to humans as well as animals, and they represented major advances in the scientific understanding of behavior: the law of effect and the law of exercise.

The Law of Effect In essence, the law states that every behavior has a consequence and the nature of that conse- quence determines if the behavior will reoccur. There are two possible consequences or effects of most behaviors, explained Thorndike: An effect (an outcome) can be “satisfying” or it can be “annoying.” Simply stated, the law of effect says that behaviors that are followed by a satisfying state of affairs are more likely to be learned and repeated when the organism is again in the situa- tion that first led to that outcome. In Thorndike’s words, responses that have satisfying outcomes are more likely to be “stamped in.” In contrast, responses that are followed by an annoying state of affairs are likely to be eliminated or weakened (“stamped out” in Thorndike’s words). The funda- mental contribution this law made to psychology’s understanding of behavior is that it recognized the importance of the consequences of behavior. As a result, it paved the way for reinforcement theory, which was later elaborated by Skinner.

The Law of Exercise Thorndike’s research also led him to a second law of learning, the law of exercise, based on the observation that the more often a response has been connected with a stimulus, the more likely it is to be repeated. In other words, practice and repetition strengthen learning. The more a stimu- lus-response association is repeated, the stronger the connection between the two and the more persistent the response will be. For example, this seems to be the case for addictive behavior. The pleasant state (“satisfaction”) brought about by a stimulus such as a drug, a computer game, or pornography leads to the repetition of exposure—and the more frequent the exposure, the stronger the connection between it and the situation that triggers it. This might explain why some people stay up all night, glued to their smartphones, Facebook pages, and Twitter accounts, with each sound signaling an incoming message serving as the ultimate reinforcer.

Reinforcers and Punishers

There are two classes of consequences: reinforcers and punishers. At the most fundamental level, reinforcement is anything that results in an increase in the behavior with which it is associ- ated. Money (a universal reinforcer, as it can be used to obtain many other things), food, sex, and attention are common reinforcers for human behavior. Punishment has the opposite effect; it is designed to reduce the probability of a response occurring. Fines, restrictions, and the removal of any valued possessions or privileges are examples of some typical punishers.

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 142 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Figure 5.3: Understanding reinforcement and punishment

Punishment should always weaken the behavior, whereas reinforcement should always strengthen it. The terms positive and negative simply refer to whether something is being added or removed to the environment.

Another important concept in understanding the consequences of reinforcement and punishment is whether the consequence involves adding (referred to as positive) or removing (referred to as negative) something from the environment. Thus, positive reinforcement involves adding some- thing to the environment that results in an increase in the behavior (e.g., giving money, food, attention, etc.). Negative reinforcement is when an aversive stimulus is withdrawn in response to a behavior, with this too resulting in an increase in the behavior. For example, if a rat has been receiving electric shocks (an aversive stimulus) and the current is turned off when it depresses the lever, turning the current off becomes the negative reinforcement for bar pressing. The important point is that both positive and negative reinforcement increase the probability of a behavior. Posi- tive reinforcement increases the likelihood of the reinforced response as a result of something being added to the situation (e.g., getting $5 for cleaning your bedroom). Negative reinforcement is effective as a result of something being removed from a situation (e.g., removing the chore of washing the dishes if you clean your bedroom).

Positive punishment involves adding something to the environment that decreases the probabil- ity of the behavior occurring. For example, giving someone an electrical shock or a child a slap on the hand could be examples of positive punishment. Negative punishment involves the removal of something desirable, and it, too, results in a decreased probability of the behavior occurring. Removing phone privileges would be an example of negative punishment. See Figure 5.3 for addi- tional illustrations of these concepts.

Positive punishment

Example: Bobby is given detention for talking

in class

Positive reinforcement

(reward)

Example: Bobby is given $10 for

getting an A in math

Added to the situation after

a response

Pleasant Stimulus (Appetitive)

Unpleasant Stimulus (Aversive)

Taken away from a situation after

a response

Negative reinforcement (relief)

Example: Bobby is let out of detention when

he promises to be quiet

Negative punishment

Example: Bobby has his $10 taken away for painting his sister

B e

h a vi

o r

st re

n g

th e

n e

d

B e

h a vi

o r

st re

n g

th e

n e

d

B e

h a vi

o r

w e

a ke

n e

d

B e

h a vi

o r

w e

a ke

n e

d

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 143 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.2 The Neobehaviorists

5.2 The Neobehaviorists

More complex versions of behaviorism evolved from the 1920s to the 1960s and became popular in American psychology. Much of the research used animals as the subjects, but even when humans were used, the subject matter was focused on the prediction of behavior rather than arriving at any complex meaning behind the behavior.

Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism One of the most well-known and influential psychologists of the 20th century was B. F. Skinner. Consistent throughout his prolific career was his belief in radical behaviorism—radical meaning “root.” Like Watson, Skinner spent his career advocating for an extreme behaviorist view. Skinner had no interest in the human psyche: He was concerned with the external, observable, and mea- surable causes of behavior. Nor did he have a theory of psychology or personality, a concept he considered illusory and a distraction to the scientific study of behavior. In this respect, it might appear that Skinner’s perspective would offer little to the study of personality. However, his firm belief in radical behaviorism had a profound impact on the field. It challenged personality theo- rists to be more scientific to avoid being dismissed as irrelevant to scientific psychology. He also forced theoreticians to form a stronger and, in some cases, a practical connection between any mental constructs, such as affect or cognition, and observable behavior.

Skinner was responsible for many discoveries and advances in our knowledge of learning. He had great mechanical aptitude and designed and constructed an experimental appa- ratus that much improved the ones designed by Thorndike—most notably the Skinner box, which became enor- mously popular in psychological labo- ratories throughout the world. The box is basically a cage equipped with a lever that controls the administration of food pellets or water. It is generally used with white rats or pigeons and provides an easy, highly controlled way of investigating learning. It is especially useful for studying the relationship between rate, kind, and amount of

reinforcement and measures of learning, such as rate of acquisition, response rate, and rate of extinction. The Skinner box lent itself exceptionally well to creating a truly empirical science.

Skinner described two different kinds of behaviors, each of which can be explained with different models. On the one hand are respondents. Respondents are responses that occur as reactions to a specific stimulus. Ducking when someone throws a punch at your head is an example of a respondent. Respondents are usually explained by a model of classical conditioning. In contrast, operants are responses that are simply emitted by the organism rather than elicited by specific stimuli. Whether an operant will occur again depends on its consequences. Hence a model of operant conditioning is used to explain operant learning. Thus, if a hungry rat presses a bar and receives a food pellet, the immediate consequences of the rat’s bar pressing are instrumental

Mimi Forsyth/age fotostock/SuperStock

The Skinner box was the first version of modern reinforcement chambers such as this one, which allows scientists to study factors that influence the acquisition of behaviors.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 144 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

in increasing the probability of the bar-pressing response when the rat is again placed in this situation.

Skinner pointed out that punishment is not especially effective as a shaper of behavior. With respect to his experiments on punishment, he writes, “The effect of punishment was a temporary suppression of the behavior, not a reduction in the total number of responses” (Skinner, 1953, p. 184). Skinner’s conclusion is interesting when considered within the context of childrearing, where punishments like timeouts are commonly employed. Of course, one important difference is that Skinner emphasized positive punishments, whereas a timeout would be an example of a negative punishment (i.e., the removal of any reinforcers).

When a response is not emitted for a long period of time, it may be forgotten. For example, if the rat that has learned to depress a lever for reinforcement is not placed in the Skinner box for a period of months or years, it might no longer run over and depress the lever when it finally enters the box again. Skinner distinguishes between forgetting—the loss of a response as a function of

the passage of time—and a pro- cess we earlier defined as extinc- tion. Extinction occurs when a response becomes progressively less likely and finally disappears as a result of not being reinforced. If, after learning bar-pressing behavior, the rat is allowed free access to the Skinner box but is never reinforced again, the bar- pressing response will weaken and eventually disappear.

Schedules of Reinforcement and Punishment

As a result of his experiments, Skinner discovered that various schedules of reinforcement either increase the probability of a behavior occurring or reduce it. The schedules can either be focused on the passage of time between responses or the number of responses. Temporally based sched- ules are characterized by the term interval, meaning that reinforcement (or punishment) occurs after the first response is given following a period of time. In contrast, ratio schedules focus on the number of responses, irrespective of the time. Schedules can also be differentiated with respect to whether they are unchanging or changing. If the schedule is stable, meaning it is not changing from trial to trial, then it is referred to as a fixed schedule. When the schedule is changing from trial to trial, then it is referred to as a variable schedule. By crossing these two descriptive fea- tures, four schedules can be identified (see Table 5.1), and each results in a different pattern of responding. If a rat is given a pellet of food every fifth time it presses a bar, then this is a fixed ratio schedule. If the rat receives the food for the first bar press following a 2-minute interval, then this is a fixed interval schedule. If the rat receives the food first after 3 bar presses, then 100, then 20, etc., this is referred to as a variable ratio scale. Finally, if the rat receives the food for the first bar press after 5 minutes, then the first bar press after 45 seconds, then 20 minutes, etc., then this is a variable interval schedule.

When learning something new, the best way to effect behavioral change is to reinforce (if trying to acquire a behavior) or punish (if trying to extinguish a behavior) every instance of that behavior.

Beyond the Text: Classic Writings

Do you engage in superstitious behavior, such as not step- ping on sidewalk cracks or rituals for good luck? In this brief 1948 paper, Skinner characterizes the acquisition of “super- stitious” behavior in a pigeon. Read it at http://psychclassics .yorku.ca/Skinner/Pigeon/.

Reference: Skinner, B. F. (1948). Superstition in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168–172.

5.2 The Neobehaviorists

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 145 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.2 The Neobehaviorists

This is referred to as a continuous schedule (technically, this is also a fixed ratio schedule, with the ratio being one response). However, this is not necessarily the best way to maintain behavior, as constant reinforcement or punishment can result in satiation, a process by which the reinforcer or punisher loses its value. For example, imagine if students were given a piece of chocolate each time they asked a question in class. Within a short period of time, the frequency of questions would increase dramatically due to the presence of what would likely be defined as a continuous reinforcer (as most people love chocolate). Despite its success in initiating a behavior, the effec- tiveness of this schedule of reinforcement would eventually decrease because the students would eventually have enough chocolates or grow tired of chocolates, and as a result, the appeal of yet one more piece would diminish. Thus, following the acquisition of behavior, the best approach is to move to a variable schedule, as variable schedules are more resistant to extinction, they can be less costly and time consuming to maintain, and they are less likely to result in satiation.

Now let’s consider some human examples. Many students are on their smartphones during class checking for texts or updates on social networking sites. This would represent the initial behav- ior. If the consequence is receiving a favorable text or message update (a reinforcer), then the use of the smartphone during class will increase. This is especially true given that the schedule of reinforcement is likely to be variable interval in nature, one that is highly resistant to change. The acquisition of a behavior in this context is clear because it’s a simple behavior in an isolated setting, but it becomes more difficult when trying to account for complex behaviors. Similarly, learning theory works well to explain simple phobias that involve a single, specific feared stimulus, but they do not work well in predicting complex phobias (such as agoraphobia) or more complex psychological phenomena (such as personality disorders or even introversion).

Table 5.1: Types of schedules

Schedule Description Example Typical behavioral response

Fixed interval

After a specific interval of time has passed, reinforcement is given following the first response.

Paychecks delivered every two weeks.

Lengthy breaks until the interval approaches, then bursts of activity.

Fixed ratio

After a specific number of responses, reinforcement is given.

After every five completed assignments, the student receives five bonus points.

Substantial decrease in productivity following the reinforcer.

Variable interval

After a variable period of time, reinforcement is given following the first response.

You are trying to get through on a busy phone signal and the call finally goes through.

Slow but steady rate. Generally harder to extinguish than the fixed schedules.

Variable ratio

After a variable number of responses, reinforcement is given.

A slot machine could result in a jackpot after one pull or no wins after thousands of pulls.

Most productive schedule with minimal pausing. Also, this schedule is the hardest to extinguish.

One way to address the acquisition of more complex behavior is to consider the process of shap- ing. Shaping involves learning by breaking complex behaviors down into simpler behaviors (i.e., steps) and then reinforcing each successive step in the sequence. With each step, the behavior is closer to the desired outcome (this is sometimes referred to as shaping by successive approxi- mations). Using operant shaping procedures, Skinner taught pigeons to play “ping pong” and a

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 146 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

pig to put dirty clothes in a hamper. He also applied these techniques to education, develop- ing “programmed instruction”—a teaching technique where learners are reinforced for correct responses to each of a sequence of related questions. The use of operant conditioning techniques soon spread to mental institutions, and in many of these established “token economies,” patients could receive some token (for example, a poker chip) that could later be exchanged for a variety of reinforcers, such as food or books. In general, though the use of token economies has its critics (Corrigan 1995), the research literature suggests that they can be effective in improving patient behavior (e.g., Ghezzi, Wilson, Tarbox, & MacAleese, 2009), even in individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia (for a review see Dickerson, Tenhula, & Green-Paden, 2005).

Skinner’s View on Personality Although Skinner did not recognize the need to explain or even address personality, he pro- posed that it is possible to predict the occurrence of behaviors by analyzing observable events, conditions, situations, and history. For example, Skinner (1953) described the traits of submis- siveness and dominance, believing that when a bully attempts to dominate others, he or she is reinforced when others acquiesce and show deference to the bully. Likewise, submissiveness can be reinforced by the lack of conflict. As these practices become habitual, they present as personality traits.

Although Skinner could explain what would typically be called personality, it is important to reiter- ate that he would not consider this personality, but rather a behavioral phenomenon. Of course, current models of personality do tend to be more behaviorally focused as well. Therefore, much of Skinner’s objection with the term personality has more to do with how the psychodynamic theorists used the term (i.e., emphasizing internal, unseen variables).

5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Behavioral psychologists often express their deeply held belief that if behavior changes, “personality” is sure to follow. In other words, when individuals change their habits and behaviors, it is not important whether or not we believe some arbitrary construct such as personality changes. As we saw, the behavioral approach emphasizes the principles by which individuals learn and the ways in which behavior can be modified. In contrast, psychodynamic approaches emphasize far more mentalistic constructs. The dialectic process resulting from the clash between the overly elaborate theoretical system of psychoanalysis and the pragmatic sci- ence of behaviorism has done much to propel the entire field of psychology forward.

In this section, we will present some of the theoretical formulations of personality that emerged toward the latter part of the behavioral era, which includes some more elaborate attempts to explain complex behavior. We will also examine some of the more recent ways in which behavioral theory has been applied in practice (i.e., Applied Behavior Analysis).

Salter’s Conditioned Reflex Theory A little-known figure in the field of behavioral personality is Andrew Salter. Although Salter’s work is not ordinarily mentioned in personality texts, it represents an interesting theoretical attempt to explain personality from a behavioral viewpoint. Salter is perhaps best known for two pub- lications: The Case Against Psycho-Analysis (1952) and Conditioned Reflex Therapy: The Direct Approach to the Reconstruction of Personality (1949). In the latter book, he established what has

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 147 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

been credited as the first assertiveness training guide, and it was couched in the language of learn- ing theory. Salter wrote about such topics as shyness, stuttering, addictions, anxiety, inhibition, masochism, and homosexuality. He believed that personality should be explained with as few concepts as possible and in the simplest way available; this premise remains consistent with the behavioral tradition.

Salter (1949) identified and used three prototypes (models) to characterize personality: what he terms excitatory personality, inhibitory personality, and psychopathic personality. For example, he used General Dwight Eisenhower as a prototype for the excitatory personality (similar to an asser- tive personality), characterizing this prototype as anxiety-free, happy, direct, energetic, respond- ing outwardly to the environment, and focused on constructive and immediate action in response to problems. Salter also characterized this prototype as a quick decision maker, who gravitates to responsibilities, and who likes individuals, but doesn’t care what they think.

Salter (1949) described the psychopathic personality as egocentric in perspective, callous and cold, insincere, unreliable, infantile, and hostile. Much like the current antisocial personality dis- order, these individuals often take advantage of others and have problems with the law.

Salter (1949) believed most people have an inhibitory personality (also known as non-assertive, and which he describes as “living death”), essentially navigating life with extreme caution and trepidation with respect to emotional expression and actions. Salter associated this inhibitory personality with psychological and physical problems, working on the assumption that to withhold emotions and actions results in “toxicity.” This was his rationale for engaging in what would now be characterized as assertiveness training to help people both identify and behaviorally express their experiences. His ideas served as the conceptual basis for Wolpe’s systematic desensitization.

What is interesting about Salter’s use of conditioning to explain human personality is that he also acknowledges the importance of emotion and interpersonal relations for personality adjustment. Dollard and Miller (1950), too, recognized the importance of emotion.

Photri Images/SuperStock Nomad/SuperStock

Though on very different sides of the political spectrum, these former presidents both appear to possess many of the traits associated with the excitatory personality.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 148 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Dollard and Miller’s Learning Theory One of the most systematic efforts to produce a comprehensive behavioral theory of personality was forwarded by John Dollard (an anthropologist) and Neil Miller (a psychologist). Dollard and Miller (1950) were not interested in traits or personality structure. Like other behaviorists, they were concerned with habits and how these are acquired. Behaviorists believe that we are born with reflexes that are shaped by the environment through the action of primary drives and the effects of reinforcement. Because of their role in reducing drives, various behaviors are strength- ened or weakened. Dollard and Miller believed that certain early experiences, such as feeding, toi- let training, learning about sex, and resolving conflict (i.e., the same activities that psychoanalytic theorists considered important), offer highly charged learning experiences in which behavior will be shaped and strengthened into individual habit patterns or personality traits.

Dollard and Miller’s theory describes what they consider the four essential components of learn- ing: drive, cue, response, and reinforcement. These components shape learning and, in so doing, shape our behavior and our personality.

• Drives are “[s]trong stimuli which impel action” (Dollard & Miller, 1950, p. 30). Unlearned drives, such as hunger, thirst, sex, fatigue, and pain, are labeled primary drives. The strength of the primary drives is related to the degree of deprivation: The longer you have been without food or sex, the stronger your hunger or sex drive. Learned drives, such as those related to fear or the need for approval, are termed secondary drives. The notion of secondary drives provided far greater explanatory power than did the concept of primary drives alone, and this was especially important in the attempt to provide a comprehensive explanation of human personality and the development of neurosis.

• Cues are stimuli that direct attention to certain aspects of the environment. They deter- mine what we will respond to and how. For example, internal hunger cues or the golden arches direct our attention toward food.

• Response: Under certain drive conditions (for example, strong hunger) we respond to cues (we eat when we have the banana in front of us). Responses can be weak at first, explain Dollard and Miller, but reinforcement can strengthen them. In addition, a variety of different responses are possible in a given situation. In a sense, there are hierarchies of responses. Some are more likely (i.e., more “dominant”) than others. Among the various ways in which habits are acquired, they suggest that trial and error is the least efficient. Dollard and Miller also suggest that learning takes place through imitation, a notion that has become an important part of contemporary social learning theory (see Chapter 6 for a review of these concepts).

• Reinforcement: Any stimulus (S) that increases the probability of a response (R) occur- ring is defined as a reinforcement. In Dollard and Miller’s theory, any stimulus that reduces a drive will be reinforcing. For example, food is reinforcing precisely because it reduces the hunger drive. In fact, they claim that reinforcement is impossible without some level of drive, as there is nothing to reduce (if you are satiated, the offer of food will not be reinforcing). They also point out that after reinforcement, the level of drive will diminish and unless something occurs to increase drive, the same stimulus will no longer be reinforcing. Thus, after you have eaten your fill—that is, your hunger drive has been reduced to zero—eating is no longer reinforcing.

An important construct in Dollard and Miller’s theory, used to explain complex behavior, is the notion of learned drives. Learned or secondary drives develop because of reinforcement that occurs in complex social systems. Thus, many have strong drives to achieve or to become famous.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 149 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

These are learned drives, unlike the primary drives of hunger, sex, thirst, and avoidance of pain. Dollard and Miller suggest that these secondary drives are so powerful because they are linked with the early satisfaction of primary drives. But unlike primary drives, when they are not rein- forced, secondary drives will weaken.

Another important construct defined by Dollard and Miller is frustration, which they describe as a blocked attempt to reduce a drive (i.e., a blocked goal), such as a failed attempt to quit smoking or drinking. They also define frustration as the inability to pursue two goals at once. When the frus- tration is severe, Dollard and Miller call it conflict, and we will here review three types of conflict:

• Approach-approach conflict is the choice between two desirable outcomes (approach means moving toward an outcome). In this situation, you tend to choose whichever out- come is closer, as this emphasizes the immediacy of drive reduction. Thus, as you move closer to one goal, your drive for that goal increases.

• Avoidance-avoidance conflict is the choice between two undesirable outcomes (avoid- ance means moving away from an outcome). As one moves closer to an undesirable outcome, it increases in its aversive quality.

• Approach-avoidance conflict is when a single behavior results in both a desirable and an undesirable outcome. Importantly, as one moves closer to engaging in the behavior and experiencing the desirable and undesirable outcomes, the aversiveness for the undesir- able outcome increases, as does the drive for the desirable outcome, but the aversiveness increases at a faster rate relative to the desire. It was Lewin (1935) who first postulated that from a distance, positive valence looms larger, whereas the closer one gets, the larger the negative valence. Imagine that you have not dated in quite some time and someone appealing is introduced to you. As you consider whether to call the person, there is likely to be an approach (getting to know them better)—avoidance (being rejected) conflict. As you move closer to contacting the individual, the fear of rejection increases, as does the desire to get to know them better, but the fear usually wins out.

Translating Psychodynamic Concepts in Learning Theory

One of the most important contributions of Dollard and Miller’s (1950) work was their translation of Freudian concepts, including the defense mechanisms, into behavioral terms, as this provided theoreticians and researchers a common framework for dialogue. This work also demonstrated that learning theory could be used to explain some complex behaviors that underlie personality.

For example, Dollard and Miller suggest that unconscious behaviors are those where the indi- vidual is unaware of the cues triggering the drive. Unconscious functioning could also reflect being unaware of the drive itself. Thus, unconscious simply means unlabeled. Although Dollard and Miller conceptualize the defense mechanisms in behavioral terminology, it is important to note that the primary difference is that Freud would assign an underlying (unconscious) motivation to the defense mechanism (i.e., repression is intentional, but unconscious). In contrast, Dollard and Miller’s account does not assume intentionality, but it can account for it being unconscious (i.e., an unlabeled drive). Table 5.2 provides a summary of the defense mechanisms in the language of learning theory.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 150 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Table 5.2: Freudian defenses explained using behavioral constructs

Freudian defense mechanism Behavioral explanation

Repression Unlabeled drives, cues, and responses are equivalent to the unconscious.

Suppression The changing of an anxiety-provoking topic by a group of people talking about something unpleasant reinforces its suppression by reducing anxiety.

Regression “When the dominant habit is blocked by conflict or extinguished through nonreward, the next strongest response will be expected to occur” (p. 171). This next strongest response is often reinforced, and this might be the response that was previously used with great frequency (e.g., a response that was used at some earlier developmental stage).

Displacement When a dominant response is blocked, the next strongest is likely to occur. The response will then generalize to another stimulus (i.e., stimulus generalization).

Rationalization When a true explanation of an event causes anxiety, the individual is motivated to construct an alternative explanation that will reduce anxiety.

Projection This defense depends on the principle of generalization: Each individual expects others to react in a certain manner. Although not a unitary phenomenon, various biologically based reactions that occur tend to reinforce this defense. Acting in a friendly manner is likely to elicit friendly behavior; conversely, a hostile manner elicits a hostile reaction.

Reaction Formation “A person who is motivated to do something he had learned to disapprove or fear may respond with thoughts, statements, or behavior of the opposite kind” (p. 184).

Adapted from Dollard, J., & Miller, N. E. (1950). Personality and psychotherapy: An analysis in terms of learning, thinking, and culture. New York: McGraw Hill.

Mowrer’s Two-Factor Theory Orval Hobart Mowrer modified the theory of classical conditioning, proposing a two-factor theory to explain avoidance learning. He believed that if an individual avoids a feared stimulus, extinc- tion will not take place. In other words, if someone is traumatized and develops a phobia of rats, as in Little Albert’s case, not exposing him to the rat in the future will not eliminate the pho- bic response. The two-factor theory of avoidance learning says, essentially, that the first factor involved in learning an avoidance response is the organism’s fear that has been conditioned to the fear-related event. The organism that runs from danger is not escaping from the source of danger, but rather from the cues—that is, the conditioned stimuli—associated with danger. For example, Mowrer would argue that running from someone who is coming at you in a threatening way with a knife is responding to the cues, in this case a jagged implement, an angry face, and aggressive movements. The second factor in this theory holds that escaping from the fear-related stimulus or stimuli (e.g., the cues noted in the example) is reinforcing because it results in harm avoidance and fear reduction. In this way, avoidance behavior is reinforced and becomes learned.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 151 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Mowrer was interested in the study of conditioned anxiety and reinforcement. He believed that two principles of reinforcement were required: (1) Responses mediated by the central nervous system involving voluntary muscles become weaker when drive is reduced (e.g., you are more likely to stop searching through the refrigerator when not hungry); and (2) responses mediated by the autonomic nervous system or smooth muscles, such as limbic system arousal related to fear are learned by sheer temporal association (classical conditioning; e.g., whenever you see a white lab coat, your blood pressure rises; Hilgard & Bower, 1975). Mowrer’s ideas were used more in the 1950s, but they were met with some criticism and revision as early as the 1960s (Feather, 1963), and as a result, few researchers cite Mowrer’s work, aside from its historical significance (e.g., Levis, 1990).

Wolpe’s Behavioral Applications Joseph Wolpe was a psychiatrist whose view of behavior was similar to that of Watson, believing that behavior is elicited by the environment and not simply emitted and shaped by environmen- tal consequences, as Skinner proposed. A very important concept in Wolpe’s system is anxiety, which he does not distinguish from fear. He defines anxiety as the automatic response patterns that occur in reaction to unpleasant stimuli. In his experiments, Wolpe placed cats in a cage and shocked them after they were exposed to a “hooting sound” of two to three seconds, duration. As classical conditioning theory would predict, the cats soon responded to the hooting with signs of extreme anxiety, crouching, trembling, and breathing heavily. When they were prevented from escaping, they were terrified, often cowering, urinating, and defecating.

In the behavior of these cats, Wolpe detected what he called a “neurotic” pattern (defined as a set of behaviors reflecting intense anxiety). These “neurotic” cats began to respond with increasing anxiety to a variety of other noises. In behaviorist terminology, they had generalized their anxiety responses to other similar stimuli. Importantly, Wolpe also noted that when a response is pre- vented by a competing response, stimuli associated with the competing response can also inhibit the behavior. In other words, if you can find a stimulus that will make the cat emit a response that prevents it from responding with anxiety, that stimulus (and others associated with it) might be used to prevent the anxiety response. This observation would be central to establishing the frame- work of a therapeutic intervention.

Wolpe developed the therapeutic technique known as systematic desensitization (also called graduated exposure therapy), which is frequently used today. It is a behavioral technique used primarily to treat phobias and other anxiety-based disorders (e.g., obsessive-compulsive disorder). There are three important steps in systematic desensitization:

1. The first step involves establishing a fear hierarchy for the conditioned stimulus. This means creating a specific list of feared stimuli and ranking them from least to most feared. For example, if dealing with a fear of spiders, the low end of the fear hierarchy might involve touching rubber spiders or pictures of spiders. Next might be contact with a dead spider. The highest end of the fear hierarchy might involve a live spider at a close distance or even touching a live spider.

2. During the second step of systemic desensitization, the participant engages in a progres- sive relaxation technique, such as deep, meditative breathing.

3. The final step involves exposing the patient to each level of the fear hierarchy, beginning with the lowest end of the fear hierarchy. The patient must return to the relaxed state prior to the removal of the stimulus.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 152 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Another therapeutic technique proposed by Wolpe (1958) is that of assertive responding. It involves training the patient to express both aggressive and affectionate feelings. The aggressive- ness, or assertiveness, is incompatible with anxiety. As a result, the patient who has learned to respond assertively is less likely to be anxious. Another illustration, as applied to Salter’s work, would be training someone to demonstrate excitatory behavior, which would be incompatible with inhibitory behavior. In effect, this is a form of reciprocal inhibition (or counterconditioning) in that assertive responding prevents free-floating anxiety.

Wolpe (1958) also used aversive techniques in therapy. Aversion therapy typically involves pair- ing a negative stimulus, such as an electric shock, with an undesirable response. The treatment of an alcoholic, for example, might include giving the client a nausea-producing drug followed by an alcoholic beverage (recall the example of the drug Antabuse used in the treatment of problematic drinking). Similarly, counterconditioning has been used with pedophiles where electric shock is paired with sexual stimuli. Ethical issues aside, these methods have had limited usefulness for this population.

Wolpe (1969) did not believe that his system treated only superficial manifes- tations of personality. He thought that behavior therapy changes personality, if what is meant by personality is the sum of an individual’s habits. He also believed that the model of reciprocal inhibition could explain cures, even when the cure is brought about by drugs (Wolpe, 1960). Many behaviorists would agree with his claim that changing habits is the critical step in altering one’s “personality.”

Thomas Stampfl (1966), who speculated that neuroses were the result of learn- ing to avoid anxiety, developed another interesting therapeutic technique that he termed flooding (also called implo- sive therapy). In implosive therapy, the patient is literally flooded with stimuli associated with anxiety. This is based on the expectation that the patient will eventually become fatigued and that the anxiety response will eventually cease—at which point a different response will have been counterconditioned to what were previously anxiety-provoking stimuli.

In a move that has taken full advantage of improving technology, more recent behavioral approaches to exposure therapy have adopted virtual reality as a means of exposing patients to feared stimuli without leaving the office. A recent empirical review of the literature suggests virtual reality expo- sure therapy is equally efficacious with respect to more traditional approaches and the benefits appear to generalize outside of therapy and have some durability (Opriş et al., 2012).

AntionioGuillem/iStock/Thinkstock

In flooding therapy, a patient is fully exposed to the most intense manifestation of his or her phobia. For example, a patient with a phobia of fish might be taken to an aquarium such as this.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 153 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

Applied Behavior Analysis Applied behavior analysis (ABA) is a form of behavior modification that relies on the basic learn- ing principles outlined in this chapter. Researchers and clinicians identify the behavior that is being targeted for change, as well as its antecedents (the behaviors and events that precede it) and its consequences. The idea is to not only study, but to change human behavior for the better in a wide range of contexts, including business, health and safety, athletics, and, perhaps most widely, in clinical settings to treat severe mental disorders.

One area that has seen the reasonably successful application of behavioral principles for over 40 years is in treating individuals with autism spectrum disorders (more broadly referred to as intellectual and behavioral disabilities). Those with autism spectrum disorders often have impaired cognitive functioning, but the hallmark feature is impairments in socialization and communica- tion. Behavioral techniques have been employed to help children and adults with low cognitive functioning to develop communication skills and other adaptive behavior (for a review, see Nei- dert, Dozier, Iwata, & Hafen, 2010).

An early forerunner to modern-day applied behavior analysis was an approach developed by Ivar Lovaas, which involves an intensive (i.e., 30 or more hours per week) behavioral intervention to help young children who have been non-communicative to express themselves (e.g., Lovaas, 1987; Smith, Lovaas, & Lovaas, 2002). Although there have been some mixed findings regarding the efficacy of such early behavioral interventions (e.g., the approach appears less effective at addressing deficits such as problematic emotional responses; Beadle-Brown, Murphy, & Wing, 2006), they continue to represent one of the most widely used and efficacious forms of early intervention with autism spectrum disordered individuals (Soorya, Carpenter, & Romanczyk, 2011). Moreover, ABA has been shown to be effective at decreasing self-injurious behavior (e.g., Chowdhury & Benson, 2011).

In addition to their difficulties communicating, these children with autism spectrum disorders have personalities that can be described as passive in social interaction, lacking in personal space, having unique perspectives on the world, failing to understand nuanced communication, and pref- erence for isolation, to name a few. Some researchers believe that autism represents a unique personality structure in and of itself and are therefore less likely to use traditional personality con- cepts to characterize these individuals (Wakabayashi, Baron-Cohen, & Wheelwright, 2006). In con- trast, other researchers adopt a more traditional perspective and use typical traits to characterize those with autism. For example, it appears that when compared to normally developing children, those with autism spectrum disorders score lower on traits such as extraversion, conscientious- ness, and openness to new experience (creativity; Fortenberry, Grist, & McCord, 2011).

5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

Many of the developments in the evolution of the behavioral model are based on research that looks at how various processes influence the development of personality. Although a few behavioral researchers tried to develop a comprehensive model of personality, most did not. Still, their research has resulted in the discovery of many processes that might be considered components of personality. Understanding these processes can be very useful for understanding how learning occurs and how it contributes to the development of personality (see Table 5.3).

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 154 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

Table 5.3: Subcomponent systems and their clinical phenomena and personality

Construct Clinical application Application to personality

Learned helplessness Depression Depressive personality development

Self-control Impulse disorders Antisocial personality development

Anxiety Agoraphobia Avoidant personality development

Seligman’s Concept of Learned Helplessness Martin Seligman (1975) developed the concept of learned helplessness, which is when an individual (or animal) learns that they are unable to control, change, or escape from their environment. In a series of fascinating experiments, Seligman studied the reactions of dogs

that were given an electric shock and then allowed to jump over a barrier to escape—which all dogs learned to do very quickly. When he changed the experimental conditions and shocked the dogs without giving them an escape route, they seemed to become helpless; instead of trying various maneuvers to escape, the dogs stood or crouched and trembled, seemingly overwhelmed and frozen with anxiety. Even more important for Seligman was the fact that when the barrier was sub- sequently removed so that the dogs could escape, they did not. This was a perplexing observation. Seligman labeled this state learned helpless- ness, suggesting that this animal model could be applied to humans to explain how individuals with depression seem to view the world in negative terms and essentially give up.

Many people come to believe that there are no responses they can make that will make matters better. Seligman explains that people characterized by learned helplessness seem to have been conditioned in much the same way as the dogs in his study; they no longer believe there is a possi- bility of escape. He suggests that learned helplessness might be learned in severely dysfunctional families where chaos rules and expectancies of having any impact are kept to a minimum. The significance of Seligman’s early work is that it provides a learning model that explains how cer- tain experiences can lead to profound changes in personality, such as we see in those who suffer

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Learned helplessness is the belief that there are no responses that can make a situation better. This belief can be learned through long-term exposure to difficult environments in which efforts do not translate into favorable change or escape from the setting.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 155 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

from trauma and depression. Interestingly, the bulk of the current research published on learned helplessness focuses on the neurobiological mechanisms of this type of maladaptive learning in animals and its implications for depression (e.g., Li et al., 2011); a detailed discussion of neurobio- logical mechanisms can be found in Chapter 4.

Goldfried and Merbaum: Changing Behavior Through Self-Control Self-control is an important feature of personality functioning. In many individuals with disordered or dysfunctional personalities, self-control often is impaired (e.g., problems with impulse control are one of four criteria used in defining personality disorders; this is also true for the DSM-5). Goldfried and Merbaum (1973) describe self-control as “a process through which an individual becomes the principal agent in guiding, directing, and regulating those features of his own behav- ior that might eventually lead to desired positive consequences” (p. 11).

They suggest that it is important to be aware of the fact that environmental influences also play a central role in developing behaviors that represent self-control. Self-control influences many areas of personality functioning, including adjustment to the community, family, and work. Indeed, when self-control is more broadly termed as self-regulation, it can be shown to play a central role in a number of problematic behaviors, such as inattention and procrastination. For example, in a lab-based study, researchers found that chronic procrastinators delayed preparing (practicing) for a task only when it was defined as a cognitive task, and not when it was labeled a fun activity (Ferrari & Tice, 2000). This research paradigm, which considers procrastination as a form of poor self-regulation, uses behavioral concepts such as task avoidance to define procrastination.

Barlow: The Nature of Anxiety One of the most prolific contemporary workers in psychology is David H. Barlow (2002), whose models of treatment are based directly on the behavioral model. However, his description of anxi- ety and its various subdivisions, such as panic and phobias, is more inclusive than that of the behaviorists. Not only does it include much of what is current in neuroscience, but it also ascribes an important role to emotions, a topic that behavioral psychologists have largely ignored.

Anxiety is perhaps the most common clinical symptom in a wide range of personality disorders, hence its central role in any comprehensive personality theory. Barlow (2002) has done much to broaden our understanding of this central issue. Using learning theory, he presents evidence that there is a relationship between the development of agoraphobia (fear of venturing into a strange place or into crowded areas) and the development of what is termed an avoidant personality style. For example, an individual might be afraid of going into a grocery store because a panic attack occurred on the last visit to the store. That person might then begin to develop more gener- alized anxiety related to being out of their zone of comfort at home. The panic can then generalize and become agoraphobia, which Barlow describes as “basically a complication of anxiety about a fear of panic” (2002, p. 357). Barlow’s work explains how reinforcement patterns can be critical in creating states of anxiety and in fostering the development of certain personality types and disor- ders. For example, a highly anxious individual, whose avoidance of new situations is reinforced by a lessening of anxiety, may develop a strongly entrenched avoidant personality style. Accordingly, most of the therapeutic approaches Barlow developed are behavioral methods.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 156 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.5 Assessment Strategies and Behavioral Tools

After establishing the theoretical groundwork (e.g., Gray, 1985), recent research has provided insights into the neurobiology of the basic learning mechanisms (e.g., activation and inhibition systems) that underlie anxiety and other disorders (e.g., Buss et al., 2003; Putman, Hermans, & van Honk, 2004; Sutton & Davidson, 1997). For example, consistent with Barlow’s hypothe- sis, recent research in a large study of college undergraduates has shown a strong connection between behavioral inhibition, experiential avoidance, and anxiety sensitivity (Pickett, Lodis, Parkhill, & Orcutt, 2012). Importantly for personality, there appear to be measurable individual differences in the acquisition/inhibition systems that can be traced to neurobiological factors (e.g., Zinbarg & Mohlman, 1998). (Chapter 4 provides a more comprehensive coverage of neuro- biological mechanisms.)

5.5 Assessment Strategies and Behavioral Tools

As indicated by the theories reviewed in this chapter, the primary focus of any assessment will be on behavior and factors in the environment that might influence that behavior. One commonality in many of the behavioral assessment strategies is the populations to which they are applied, which tend to reflect lower cognitive abilities. For example, infants and children are often the target of behavioral assessments, in large part because behaviors are more likely to reflect the primary presenting problem, and also because access to other constructs (e.g., affec- tive and cognitive experiences) is limited by their level of functioning. Similarly, individuals having experienced brain injuries or pervasive developmental disorders are also assessed largely with behavioral measures.

One relevant concept to all forms of behavior assessment is behavioral reactivity, which means that behaviors can sometimes change (at least for a short period of time) as a function of being observed. Within the context of research, this could mean that the participant alters his or her behavior to conform to the expectations of the researcher, known as demand effects. This can also occur in clinical contexts.

Assessing With Applied Behavior Analysis Much like psychoanalysis, applied behavior analysis is both a technique for therapeutic change and a method of assessment in which behavioral sequences are analyzed. This procedure ana- lyzes and assesses important variables such as operants, reinforcers, punishment, extinction, and schedules of reinforcement. Using these tools, researchers are able to analyze and understand how certain behavioral patterns are shaped, reinforced, and maintained, as well as how they can be extinguished when change is desired.

Behavior analysis is a proven and powerful technology that has many uses. A common first step in therapy is to observe sequences of behavior and to analyze associated reinforcement and punish- ment. For example, if a child has a temper tantrum when asked to logoff the computer, the tan- trum might last longer if the parent continues to pay attention to the child, even if the attention is negative. The attention might actually be reinforcing the temper tantrum. Knowing that this is the case is an important tool in behavioral therapy.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 157 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.5 Assessment Strategies and Behavioral Tools

Behavioral Assessments of Children and Adolescents Diagnosticians have long relied on behavioral assessments in a variety of clinical contexts to facili- tate case conceptualization and treatment of children and adolescents (e.g., for a recent review, see Hersen, 2006; McLeod, Jensen-Doss, & Ollendick, 2013). For example, scales such as the Neonatal Behavioural Assessment Scale and the Assessment of the Preterm Infant’s Behavior are commonly used to assess for any unusual behavioral or developmental manifestations (Lester & Tronick, 2001).

Clinicians use these assessments in applied settings, but it is also the case that any advances in our understanding of children’s temperaments (personalities) is driven by the effectiveness of the tools available to assess temperament. Researchers have argued and demonstrated that behav- ioral assessments should stand at the forefront of any such assessments (Goldsmith & Gagne, 2012). There are a number of reasons for this argument, most notably, when dealing with children it is much more difficult to access cognitive and behavioral information, and behaviors are more easily objectified and can be directly observed.

Behavioral Assessments of Adults The last 20 years have seen the implementation of many behavioral assessment approaches in adults (e.g., Kenny, Alvarez, Donahue, & Winick, 2008), though with the bulk of these assess- ment procedures being applied to individuals with some compromise in functioning, such as those with adult autism-spectrum disorders (e.g., Parsons, Reid, Bentley, Inman, & Lattimore, 2012). Although less common, behavioral assessments in normally functioning adults are also employed, and recent research has attempted to integrate these methods in the personality literature (e.g. Kelly & Agnew, 2012). Researchers have also attempted to use behavioral assessment strategies to assess personality disorders, both to facilitate case conceptualization and treatment (i.e., behav- ior change; Nelson-Gray et al., 2009). Interestingly, even informal and relatively brief behavioral assessments of normally functioning adults can lead to some consensus with respect to predicting the traits of extraversion and conscientiousness (Vartanian et al., 2012), thereby suggesting that at least some traits are universally recognized and defined.

Behavioral assessment and therapy can and has been applied in many settings. It can be used in naturalistic settings, such as in childcare facilities or in the classroom, as well as in clinical, forensic, industrial/organizational settings (e.g., performance evaluations), and healthcare settings. In addi- tion, health psychologists have adopted these techniques to help address problems of obesity, smoking, heart disease, and other negative health behaviors that plague Western society.

Although other forms of assessment are typically cautious in their use of tests in other cultures, behavioral approaches simply interpret any cultural differences as reflecting different learning environments. Different cultures expose their members to different social and environmental influences, which will then have powerful effects in shaping behavior. Cultures reinforce cer- tain behaviors and values, and they punish others. The behavioristic model analyzes differences among cultures in the same way as differences between the behaviors of two individuals might be analyzed—that is, in terms of the nature of the reinforcement and punishment that follows the behaviors. For example, as noted at the beginning of Chapter 3, grandiosity, attention seek- ing, and other characteristics of narcissism are prevalent in American culture today. A behavioral analysis would identify the elements of our culture that reinforce these behaviors that may not be present in other cultures today or in American culture of the past. However, learning theory does not concern itself with cultural variations and issues to the same extent that some of the other approaches presented in this text do. Instead, behaviorists have sought to identify the universality of human responses, rather than emphasizing cultural differences.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 158 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 Summary

Summary

The development of behaviorism heralded a major departure from the psychodynamic mod-els of personality. By rejecting most of the basic concepts of psychoanalysis, such as the unconscious, ego, and id, behaviorists attempted to develop an empirical foundation for the study of behavior. Unlike other models presented in this text, behaviorism espouses no grand theories and focuses instead on mere behavior.

One of the pioneering figures in behaviorism was Thorndike, who formulated the law of effect and the law of exercise. The field was also strongly influenced by Pavlov’s discovery of the condi- tioned reflex. Watson popularized behaviorism, most notably by demonstrating with Little Albert the explanatory power of conditioning. He also brought behavioral principles to the public by applying them to child psychology and parenting. Watson emphasized the prediction and control of behavior, and this dramatically altered psychology’s theoretical landscape. Radical behavior- ism, introduced by Skinner, held firmly to the notion that psychology should not concern itself with mentalistic constructs because they are too subjective. Skinner described how schedules of reinforcement can be used to shape complex behavior using the principles of operant condition- ing. Dollard and Miller translated aspects of psychodynamic theory into learning theory in their analysis of the role of drives, cues, responses, and reinforcement. Wolpe studied conditioning in animals but then applied his findings to humans to understand how anxiety is caused and how it can be extinguished, using systematic desensitization to treat disorders such as phobias. Research also suggests that we may be more likely to acquire and maintain some phobias (e.g., spiders and snakes) relative to others. Seligman investigated learned helplessness with animals and then applied the model to explain depression in humans.

Principles of learning that are the foundation of the behavioral model can be used to understand how personality is shaped and formed by examining behavioral sequences and reinforcement pat- terns. These tools of behavioral analysis have found widespread use in a variety of disciplines and settings, including clinical psychology, education, and business.

As noted in this chapter, numerous theoreticians have attempted to extend basic learning prin- ciples to an understanding of personality with varied success. Although the behavioral perspec- tive offers some very important insights to understanding personality, and perhaps even more to the methods of studying any psychological phenomena, one longstanding and cogent criticism is whether learning theory can be broadly applied to the complexities of human functioning. Because much of the work is based on animal models, and is generally less able to account for a multitude of competing drives and motivations, not all of which are known to the individual (or at least not to the same degree), one natural criticism is that the complexities of human func- tioning are overly simplified by the learning perspective. Indeed, some of the most successful behavioral applications are for relatively less complex phenomena. As was noted in this chapter, when applying behavioral principles to behavior change, the best fit appears to be with disor- ders that are largely behaviorally defined (e.g., simple phobias, where the primary symptom is avoidance behavior); where a single, definable stimulus (environmental cue) can be identified as the trigger of the problematic behavior (e.g., a spider for someone with arachnophobia); and when the population being targeted for treatment and behavior change exhibits lower cognitive functioning (e.g., as with the application of behavioral principles to those with cognitive dis- abilities). Of course, the trade-off for the simplified approach is that there is likely to be greater experimental control, and this can be very useful to advancing our scientific understanding of any phenomenon, including personality.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 159 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 Key Terms

Key Terms

anxiety Automatic response patterns that occur in reaction to unpleasant stimuli.

applied behavioral analysis (ABA) A form of behavior modification that identifies the behav- ior that is being targeted for change, as well as its antecedents and its consequences.

assertive responding A behavioral technique that trains the patient to employ direct behav- iors to express internal experiences.

aversion therapy A behavioral technique that pairs a negative stimulus with an undesirable response.

behavioral reactivity A change in behavior as a function of being observed.

classical conditioning Learning by temporal association, focusing on reflexive actions.

conditioned response A learned response to a stimulus.

conditioned stimulus A previously neutral stimulus that elicits the response to an uncon- ditioned stimulus through repeated association.

continuous schedule When every instance of a behavior is reinforced or punished.

cue A stimulus that directs attention to certain aspects of the environment.

discrimination When the conditioned response is only produced for a very specific conditioned stimulus.

drive A strong stimulus that motivates action.

extinction When the conditioned stimulus no longer elicits the conditioned response.

fear hierarchy A ranked list of feared stimuli.

fixed schedule A schedule that is stable and does not change from trial to trial.

flooding A behavioral technique where the patient is exposed to stimuli associated with intense fear or anxiety (also called implosive therapy).

generalization When the conditioned response is elicited by a similar conditioned stimulus.

higher order conditioning When a con- ditioned stimulus is paired with a neutral stimulus until the neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus by producing the con- ditioned response; also known as secondary conditioning.

inductive reasoning Reasoning that begins with data and then induces laws from the data.

interval The period of time between responses (or, in a related sense, it can be used as an adjective to describe the type of schedule that is determined by the time between schedules).

law of effect Behaviors are controlled by their consequences, such that behaviors that are reinforced are likely to reoccur, whereas those that are punished are less likely to reoccur.

law of exercise The more often a response has been connected with a stimulus, the more likely it is to be repeated (repetition strengthen learning).

learned drive See secondary drive.

learned helplessness When an individual or animal learns that they are unable to control, change, or escape from their environment.

negative punishment Withdrawing something from the environment that decreases the prob- ability of a behavior occurring.

negative reinforcement Withdrawing some- thing from the environment that results in an increase in a behavior.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 160 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 Key Terms

neutral stimulus A stimulus that does not pro- duce a specific response.

non-assertive An inhibitory personality that navigates life with extreme caution with respect to emotional expression and actions.

one-time conditioning Learning that occurs after only one trial of conditioning.

operant conditioning Learning as a result of consequences that are typically not occurring at the same point in time as the behavior and involving nonreflexive actions.

operants Behavioral responses that are emit- ted by an organism rather than elicited by specific stimuli.

phobia An intense fear that results in a degree of dysfunction.

positive punishment Adding something to the environment that decreases the probability of a behavior occurring.

positive reinforcement Adding something to the environment that results in an increase in a behavior.

preparedness The suggestion that all species are genetically prepared to make certain asso- ciations, especially those that have maximized survival.

primary drive Unlearned drives, such as hun- ger, thirst, sex, fatigue, and pain.

punishment Anything that reduces the prob- ability of a certain response occurring.

ratio schedule Determined by the number of responses.

reinforcement Anything that increases the behavior with which it is associated.

respondents Behavioral responses that occur as reactions to a specific stimulus.

response See unconditioned reflex.

secondary drive Learned drive that develops by way of reinforcement in complex social systems.

shaping A form of conditioning that breaks complex behaviors into simpler behaviors and reinforces each successive, sequential step.

Skinner box An experimental apparatus used for investigating learning in animals.

spontaneous recovery When an extinct con- ditioned response returns without any further conditioning.

systematic desensitization A behavioral tech- nique used to treat phobias and anxiety-based disorders.

unconditioned reflex A natural response to a stimulus.

variable schedule A schedule that changes from trial to trial.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 161 5/21/15 12:40 PM

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 162 5/21/15 12:40 PM