9 DISCUSSIONS DUE IN 48 HOURS

combs

05CH_Teaching_Lefrancois.pdf

Home >Education homework help >9 DISCUSSIONS DUE IN 48 HOURS

143143

5Behaviorism and Social Cognitive Theory

novikat/iStock/Thinkstock

Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter you will be able to:

ሁ Define learning. ሁ Explain why the theories of Pavlov and Watson are labeled “behaviorism.” ሁ Analyze how Thorndike’s theory is used in the classroom. ሁ Define classical and operant conditioning. ሁ Explain the difference between negative reinforcement and punishment. ሁ Evaluate Bandura’s social cognitive theory.

A little learning is a dangerous thing Drink deep or taste not the Pierian spring

—Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 143 12/14/17 4:36 PM

144

Section 5.1 Learning

Pretest

Determine if the following statements are true or false.

1. Learning requires a change in knowledge, skills, habits, attitudes, or beliefs. (T/F) 2. In classical conditioning, the neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned response when

learning has occurred. (T/F) 3. John B. Watson believed that human learning is almost entirely due to nature, not

nurture. (T/F) 4. Primary reinforcers are defined as the first reinforcers that the organism receives. (T/F) 5. Too much of a reward may lead to cessation of behavior. (T/F) 6. Children imitated charitable behaviors after observing other children perform similar

behaviors in Bandura’s “Bobo” doll experiments. (T/F)

Answers can be found at the end of the chapter.

Introduction For teachers, one of the most important questions about learning is which conditions lead most effectively to desirable changes in behavior. But before we can begin to answer this question, we need to look at psychology’s explanations for learning. This chapter presents two kinds of explanations: the behavioristic (which looks at how behavior is controlled by its consequences) and the social cognitive (which emphasizes the social origins of behavior and which also takes into consideration our ability to think and anticipate).

My youngest son doesn’t really like wild mushrooms, although he once ate them very happily. The last time he ate wild mushrooms, I must have inadvertently thrown some strange fungus in with my succulent boletes. He happened to be the one who ate it. And shortly after supper, he became violently ill and I had to take him in and have his stomach pumped out.

He hasn’t been able to eat wild mushrooms since.

5.1 Learning My son is apparently the victim of what psychologists call one-shot taste aversion learning. It’s a type of learning easily illustrated with animals like rats. When rats are given something to eat and then exposed to a single dose of radiation, which makes them ill, they will then refuse to eat the food they ate just before the radiation. This is a special kind of learning that

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 144 12/14/17 4:36 PM

145

Section 5.1 Learning

can be extremely important for survival. If we, and other animals, didn’t easily learn to avoid things that make us ill, many of us wouldn’t be here today: Too many of our ancestors would have continued to eat nasty mushrooms.

The learning of taste aversions is a biologically based phenomenon, of little direct importance to the business of teaching. However, more general forms of learning are absolutely central to the educational enterprise—an enterprise that is really all about learning.

Learning, you see, is the acquisition of information and knowledge, of skills and habits, and of attitudes, beliefs, and new interests. It always involves a change in one of these areas (namely, a change in knowledge, skills, habits, attitudes, beliefs, interests, etc.)—a change that is brought about by the learner’s experiences. Accordingly, psychologists define learning as all relatively permanent changes in potential for behavior that result from experience but are not due to fatigue, maturation, drugs, injury, or disease. (See Figure 5.1.)

Figure 5.1: Learning as experience-based changes in behavior ሁ Evidence of learning is found in actual or potential changes in behavior as a result of experience.

But learning itself is an invisible, internal neurological process.

Learning

All relatively permanent changes in potential for behavior that result

from experience but are not due to fatigue, aging, maturation,

drugs, injury, or disease.

Experience

Contact with, participation in, exposure to external or internal events to which the organism is

sensitive. These events are called stimuli.

Change in behavior

Actual or potentially observable changes following

experience.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 145 12/14/17 4:36 PM

146

Section 5.1 Learning

Note that learning is found not only in actual but also in potential changes in behavior because not all changes involved in learning are obvious and observable. For example, in the case entitled “The Talking Marks,” there are some immediately apparent changes in the students’ actual behavior—as, for example, when Tyler makes a pair of “talking marks” and places them appropriately, a behavior of which he was earlier incapable. There may also be other impor- tant changes that are not apparent but are still a fundamental part of learning.

C A S E S F R O M T H E C L A S S R O O M : T H E T A L K I N G M A R K S

The Place: Lynn Swann’s second-grade class

The Situation: A punctuation lesson on quotation marks

Ms. Swann: And what we have to do is put the talking marks around the words that come right out of Mr. Brown’s mouth. (Demonstrating with a cartoon character who has just said, “Here’s my dog.”)

Tyler: Can I do it, Ms. Swann? Can I?

Ms. Swann: May I, Tyler. It’s may I. Yes you may and we’ll see if you can. (Ms. Swann erases the quotation marks. Tyler takes the green pen and makes a pair of recognizable opening and closing quotation marks. The children have already practiced making these “talking marks.”)

Ms. Swann: Very good, Tyler. I see that you can do it.

Jenna: Can I do it too? Can I?

Ms. Swann: Weren’t you paying any attention at all, Jenna? It’s may! May, not can. No, you may not do it right now. We have to move along because it’s going to be lunch time soon. (and the lesson continues . . . )

For example, there may be an unfortunate change in Jenna’s eagerness to participate in class activities following Ms. Swann’s refusal to allow her to do so and because of the loud scolding she received for the may I–can I grammatical error. This change in disposition—that is, in the person’s inclination to do or not to do something—is also an example of learning. Changes in disposition have to do with motivation, a topic discussed in Chapter 8. Motivational changes cannot always be observed but are no less real or important.

Learning often involves changes in capability—that is, changes in the skills or the knowledge required to do something. Like changes in disposition, changes in capability are not always observed directly. For instance, in Ms. Swann’s class, many other students will probably also learn to make quotation marks and to place them “around the words that come right out of Mr. Brown’s mouth.” But, like Jenna, most will not be given an opportunity to demonstrate this learning immediately. To determine whether students’ dispositions or capabilities have changed following instruction, teachers need to give them an opportunity to engage in the relevant behavior—that is, to perform.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 146 12/14/17 4:36 PM

147

Section 5.2 Behaviorism and Cognitivism

Performance refers to actual behavior—to a real-life demonstration of knowledge or capa- bility. When Leonard recites a poem he has been asked to memorize, when Lenora writes a test, when William dunks the basketball for his coach, when Jenna later puts the “talking marks” where they belong, they are performing. That is, they are demonstrating the effects of learning through their actual performance. What’s important to note is that the changes in capabilities and dispositions that define learning will not be evident until learners are placed in a situation requiring the relevant performance.

5.2 Behaviorism and Cognitivism Some psychologists try to understand learning by limiting their investigations and their theo- rizing to things they can actually observe—actual behavior (responses; for example, opening an umbrella), the conditions that lead to behavior (stimuli; for example, a sudden rainstorm), and the consequences that follow (such as increased comfort following the response of open- ing the umbrella).

The approach that focuses on observable aspects of behavior (stimuli, responses, and con- sequences) is labeled behaviorism. Behavioristic researchers try to discover the rules that govern the formation of relationships between stimuli and responses (the rules of condi- tioning). For this reason, these theories are often referred to as stimulus–response (S–R) theories or behavioristic theories.

In contrast to behaviorism, cognitivism looks at the more intellectual or mental aspects of learning. Cognitive approaches deal mainly with questions relating to how we develop our fund of knowledge and how we eventually arrive at notions of ourselves as learners and prob- lem solvers. Cognition-oriented researchers attempt to understand the nature of information: how it is acquired and organized by learners; how it can be recalled, modified, applied, and analyzed; and how the learner understands, evaluates, and controls the activities involved in cognition.

Early Behaviorism: Pavlov and Watson Ivan Pavlov, the Russian physiologist whose name will probably be associated forever with classical conditioning, stumbled upon his most famous observation almost by accident. At the time, his investigations dealt mainly with digestion in dogs. One day he noticed that some of his dogs began to salivate when they were about to be fed. Strangely, they seemed to be salivating at the mere sight of their keeper or even when they simply heard his footsteps, well before they could see or smell the food.

This simple observation led Pavlov to a series of well-known experiments: He would ring a bell or sound a buzzer—neither of which ordinarily leads to salivation—and then immedi- ately give the dogs food, a stimulus that does lead to salivation. He soon found that if the pro- cedure were repeated often enough, the bell or buzzer alone began to elicit salivation.

In Pavlov’s experiments, the bell is referred to as a conditioned stimulus (CS) (it leads to a response only after learning has occurred); the food is an unconditioned stimulus (US) (it leads automatically to a response without any learning having to occur); salivation in

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 147 12/14/17 4:36 PM

148

Section 5.2 Behaviorism and Cognitivism

response to the food is an unconditioned response (UR) (it is an unlearned response to an unconditioned stimulus); and salivation in response to the bell or buzzer is a conditioned response (CR) (it is a learned response to the bell, which is a conditioned stimulus). The dogs’ learning to salivate in response to a sound illustrates classical conditioning.

The basic facts of classical conditioning, which, according to Bitterman (2006), have changed very little since Pavlov’s work, are these: A stimulus or situation that readily leads to a response can be paired repeatedly with a neutral stimulus (one that does not lead to a response) so that eventually the neutral stimulus will have been conditioned to bring about the response. Note that learning in classical conditioning is typically unconscious. That is, learners do not respond to the conditioned stimulus because they become aware of the relationship between it and an unconditioned stimulus.

Watson’s Environmentalism According to J. B. Watson (1913, 1916), who was greatly influenced by the work of Pavlov, people are born with a limited number of reflexes—simple, unlearned behaviors. Learning, explained Watson, is just a matter of classical conditioning involving these reflexes. Hence, differences among people are entirely a function of their experiences. This point of view is referred to as environmentalism.

Watson’s view was extremely influential in the early development of psychology in the United States. His insistence on precision, rigor, and objectivity was very much in line with the scientific spirit of the times—as was his rejection of popular but vague terms such as mind, feeling, and sensation (Berman & Lyons, 2007). The belief that what we become is a function of our experiences also presents a just and egalitarian view of humans. If what we become is truly a function of the experiences to which we are subjected, we are in fact born equal. Watson declared that any child can become a doctor or a judge—or, presumably, a pop star or a president. It’s a nice thought, but in reality things are not quite that simple. There are certain physical, intellectual, personal, and emotional qualities that are clearly not equal in all people. I am convinced that I could never have been a great opera singer. Nor can just anybody become a doctor or a judge.

Instructional Implications of Pavlov’s and Watson’s Behaviorism Classical conditioning, especially of emotional reactions, occurs in all schools, virtually at all times, regardless of the other kinds of learning going on at the same time. And it is partly through these unconscious processes that students come to dislike schools, subjects, teach- ers, and related stimuli—or to like them.

To illustrate, a school subject may be considered a neutral stimulus that evokes little emo- tional response when first encountered. But distinctive stimuli that accompany the subject may be associated with pleasant responses (a comfortable desk, a friendly teacher) or with more negative reactions (a cold, hard desk; a cold, hard teacher with a grating voice). After repeated pairings of the subject with a distinctive unconditioned stimulus, the emotions (atti- tudes) associated with the unconditioned stimulus may become classically conditioned to the subject (see Figure 5.2).

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 148 12/14/17 4:36 PM

149

Section 5.2 Behaviorism and Cognitivism

Figure 5.2: Classical conditioning ሁ In this example of classical conditioning, an initially neutral stimulus (NS) is paired with an

unconditioned, fear-producing stimulus (US) so that the subject is eventually conditioned to fear the previously neutral stimulus. Fear is now a conditioned response (CR) to a conditioned stimulus (CS).

NS Mathematics

US Unfriendly teacher with grating voice

No response (or neutral response)

UR Discomfort, dislike,

fear

Elicits

Before conditioning

Mathematics elicits no strong emotional response; the unconditioned stimulus elicits negative reactions.

NS Mathematics

US Unfriendly teacher with grating voice

UR Discomfort, dislike,

fear Elicits

Conditioning process (repeated simultaneous pairing)

Mathematics is paired repeatedly with the unconditioned stimulus (teacher).

CS Mathematics

CR Discomfort, dislike,

fear Elicits

After conditioning

Mathematics has become a conditioned stimulus associated with negative reactions.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 149 12/14/17 4:36 PM

150

Section 5.2 Behaviorism and Cognitivism

In the case “Of Pig Grunting and Flinching,” there are clear examples of classical conditioning in the school. Most obviously, Robert has been conditioned to flinch when Mrs. Grundy makes noises. Less obvious but perhaps even more important, he has probably also acquired a num- ber of negative emotional responses associated not only with Mrs. Grundy’s noises but also with her appearance, with the classroom, with the subject she teaches—perhaps even with school in general.

C A S E S F R O M T H E C L A S S R O O M : O F P I G G R U N T I N G A N D F L I N C H I N G

The Time: 1848

The Place: Mrs. Evelyn Grundy’s classroom in Raleigh, North Carolina

The Situation: 6-year-old Robert has been “Misbehaving to Girls and Telling Lyes”

In this Raleigh school system in 1848, the prescribed punishment for Misbehaving to Girls is 10 lashes, and for Telling Lyes, it’s 7 lashes for a total of 17 lashes.* Mrs. Grundy adminis- ters the punishment herself. And every time she raises the cane to strike Robert, the effort makes her squeal hoarsely, a little like pig grunting. By the tenth lash, Robert has begun to flinch just before the cane hits. He cries out quite loudly when it lands.

Later that day, when Mrs. Grundy is passing out the spellers, she turns her back to Edward and his ruler-propelled spitball catches her smack behind the left ear and she squeals loudly. Robert flinches.

*By our standards, the punishment sounds extreme and barbaric. But in 1848, it was the prescribed punishment in this Raleigh school (see Coon, 1915).

The clearest and most important instructional implications of classical conditioning include the following:

• Teachers need to do whatever they can to maximize the number, the distinctiveness, and the potency of pleasant unconditioned stimuli in their classrooms.

• Teachers should try to minimize the unpleasant aspects of being a student, thus reducing the number and potency of negative unconditioned stimuli in schools.

• Teachers need to know what is being paired with what in their classes.

The old adage that learning should be fun is more than a schoolchild’s frivolous plea: It fol- lows directly from classical conditioning theory. A teacher who makes students smile and laugh while she has them repeat the 6 times table may, because of the variety of stimuli and responses being paired, succeed in teaching students (1) how to smile and laugh—a worth- while undertaking in its own right, (2) to associate stimuli such as 6 × 7 with responses such as “42”—a valuable piece of information, and (3) to like arithmetic—and the teacher, the school, the smell of a crowded classroom, the feel of a book’s pages or the heft of a personal electronic tablet, and on and on.

What does a teacher who makes students suffer grimly through their multiplication tables teach?

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 150 12/14/17 4:36 PM

151

Section 5.3 Thorndike’s Connectionism

5.3 Thorndike’s Connectionism People are always trying to show how intelligent their pet animals are, claimed psycholo- gist Edward L. Thorndike (1898). If a dog gets lost and then finds its way home, newspapers run stories about how smart dogs are. Stories about the hundreds of dogs who go out for an evening stroll, stupidly get lost, and never come home again are much less interesting and seldom get reported.

Trial-and-Error Learning “Are animals really intelligent?” asked Thorndike. “You can’t really tell from anecdotes,” he answered. “They make very poor scientific evidence.” And so he devised a series of tasks that, in a sense, serve as crude measures of animal intelligence. The most famous of these are the so-called puzzle boxes. The one shown in Figure 5.3 is designed so that a cat locked in the box can get out only if it does three things: pull a string to release one lock, step on a lever to release a second, and flip a latch upright so that the door will open. To make sure that the cat will be highly motivated to get out, Thorndike would place a juicy morsel, like a dead fish, just far enough away that the cat couldn’t quite reach it through the bars.

Figure 5.3: Thorndike’s puzzle box ሁ To escape from the box, the cat had to pull a string to release one of the door locks, step on the

lever to release the second, and then flick one of the door latches.

Source: From E. L. Thorndike, 1898, “Animal intelligence: an experimental study of the associative processes in animals.” Psychological Review Monograph Supplement, 2(8).

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 151 12/14/17 4:36 PM

152

Section 5.3 Thorndike’s Connectionism

So what does a hungry cat do in this situation? It uses up all of its ready-made solutions like trying to squeeze between the bars, scratching and clawing at the door, looking pathetic, and begging for help. And when none of these strategies works, it doesn’t sit back and contem- plate the situation, trying to figure out a solution, looking for insight. No, says Thorndike. What the cat does instead is continue to try out dozens of different actions until, by chance, it stumbles upon the right combination of behaviors and escapes from the puzzle box.

It seems clear, Thorndike explained, that this is trial-and-error learning. The essence of his explanation may be simplified as follows: Hunger as well as the cat’s disinclination to be locked up are stimuli that lead to a series of responses, such as scratching and clawing. The combination of these responses eventually results in the animal being able to satisfy the hunger and freedom-seeking urges that led to the responses in the first place. As a result, the sequence of responses quickly becomes learned.

People, Thorndike insisted, learn in exactly the same way. In a given situation, a person makes various responses until a response leads to a solution or, in Thorndike’s words, leads to a “satisfying state of affairs.” That response is then learned or, again to use Thorndike’s words, “stamped in.” Thus, learning involves the “stamping in” of connections between stimuli and responses: Hence, the theory is labeled connectionism.

The Law of Effect That, in a nutshell, is Thorndike’s law of effect. In essence, this law maintains that responses occurring just prior to a satisfying state of affairs are more likely to be repeated. The converse is also true, although less important, claimed Thorndike: Responses occurring just prior to an annoying state of affairs are more likely not to be repeated. Thus, what Thorndike called satisfiers and annoyers are critical to learning.

“Hold on!”, staunch behaviorists might object at this point. Terms like satisfying and annoy- ing are simply too subjective to be acceptable to behaviorists. Not so, responded Thorndike, because satisfying and annoying can be defined completely objectively. A satisfying state of affairs is one that the animal (or person) tries to maintain, or at least does nothing to avoid. And an annoying state of affairs is one that the animal (or person) either tries to change, or does nothing to maintain (Thorndike, 1913). These definitions have nothing to do with the organism’s feelings, but only with behavior. That Edwina hurries to curl up by a warm fire on a cold, rainy night indicates that this is a satisfying state of affairs. That she goes to great lengths to avoid being out in the rain in her nightgown illustrates that this would be an annoying state of affairs. In both cases, it is the behavior rather than the presumed emotion that allows the behaviorist to interpret the consequence as “satisfying” or “annoying.”

After 1930, Thorndike (1931) modified the law of effect in an important way. He had previ- ously believed that annoying states of affairs lead to connections being stamped out (forgot- ten). But further experimentation led him to the view that satisfiers lead to learning, whereas annoyers do not lead to forgetting but simply lead the learner to do something else.

Instructional Implications of Thorndike’s Theory Much of Thorndike’s research and writing was directed specifically toward applying his find- ings to education. Not surprisingly, his theories are rich with instructional implications.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 152 12/14/17 4:36 PM

153

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Most obvious and perhaps most important are the implications of his belief that learning results from correct trials being rewarded (leading to a satisfying state of affairs). It fol- lows that teachers and schools need to provide opportunity for students to emit a variety of responses and that correct responses need to be rewarded. The theory also stresses that rewards need to be tailored to the situation and to the child and that, among other things, the child’s readiness to learn needs to be taken into consideration.

Many of the instructional implications of Thorndike’s theory are to be found in his subsidiary laws. The law of set or attitude, for example, recognizes that people frequently respond to novel situations in terms of the sets, or attitudes, that they bring with them. Teachers often exercise considerable influence in determining student attitudes. For example, they can encourage students to develop attitudes that place high value on creativity. Subsequently, stu- dents will be more likely to prize creative behavior and perhaps even to respond creatively.

Thorndike’s law of readiness specifies that a learner who is ready for a specific type of learn- ing is far more likely to profit from relevant learning experiences than another who is not ready. Learner readiness may depend on physical maturation, on the development of intellec- tual skills, on the acquisition of important background information, and perhaps on motiva- tion. Hence, to assess as well as to enhance readiness, teachers need knowledge of children’s emotional and intellectual development.

What Thorndike referred to as response by analogy, commonly called generalization, is central to the educational enterprise. Generalization occurs whenever a previously learned response is used in a new situation—or when a new stimulus is reacted to as though it were familiar. When Tammy uses a multiplication rule she learned in school to determine how many packs of bubble gum eight quarters will buy, she is generalizing.

Thorndike suggested that teachers can facilitate transfer by pointing out a variety of situa- tions in which a single response (or rule) is applicable. He also emphasized the importance of pointing out connections among ideas. These connections, Thorndike insisted, are the basis of knowledge.

5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning By definition, behaviorists are concerned with behavior. They define learning as changes in behavior and look to the environment for explanations of these changes. Their theories are associative; they deal with associations that are formed among stimuli and responses. And, typically, they explain learning on the basis of contiguity (simultaneity of stimulus and response events) or in terms of the effects of behavior (reinforcement and punishment). Pav- lov and Watson are contiguity theorists; Thorndike is a reinforcement theorist, and so is B. F. Skinner, one of the most influential psychologists of the 20th century and the man behind the theory of operant conditioning.

Respondents and Operants There are two kinds of behavior, explained Skinner. Elicited responses are all the many responses that are caused by stimuli and can be classically conditioned (like sneezing; blink- ing; being angry, afraid, or excited). These are also called respondents because they occur

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 153 12/14/17 4:36 PM

154

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

in response to a stimulus. They are largely automatic, involuntary, and almost inevitable responses to specific situations.

Emitted responses are a much larger and more important class of behaviors that are not elicited by any known stimuli but are simply emitted responses. Skinner called these behav- iors operants because, in a sense, they are operations performed by the organism. Driving a car, surfing the Internet, singing, reading a book, and kissing a baby are generally operants. Their common characteristics are that they are deliberate and intentional. And they are sub- ject to the laws of operant conditioning. (See Table 5.1.)

Table 5.1: Classical and operant conditioning

Classical (Pavlovian) Operant (Skinnerian)

Deals with respondents, which are elicited by stimuli and appear involuntary

Deals with operants, which are emitted as purpose- ful (instrumental) acts

Reactions to the environment Actions upon the environment

Type S conditioning (S for stimuli) Type R conditioning (R for reinforcement)

What Is Operant Conditioning? The clearest illustration of operant conditioning involves a typical Skinnerian experiment in which a rat is placed in a Skinner box, a small, controlled environment (see Figure 5.4). The Skinner box is constructed to make certain responses highly probable and to allow the experi- menter to measure these responses and to punish or reward them. For a typical experiment, the box might contain a lever, a light, an electric grid on the floor, and a food tray, arranged

Figure 5.4: A Skinner box ሁ Operant conditioning is clearly demonstrated by Skinner’s experiments involving a rat’s (e)

interactions with a light (a), food tray (b), lever (c), and electric grid (d).

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 154 12/14/17 4:36 PM

www.cengage.com/permissions

155

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Figure 5.5: Operant learning in the classroom ሁ In operant conditioning, unlike classical conditioning, the original response is emitted rather

than elicited by a stimulus. In this example, a variety of off-task and on-task behaviors are emitted. Reinforcement leads to the more frequent occurrence of on-task behaviors.

Before conditioning

Stimulus context (SD): Classroom/appearance and behavior of teacher

Various on- and off-task responses are emitted in the classroom context.

Conditioning process

Stimulus context: Classroom

The reinforced response becomes more frequent. Stimuli accompanying the reward (discriminated stimuli, or SD) acquire

control over the response.

After conditioning

Stimulus context: Classroom

One response is systematically reinforced.

Response Attention to teacher

Sight and behavior of teacher in classroom

is followed by Teacher attention, smiles, praise, high marks

Reinforcement

leads to Attentive, on-task behavior

Response

so that when the rat depresses the lever, the light goes on and a food pellet is released into the tray. Most rats will quickly learn to depress the lever if rewarded. And they can also be trained to avoid the lever if depressing it activates a mild electric current in the floor grid, or to depress it if doing so turns off a current that is otherwise constant.

Most of the basic elements of Skinner’s theory are evident in this situation. The rat’s depress- ing the lever is an operant—a behavior that is simply emitted rather than being elicited by a specific stimulus. The food pellets are reinforcement: they increase the probability that the rat will depress the lever.

In general terms, operant conditioning increases the probability that a response will occur again. Furthermore, the reward and whatever discriminated stimuli (SD) are present at the time of reinforcement are stimuli that, after learning, may bring about the operant. For example, the rat’s view (and smell) of the inside of the Skinner box may eventually serve as stimuli for lever-pressing behavior. But, cautions Skinner, these are not stimuli in the sense that a puff of air in the eye is a stimulus that elicits a blink. Rather, these discriminated stimuli are signals that a certain behavior may lead to reinforcement. (See Figure 5.5 for a model of operant learning in the classroom.)

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 155 12/14/17 4:36 PM

156

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Reinforcement The causes of behavior, Skinner insisted, are outside the organism; they have to do with the consequences of actions. Thus, his science of behavior seeks to discover how consequences affect behavior (Skinner, 1969; see Figure 5.6).

Figure 5.6: The variables Skinner studied ሁ Skinner was interested in clarifying the relationship between independent variables (those

the experimenter controls), such as type and schedule of reinforcement, and dependent variables (variables affected by experimental manipulations of the dependent variables), such as how fast the organism learns, rate of responding, and how soon responding stops when reinforcement ceases.

Type of reinforcement (positive or negative)

Schedules of reinforcement

(continuous or intermittent)

Acquisition rate (how fast the organism learns)

Rate of responding (how many responses are

emitted)

Extinction rate (how soon the behavior stops when

reinforcement is discontinued) Independent variables

(controlled by the investigator) Dependent variables

(affected by the independent variables)

Reinforcement is the effect of any stimulus that increases the probability that a response will occur. There are two broad classes of reinforcers: primary and generalized. A primary rein- forcer is a stimulus that the organism does not have to learn is reinforcing. Primary reinforc- ers are ordinarily related to unlearned needs such as the need for food, drink, or sex. Stimuli that satisfy these needs tend to be highly reinforcing for most organisms.

A generalized reinforcer is a previously neutral stimulus that, through repeated pairings with other reinforcers in various situations, has become reinforcing for many behaviors. In one sense, twenty dollars is only a piece of paper—that’s all it is to a very young child. But to an older child or an adult for whom dollars have been paired with many reinforcers, twenty dollars—or better yet, a whole fistful of twenty-dollar bills—is an extremely powerful gener- alized reinforcer. And so are prestige, fame, power, and high grades.

A stimulus is a positive reinforcer if it increases the probability of a response occurring when it is added to a situation. A negative reinforcer has the same effect when it is removed from the situation. Negative reinforcers tend to be aversive stimuli (unpleasant outcomes such as an electric shock or detention). Positive reinforcers tend to be positive stimuli (pleas- ant outcomes such as money, food, or tokens).

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 156 12/14/17 4:36 PM

157

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

In the Skinner box example, food pellets are positive reinforcers—as might be the light if it’s paired with food. However, if a mild current were turned on in the electric grid that runs through the floor of the box, and if this current were turned off only when the rat depressed the lever, turning off the current would be an example of an aversive stimulus serving as a negative reinforcer.

In summary, there are two types of reinforcement: One involves presenting a pleasant stimu- lus (positive reinforcement; reward); the other involves removing an aversive stimulus (nega- tive reinforcement; relief). Similarly, there are two types of punishment: removing a pleasant stimulus (penalty; often termed removal punishment); and presenting an aversive stimulus (castigation; sometimes called presentation punishment).

Keep in mind that both positive and aversive stimuli can be used for either reinforcement or pun- ishment. As Figure 5.7 illustrates, this depends on whether stimuli are added to or taken away from the situation following a behavior. Also keep in mind that whether a stimulus is reinforc- ing or not depends entirely on its effect on behavior. (See Figure 5.8 for classroom examples of operant conditioning.)

Figure 5.7: Reinforcement and punishment ሁ Reinforcement and punishment are defined not by the nature of the outcome (positive or

aversive), but by their effects on behavior. Thus a pleasant outcome such as free time in the library can be a powerful reinforcer when it follows successful completion of an assignment. But when the same outcome is taken away following transgression of a school rule, it becomes a form of punishment.

Behavior strengthened

Something is added to a situation after a

response

Something is taken away from a situation

after a response

Behavior weakened

Positive reinforcement

(reward)

(Louella is given a jelly bean for being good)

Presentation punishment (castigation)

(Louella has her nose tweaked for being bad)

Negative reinforcement

(relief)

(Louella’s nose is released because she

says she’s sorry)

Removal punishment

(penalty)

(Louella has her jelly bean taken away for

being bad)

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 157 12/14/17 4:36 PM

158

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Aversive and Positive Control Note that negative reinforcement and punishment describe two very different situations. The two are often confused because each can involve aversive stimuli. But each has very different effects on behavior. Specifically, punishment is meant to bring about a reduction in behav- ior, whereas negative reinforcement, like positive reinforcement, increases the probability that a response will occur. Thus, a child can be encouraged to speak politely to teachers by being smiled at for saying “please” and “thank you” (positive reinforcement). Another child can be beaten with a cane (or threatened therewith) when “please” and “thank you” are for- gotten (punishment)—with the clear understanding that the cane will be put away only when behavior conforms to the teacher’s standards of politeness (negative reinforcement). In the end, both children may seem to be wonderfully polite. But which child, do you suppose, will like teachers and schools more? There is surely an important lesson here for teachers.

Strange as it might seem, the use of negative reinforcement as a means of control is highly prevalent in today’s schools, homes, and churches, as is the use of punishment. These meth- ods of aversive control (in contrast to positive control) are evident in the issuance of low grades and verbal rebukes, threats of punishment, detention, and the unpleasant fates that most major religions promise transgressors. These methods are evident as well in our legal and judicial systems, which are extraordinarily punitive rather than rewarding.

Figure 5.8: Classroom examples of operant conditioning ሁ The first two examples (positive and negative reinforcement) lead to an increase in the likelihood

of the response. The last two examples (both forms of punishment) lead to a decrease in the likelihood of the response. Teachers may also inadvertently reinforce maladaptive behaviors (second example). Note that in real life, the implications of each of these consequences may not be so simple and straightforward.

Consequence (reinforcement or punishment)

Implications

Negative reinforcement: Student is not

ridiculed

Student is more likely to answer

only when sure of being right

Presentation punishment:

Teacher has student clean cupboards

Student is less likely to talk

during lecture

Removal punishment: Privilege of going on field trip

is withdrawn

Student is less likely to misbehave

before field trip

Student is more likely to study

diligently again

Positive reinforcement:

Student receives an A on exam

Operant responseStimulus

Student answers only when sure of being right

Teacher ridicules wrong answers

Student talks to neighbor

Teacher lectures

Student misbehaves Teacher promises

field trip for good behavior

Student studies diligently

Physics exam is announced

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 158 12/14/17 4:36 PM

159

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Types of Reinforcement Schedules The variables Skinner was most interested in investigating were type of reinforcement and reinforcement schedule (how reinforcement is presented). He wanted to know how these independent variables affect behavior. He looked at dependent variables such as how rapidly learning occurs, the rate of responding, and how long behavior persists in the absence of reinforcement (Figure 5.6).

One of Skinner’s important early conclusions was that even a very small reward will lead to effective learning and will maintain behavior over a long period. You don’t have to feed a dog an entire steak to teach it a sequence of simple tricks; a tiny morsel will do just as well. Besides, it’s clear that too much reward (satiation) may lead to a cessation of behavior. After several steaks, the dog might well say, “Enough, thank you, I’m—belch—going to curl up and sleep now.”

How reinforcement is administered is referred to as the schedule of reinforcements. Rein- forcement always involves one of two different kinds of schedules (or a combination of the two). In one schedule, called continuous reinforcement, every correct response is rein- forced. In the other, labeled intermittent reinforcement (also called partial reinforcement), only some correct responses are reinforced.

If reinforcement is administered intermittently (rather than continuously), there are two gen- eral options: a proportion (or ratio) of responses might be reinforced—for example, one out of every five correct responses. This intermittent schedule of reinforcement is called a ratio schedule. Alternatively, an intermittent schedule might involve reinforcement that occurs after a specified period of time—for example, after every 15 seconds. This is called an inter- val schedule.

Both ratio and interval schedules of reinforcement can be either fixed schedules or ran- dom or variable schedules. In a fixed schedule, reinforcement is given in a predetermined, unchanging fashion. For example, in a fixed-ratio schedule, reinforcement might occur after every 5th correct response, whereas in a random-ratio schedule, an average of every 5 responses is reinforced, but in unpredictable fashion. That is, the first response might be reinforced, then the 7th, then the 15th, and perhaps the 22nd; but after 100 responses, 20 will have been reinforced. Similarly, in a fixed-interval schedule, reinforcement will occur after a correct response following a predetermined period of time—say every 20 seconds. In a com- parable random-interval schedule, reinforcement will occur an average of every 20 seconds but at unpredictable times. To further complicate matters, different schedules might be used at the same time for different behaviors in what are termed concurrent schedules.

In studies of the effects of reinforcement, or when using reinforcement in the classroom or to train animals, usually every effort is made to reinforce only correct, desirable responses. However, there have also been investigations where reinforcement is provided no matter what the learner is doing, giving rise to what is termed a superstitious schedule. A supersti- tious schedule is a fixed-interval schedule without the requirement that there be a correct response before reinforcement occurs. Skinner (1948) once left six pigeons overnight on a superstitious schedule (they received reinforcement at regular intervals no matter what they did). He found that by morning one bird had learned to turn clockwise just before each rein- forcement, another pointed its head toward the corner, and several had learned to sway back and forth.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 159 12/14/17 4:36 PM

160

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Skinner suggests that we too learn superstitious behaviors as a result of reinforcement that occurs independently of what we do. For example, some of us are very careful to always put on our red and yellow underwear whenever the home team plays. After all, they won that one time we wore those things. And they lost that time we forgot. Figure 5.9 summarizes Skin- ner’s schedules of reinforcement.

Figure 5.9: Schedules of reinforcement ሁ Each type of schedule tends to generate a predictable pattern of responding.

Every correct response

is reinforced

A. Continuous

B. Intermittent (partial)

Fixed ratio

For example, every fifth correct response is reinforced.

Ratio

Fixed interval For example, the first correct response is rewarded after a

fifteen-second time lapse.

Interval

A variation of fixed interval: For example, reinforcement occurs after a fifteen-second

time lapse no matter what the organism is doing.

C. Superstitious

Different schedules associated with different behaviors are presented concurrently. For example,

one behavior produces reinforcement on a fixed-interval basis and a second behavior,

on a fixed-ratio basis.

D. Concurrent

Fixed

Random (variable)

Random ratio For example, an average of one

out of every five correct responses is rewarded

at random.

Random interval For example, reinforcement follows a correct response an average of once every

fifteen seconds, but at unpredictable times.

Effects of Various Schedules One of the things Skinner was interested in discovering was the relationship between various schedules of reinforcement and rate of learning, extinction rate, and response rate. Some of these results have important implications for teaching.

In the early stages of learning, it appears that continuous reinforcement leads to the high- est rate of learning. When learning simple responses such as pressing a lever, the rat might become confused and would almost certainly learn much more slowly if only some of its ini- tial correct responses were reinforced.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 160 12/14/17 4:36 PM

161

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Interestingly, although continuous reinforcement often leads to more rapid learning, the extinction rate for behavior that has been continuously reinforced is considerably faster than for behavior that has been reinforced intermittently.

Among animal subjects, rate of responding is clearly a function of the schedule used. Pigeons and rats, for example, often behave as though they had developed expectations about reward. A pigeon that has been taught to peck a disk and is reinforced for the first peck after a lapse of 15 seconds (fixed interval) often stops pecking immediately after being reinforced and starts again just before the end of the 15-second interval. If, on the other hand, the pigeon is rein- forced on a random-ratio basis, its response rate will be uniformly high and constant, often as high as 2,000 or more pecks per hour. (See Figure 5.10.)

Figure 5.10: Response rate as a function of reinforcement schedule ሁ As shown in these idealized graphs, pigeons, rats, and people often respond to reinforcement

schedules as though they have developed valid expectations about the timing and frequency of reinforcement.

Fixed interval (reinforcement every 15 seconds)

R es

p o

n se

r at

Random ratio (reinforcement at unpredictable times)

R es

p o

n se

r at

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 161 12/14/17 4:36 PM

162

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

So! One can reinforce the behavior of rats and pigeons in a variety of clever ways and note a number of consistent effects this will have on their ridiculously simple behaviors. From this, many graduate dissertations and yards of published research can be derived for the erudition of the scholars and the amazement of the people. But what of human beings? How are they affected by schedules of reinforcement?

The simple answer is, in much the same way as experimental animals. Kollins, Newland, and Critchfield (1997) reviewed 25 studies that looked at this question. They conclude that humans seem to respond to schedules of reinforcement much as animals do. In the early stages of learning, we perform better under continuous schedules, but our responses are more durable and more predictable if we are later reinforced intermittently. That the attention- seeking behaviors of young children are so highly persistent may well be precisely because these behaviors are often reinforced intermittently.

Concurrent Schedules of Reinforcement Clearly, however, human behavior is seldom as simple as might be the bar-pressing behavior of a rat or the key pecking of a pigeon. Neither the rat nor the pigeon has a lot of choices in its highly controlled environment: to press or not to press; to peck or not to peck. . . . But you, on the other hand, might have a nearly overwhelming array of choices: To go to a movie or not to go; to study or not to study; to call this friend or that friend or the other friend; to text- message a parent; to update Facebook, to tweet your current thoughts for the amazement of your friends, and on and on. To each of these choices is linked the possibility of reinforcement. And each might be associated with very different schedules of reinforcement—a situation that defines concurrent schedules of reinforcement.

In studies of concurrent schedules, the organism can choose among two or more behaviors, each of which is linked to a different schedule of reinforcement. For example, a pigeon might be placed in a situation where pecking disk A is linked to a variable ratio schedule and pecking disk B is linked to a variable interval schedule. Studies of pigeons under these circumstances indicate that they typically select which disk to peck and adjust their rate of pecking in clearly predictable ways that tend to maximize reward. A pigeon is not totally stupid!

Not surprisingly, studies with human subjects lead to much the same conclusion: Our behav- iors in experiments where responses are tied to different schedules of reinforcement tend to be directed toward maximizing reinforcement (Silberberg et al., 2008).

Shaping Through Operant Conditioning It is relatively simple to train a rat to press a lever, a pigeon to peck a disk, or a 2-year-old to say “Wazoo.” Why? Because these are some of the things that rats, pigeons, and children do. But as Guthrie (1935) observes, “We cannot teach cows to retrieve a stick because this is one of the things that cows do not do” (1935, p. 45).

But maybe Guthrie is wrong: It just might be possible to train a cow to retrieve a stick. The psychologist charged with that task could stand there, leaning on the fence, day after day, watching for the behavior in question to appear. And when the cow finally decided in her cowlike way to pick up the stick, it would be a simple matter to reinforce her—say, with a nice new bale of timothy hay—thus increasing the probability that the behavior would occur again. Unfortunately, both the psychologist and the cow would likely die of old age before the desired operant appeared.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 162 12/14/17 4:36 PM

163

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Shaping is a much better way of teaching animals complex behaviors. It involves reinforc- ing the animal for every response that brings it slightly closer to the desired behavior. For example, to teach the cow to pick up a stick, the experimenter might initially reinforce the cow every time it turned toward the stick. Later, once the cow had learned to turn toward the stick, it would no longer be reinforced until it moved slightly closer to it. And if the reinforcements were accompanied by a distinctive stimulus such as the sound of a cowbell (a discriminated stimulus), eventually the cow might walk directly to the stick every time it heard the bell. And, following the systematic reinforcement of behaviors successively closer to the desired oper- ant, in the end the cow might have learned to pick up and retrieve the stick, placing it gently in the psychologist’s hand, which would surely have amazed and confounded my grandmother!

It isn’t possible for schools and teachers to give students experience with all situations in which a specific learned behavior will or will not be appropriate. Yet one of the most impor- tant tasks of schools is to prepare learners to respond appropriately in new situations. And reassuringly often, children do respond appropriately when faced with completely new sit- uations. They can learn to discriminate between situations where a particular behavior is appropriate and others where it isn’t—termed discrimination learning. And they may learn when to apply a behavior in different situations where appropriate—termed generalization.

As an example, many children learn very early in life that their mother will pay attention if they cry. And they soon learn to generalize this behavior from specific situations where they have obtained their mother’s attention to new situations where they desire her attention. And often, a wise mother can bring about discrimination learning simply by not paying attention to her child in those situations in which she doesn’t want to be disturbed—like when she’s on the phone.

Instructional Implications of Skinner’s Operant Conditioning The principles of operant learning are enormously relevant for teaching. A classroom is in many ways like a gigantic Skinner box. Like a Skinner box, it is engineered so that certain responses are more probable than others. For example, it is easier to sit at a desk than to lie in one, and it is easier to remain awake when sitting than when lying down. And at the front of a million classrooms stand those who are among the most powerful dispensers of reinforcement—teachers. They smile or frown; they say “cool” or “that stinks”; they give high or low grades; occasionally they grant special favors; at other times they withhold or cancel privileges. Through their use of reinforcement and punishment, sometimes deliberate and planned and sometimes quite unconscious, teachers shape the behavior of their students.

One clear implication of Skinner’s theory is a strong emphasis on methods of positive rather than aversive control (positive reinforcement rather than negative reinforcement and punishment).

The specific and systematic application of operant conditioning principles to education requires that teachers become behavior analysts—that they dedicate themselves both to identifying and establishing environments that will lead to desirable behaviors and to pro- viding reinforcement consequences that will maintain these behaviors. A collective label for the application of operant principles in education and in therapy is behavior modification (discussed in Chapter 9). (See Table 5.2 for other classroom applications of operant condi- tioning principles.)

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 163 12/14/17 4:36 PM

164

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

Table 5.2: Some operant conditioning concepts applied to instruction

Concept Explanation/Effect Illustration Probable consequences

Positive reinforcement (reward)

Probability of a behav- ior increases following the presentation of a consequence usually perceived as positive

Ellen writes an original poem, reads it in class, and receives high praise

An increase in the like- lihood of Ellen’s writing more poems and read- ing them in class

Negative reinforcement (relief)

Probability of a behav- ior increases follow- ing the removal of a consequence usually perceived as aversive

Leonard is terribly afraid of making a fool of himself when he presents his science experiment to the class; he stays home on the day of the science fair; his fear disappears

An increase in the likelihood that Leon- ard will subsequently try to avoid stressful situations

Presentation punish- ment (castigation)

Probability of a behav- ior decreases following a consequence usually perceived as aversive

Leonard’s father rep- rimands him severely for having stayed home from school

Leonard may be more likely to go to school in the future, even when faced with fearsome tasks

Removal punishment (penalty)

Probability of a behav- ior decreases when it leads to the removal of a stimulus ordinarily perceived as positive

Sammy bullies the smaller children on the playground; as a con- sequence, his teacher slashes his playtime in half for a week

Sammy is less likely to bully the playground children again

Shaping A complex behavior is brought about or modi- fied through reinforce- ment of successively closer approximations

Early in her Spanish class, Sylvia is praised for saying “hey meee, nah me emportay,” and other similar phrases, no matter what her pro- nunciation. But later in the class, she receives praise only for phrases that no longer contain her most elementary errors. Finally, there is praise only for correctly pronounced phrases

Sylvia’s pronunciation improves dramatically through the course

Generalization Responses learned in one situation are transferred to another similar situation

A grade-2 teacher sets up a “store” in her multilingual ESL class where children can use play money to buy vari- ous objects

Juan, who is newly learning English, can subsequently shop in his neighborhood store with far more confidence, applying addition and subtrac- tion rules learned and practiced in school

(continued on next page)

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 164 12/14/17 4:36 PM

165

Section 5.4 Skinner’s Operant Conditioning

There are many, however, who are quick to point out that behaviorism is not a universal cure for all our educational ills. Even if we agree that behavioristic principles should be applied whenever possible, we would soon discover that in countless instances they cannot be applied very effectively at all. The fact is that teachers seldom control the most powerful reinforcers that affect student behavior—for example, peer acceptance and praise, parental approval, and so on. This means that teachers are often relegated to using what are, at least for some students, relatively weaker reinforcers—teacher approval and grades.

A second problem is that one of the central tasks of teaching is often to bring about a desired response rather than simply to increase its frequency or to prevent it from being extinguished.

Table 5.2 (continued)

Concept Explanation/Effect Illustration Probable consequences

Discrimination Responses learned in one situation are judged inappropriate in another similar but not identical situation

In early September, all the children yell and shout at each other on the playground during recess; many of the first- grade children continue to do so when they go back into their class- rooms after the buzzer sounds; teachers in the different classrooms use various combinations of reinforcement and punishment to suppress some of the noise

By October most of the first-grade children have learned to dis- criminate more readily between situations where loud noise is appropriate and situ- ations where it is less appropriate

Extinction Responses that are not reinforced become less frequent

Cheryl delights in making her class- mates laugh, usually by contorting her face or making rude noises with her palms and her armpits, often disrupting the flow of classroom activities; she pays no attention to the teacher’s request that she stop these behaviors, and appears unfazed by the various punishments orga- nized by the teacher and principal. In the end, the teacher asks the students to ignore Cheryl as much as they possibly can; they comply

Cheryl’s acting out becomes more and more infrequent, finally disappearing altogether

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 165 12/14/17 4:36 PM

166

Section 5.5 Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

This is quite unlike the Skinner box situation where the main problem is to control and main- tain a simple and easily elicited response through the manipulation of reinforcement.

A third problem is that although operant principles can be used to control maladaptive behavior, their application sometimes has limitations. Martin and Pear (2007) point out that behavior modification techniques applied to behavior problems often ignore the causes of misbehavior and sometimes lack long-term benefits.

Finally, there are those who object to Skinner’s theory on more philosophical grounds. They argue that the view that rewards and punishments control our behaviors reduces us to pup- pets and robs us of our freedom and dignity. They suggest that experiments with animals don’t generalize well to humans—that we are much more than just animals. Yes, Skinner replies: “Man is much more than a dog. But like a dog he is within range of scientific analysis” (1971, p. 21).

5.5 Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory One of the characteristics that makes humans more than dogs, the cognitive psychologists suggest, is that we understand something of the consequences of our behaviors: We can antic- ipate and reason and decide to act or not to act. Behaviorists such as Skinner do not deal with mentalistic concepts such as these, but this does not mean that they deny that these events take place. What it means, instead, is that they believe it is unnecessary and wasteful to include such poorly defined, imprecise, and often unobservable activities in a science of human learning and behavior. However, some psychologists, such as Albert Bandura (1977; 1997) have attempted to recognize and understand these mentalistic activities while still remaining faithful to the behaviorists’ emphasis on observable events.

Bandura’s theory is labeled social cognitive theory because it emphasizes the social origins of behavior (it looks at how we learn from observing others in social situations) and recog- nizes the role of mental (cognitive) processes such as imagining and anticipating.

Observational Learning One of the most important questions from a teacher’s point of view is: how does the child learn socially acceptable behaviors? Bandura’s answer is that social learning occurs largely through imitation, a process that is also called observational learning. Learning through imitation, or observational learning, involves acquiring new responses or modifying old ones as a result of seeing a model do something (Bandura, 1969).

Bandura suggests that the best way to understand how learning through imitation works is by reference to operant conditioning. Put simply, we learn by observing and imitating the behaviors of others or of symbolic models such as fictional characters in books or television programs. In Skinner’s terms, imitative behaviors can be considered operants. And when imi- tative behaviors are reinforced, they become more probable.

Triadic Reciprocal Determinism Besides being based on operant conditioning principles, and perhaps even more impor- tantly, Bandura’s theory recognizes the fundamental importance of our ability to symbolize,

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 166 12/14/17 4:36 PM

167

Section 5.5 Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

to imagine, to figure out cause-and-effect relationships, and to anticipate the outcomes of our behaviors. The environment clearly affects our behavior, Bandura informs us; there is little doubt that we engage in many behaviors because of the reinforcing consequences of so doing. But reinforcement does not control us blindly: Its effects depend largely on our awareness of the relationship between our behavior and its outcomes.

Our ability to symbolize and to anticipate is reflected not only in our ability to imagine the con- sequences of our behavior and therefore govern ourselves accordingly, but it is also reflected in our habit of deliberately arranging our environments to try to control the consequences of our actions—hence, Bandura’s concept of triadic reciprocal determinism. Put simply, this concept refers to the notion that we both affect and are affected by our environment.

Take Stephen as an example. He spends most recesses telling stories and imitating the voices and mannerisms of politicians and teachers, activities that make his friends laugh. But he does not imitate politicians or teachers in front of his father; his father does not laugh. Thus, his social and physical environments affect his behavior. But, at the same time, that he can imitate so well is an important factor in determining what he does.

There are three principal components of our social cognitive realities at play here, explains Bandura. There are personal factors (Stephen’s special talent), the social and physical envi- ronment (Stephen’s audience), and the person’s behavior (Stephen’s imitating politicians and teachers). The audience clearly affects Stephen’s behavior and may also, in the end, change his personality, his emotions, and his moods. At the same time, his behavior affects and changes the audience. This illustrates what Bandura means by triadic reciprocal deter- minism (Figure 5.11).

Figure 5.11: Bandura’s triadic reciprocal determinism ሁ Behavior, the person, and the environment all mutually influence and change each other.

Personal internal factors like biology (gender; hormones),

affect (emotions; moods), and cognition (knowledge;

goals; expectations)

Behavior (the person’s actions)

The social and physical environment as

experienced by the individual

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 167 12/14/17 4:36 PM

168

Section 5.5 Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

The Processes of Observational Learning Although reinforcement is important for learning through imitation, Bandura (1977) makes it clear that the effects of models are largely a result of what he calls their “informative func- tion.” In other words, from observing models, we learn cognitively how to do certain things and we also learn what the consequences of our actions are likely to be.

Four distinct processes are involved in observational learning: attentional processes, reten- tion processes, motor reproduction processes, and motivational processes.

Many of the behaviors in which our models engage have no value for us; therefore, we pay lit- tle attention to them and do not learn them. For example, when I lived with my grandmother as a young adolescent, I was passionately interested in trapping and snaring wild things for food and money. And when I had the opportunity to go out into the woods with George Aheni- kue, I watched his every move like a hawk—how he walked, how he looked around, how and where he stopped, how he fashioned his sets, and how he arranged his snares. These behav- iors had high value for me. And his expertise gave him power as a model.

But when I managed to catch a rabbit, I paid no attention to how my grandmother cleaned, sautéed, and stewed the beast; I just sat at the table and licked my chops. Not until many years later, when I had a rabbit to prepare in my own kitchen, did I realize how little I had learned from my grandmother about the mysteries of the kitchen. I had paid no attention.

Just as we must pay attention if we are to learn, so too must we remember what we have observed. Because the effects of imitation are usually delayed rather than immediate, we need some way of symbolizing, understanding, and organizing our observations. For example, to learn a complex motor skill, it is sometimes useful to observe a model closely and store a visual sequence of the behavior. It is then possible to mentally rehearse the desired behavior.

Acting out a modeled behavior involves transforming actions that are mentally represented into actual physical movements. Being able to do so successfully, of course, depends on physi- cal capabilities: Clearly, some of us will never be able to hit a golf ball very far no matter how many expert golfers we observe and try to imitate.

Accurate motor reproduction of an observed behavior also depends on the individual’s abil- ity both to monitor attempted reproductions and to use motor feedback to make corrections. Imitations of motor behavior are seldom perfect the first time—they have to be refined. A coach might repeatedly demonstrate how a batter should stand, how she should hold the bat, how she should distribute and shift her weight, and where her eyes and toes should point. But in the end, a truly good batter will have refined and perfected her batting through a long suc- cession of trials (motor reproductions) that are evaluated and slowly modified as a function of feedback involving, among other things, how often contact is made with the ball, how far the ball goes when it’s hit, and whether the coach smiles or frowns while watching the batter.

Much of what people observe and could learn is never manifested in their behavior. George Ahenikue, for example, was an important model for me with respect to trapping snowshoe hares. But he also knew a fantastic trick for blowing his nose. I have little doubt that I learned it; I remember it very clearly. But I don’t do it. Ever! Phrased another way, I have acquired the behavior but do not perform it: I am not motivated to do so.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 168 12/14/17 4:36 PM

169

Section 5.5 Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

A model can be an actual person whose behavior serves as a stimulus for an observer’s response. It can also be something far more abstract like oral or written instructions, pictures, mental images, cartoon or film characters, religious figures, and—not least important—mate- rial from books, television, and the Internet. These are termed symbolic models. For some children, symbolic models may be as important as real-life models. This is not to deny that peers, siblings, and parents also serve as models or that teachers and other well-behaved people are often held up as exemplary models. (“Why don’t you behave like Dr. Anderson? See how nicely he sits in church with his eyes closed.”)

Sources of Reinforcement in Imitation There are two possible sources of reinforcement for imitative behaviors: direct and vicarious.

Direct reinforcement occurs when the consequences of behavior lead to reinforcement— for example, when parents praise an infant for repeating a word correctly, or a toddler for roll- ing a ball back to mother. It is also apparent when the imitative behavior leads to a goal—such as receiving a bottle of milk after saying “milk.”

Vicarious reinforcement is a secondhand type of reinforcement—hence, vicarious—that results from observing someone else behave in a certain way. It is as though the observer assumes that the model does something because he or she derives reinforcement from that behavior. Therefore, using the observer’s logic, anyone else engaging in the same behavior would receive the same reinforcement. Albert, who gets up at five each morning and runs eight miles as fast as he can, is responding to having seen his neighbor, Mike Wattingly, do the same. Mike looks unexpectedly happy and in Albert’s unconscious logic, if he imitates Mike, he too should be happy. The reinforcement that moves Albert is vicarious.

The Effects of Imitation Bandura (Bandura & Walters, 1963) suggests that there are three categories of imitative behavior that he describes as the three effects of imitation: the modeling effect, the inhibitory- disinhibitory effect, and the eliciting effect.

The Modeling Effect The modeling effect involves acquiring new behavior as a result of seeing a model emit that behavior. This effect is well illustrated in the acquisition of aggressive behaviors, which have been extensively studied in laboratory situations, usually with nursery-school children.

In the first and most famous of these experiments, Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961) exposed three groups of children (aged 37 to 69 months) to one of three different experimental con- ditions. One group saw the experimenter being physically aggressive with a 5-foot inflated “Bobo” doll (punching it, striking it with a mallet, kicking it, sitting on it, and so on.) The physical aggression was also interspersed with verbally aggressive comments (like “sock him in the nose . . . ,” “throw him in the air . . . ,” “knock him down,” and so on). A second group saw the experimenter totally ignore the doll. And a third group, the control group, was exposed to the Bobo doll only in the testing part of the study. In this case, testing involved observing the children through a one-way mirror for a 20-minute period during which they could interact with the Bobo doll or play with other toys.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 169 12/14/17 4:36 PM

170

Section 5.5 Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

The results of this and many subsequent experiments clearly illustrate the modeling effect. That is, when left alone with the dolls, children exposed to aggressive models are significantly more aggressive than children exposed to nonaggressive models. Furthermore, their aggres- sive responses are often precisely imitative. If the model punched the doll, that is exactly what participants are most likely to do. If the model kicked the doll instead, then that, too, is what observers do. And, strikingly, those exposed to nonaggressive models subsequently engage in far less aggressive behavior than those not exposed to any models at all (see Figure 5.12).

Figure 5.12: Aggression as a function of imitation ሁ Some of the results from Bandura, Ross, and Ross’s (1961) study of children’s interactions with a

Bobo doll following exposure to models interacting aggressively or nonaggressively with the doll.

Average number of aggressive responses per child

0.80 1.05

0.30 0.35

Imitative physical

aggression

Imitative verbal

aggression

Non- imitative

aggression

14.25

Aggressive model

Nonaggressive model

Control group (no model)

12.73

8.18 7.67

20.65

The Inhibitory-Disinhibitory Effect The inhibitory effect is the suppression of deviant behavior in an observer, usually as a result of seeing a model punished for engaging in the same behavior. The disinhibitory effect is the opposite: It occurs when an observer engages in previously learned deviant behavior, usually as a result of seeing a model rewarded (or at least not punished) for the same behavior. The inhibitory-disinhibitory effect of imitation is especially important for teachers when dealing with deviant behavior.

A series of sobering experiments illustrates that socially unacceptable behavior in adults can be disinhibited through the use of models. These studies, modeled after Milgram’s (1963) famous obedience studies, illustrate that college students and other adults will willingly administer to other students what they believe are extremely dangerous, high-voltage electri- cal shocks—and that they will do so simply because they have been told to by an experimenter.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 170 12/14/17 4:36 PM

171

Section 5.5 Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

Furthermore, prior exposure to violent film scenes dramatically increases the intensity of the punishment they are willing to administer.

The Eliciting Effect The eliciting effect occurs when imitation leads to responses that don’t precisely match but are simply related to those of the model. For example, a man might serve as a model of gener- osity if he works hard for civic organizations, church activities, and school functions. Several of his neighbors might be moved by his example to be generous in different ways: One might give money to local charities, a second might donate a prize for a church raffle, and a third might give freely of advice. None of these observers imitates the model’s behavior precisely, but each of them emits a related response that involves being generous. (See Table 5.3 for a summary of the three effects of imitation.)

Table 5.3: Three effects of imitation

Label Definition School-related illustration

Modeling effect Acquiring new behavior as a result of observing a model.

Just arrived in a new school, Robert observes other students and quickly learns to raise a single finger when he wants to go to the bathroom.

Inhibitory-disinhibitory effect

Ceasing or starting some deviant behavior as a result of seeing a model punished or rewarded for similar behavior.

Ralph burns all his cigarette papers and flushes his weed down the toilet after his twin brother is caught and disci- plined by the teacher.

Eliciting effect Engaging in behavior related to that of a model.

Robin offers to clean the book shelves after the teacher praises Samantha for helping the younger children with their jackets.

Instructional Implications of Social Cognitive Theory The greatest advantage of learning by imitation over other forms of learning is that it provides a complete behavioral sequence for the learner. There is no need for successive approxima- tions, for trial and error, or for association by contiguity. Nobody would put a person behind the wheel of a car and allow the person to learn to drive by trial and error alone. One might, on the other hand, teach someone to drive by presenting one or more models: exposure to a person driving, a driving manual, and a series of oral instructions. In this, as in many other types of learning, it would be foolhardy to permit people to learn only by doing or through the reinforcement of successive approximations.

Analysis of the processes involved in social learning suggests several considerations that might be important for teaching. For example, many of the factors associated with attentional processes (such as distinctiveness of stimuli) are at least partly under the teacher’s control. Similarly, teachers can provide direction and opportunity for the activities involved in reten- tion and in reproduction. And because the effects of reinforcement depend on our awareness of the connection between our behavior and its consequences, teachers can also exercise con- siderable influence on motivational processes.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 171 12/14/17 4:36 PM

172

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

Key Points • Learning includes all relatively permanent changes in potential for behavior that

result from experience but that are not simply due to fatigue, maturation, drugs, injury, or disease. Changes in disposition or capability are not always manifested in performance.

• Behaviorism deals with things that are observable: stimuli, responses, and response consequences. Classical conditioning (Pavlov and Watson) involves the repeated pairing of a conditioning stimulus with an effective stimulus so that it eventually brings about a conditioned response. Thorndike’s theory emphasizes the role of reinforcement in bringing about learning (the law of effect) through trial and error.

• In Skinner’s explanation of operant conditioning, when operants (emitted behav- iors) are reinforced, the probability of their recurrence increases. A reinforcer is any stimulus that increases the probability that a response will occur. It can do so by being added to a situation (positive reinforcement, reward) or by being removed (negative reinforcement, relief).

• Punishment occurs when a pleasant stimulus is removed (penalty, or removal pun- ishment) or an aversive one is introduced following behavior (castigation, or presen- tation punishment).

• Reinforcement can be continuous (every correct response) or intermittent (vari- able). Intermittent reinforcement can be based on the number of responses (ratio) or the passage of time (interval) and can occur in a random or fixed manner. In gen- eral, continuous schedules lead to faster learning, whereas intermittent schedules result in longer extinction periods. In real life, concurrent schedules—where many options and many possible consequences co-occur—are common.

• Shaping (the reinforcement of successive approximations) can be used to teach animals novel behaviors or to alter human behavior. To generalize is to respond to similarities; to discriminate is to respond to differences.

• The main emphases of Bandura’s social cognitive theory recognize the cognitive capacities and the social influences that guide human behavior. The theory assumes that imitation (observational learning) is a central process in determining behavior. Learning through imitation requires paying attention, remembering, reproducing, and being motivated to do so.

• The term model refers to a person who serves as an example for another or to more symbolic models. Sources of reinforcement in observational learning include direct and vicarious reinforcement.

• The three effects of imitation are the modeling effect (the learning of novel responses); the inhibitory-disinhibitory effect (deviant behavior is disinhibited or suppressed as a function of response consequences to the model); and the eliciting effect (the emission of responses that are related to those made by the model but that are neither novel nor deviant).

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 172 12/14/17 4:36 PM

173

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

Posttest

1. Giuseppe initially takes dishes to the dishwasher after meals only when told by his mother to do so. Eventually, Giuseppe takes the dirty dishes to the dishwasher after meals without being told. In this example, the conditioned response is a. being told to take the dishes to the dishwasher. b. taking the dishes to the dishwasher without being told. c. finishing the meal. d. the dirty dishes.

2. According to Thorndike, a. animals often use insight to solve puzzle boxes. b. learning a new response requires “stamping out” that response. c. connectionism is defined as the connection between human and animal learning. d. both humans and animals often use trial and error to solve problems.

3. Joaquin finds that after he drinks caffeinated beverages, his energy levels are higher and his head is clearer—pleasurable effects for him. He continues to drink cola and coffee regularly. This illustrates a. Thorndike’s Law of Effect. b. Thorndike’s Law of Set or Attitude. c. Thorndike’s Law of Readiness. d. taste aversion.

4. Ms. Knowmore puts students’ names on the board when they misbehave in class. After implementing this system, fewer students misbehave in class. Ms. Knowmore has used a. presentation punishment. b. removal punishment. c. negative reinforcement. d. positive reinforcement.

5. Mr. Knope gives a gold sticker to students after they get three 100% scores on their weekly spelling tests. This schedule of reinforcement would be a a. continuous-reinforcement schedule. b. fixed-interval reinforcement schedule. c. fixed-ratio reinforcement schedule. d. variable- or random-interval reinforcement schedule.

6. After watching Johann get teacher praise for giving an apple, Bertrand gives his coach a bratwurst. The effect of modeling that Bertrand is demonstrating would be a. inhibiting. b. modeling. c. eliciting. d. disinhibiting.

Answers: 1(b), 2(d), 3(a), 4(a), 5(b), 6(c)

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 173 12/14/17 4:36 PM

174

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

Critical Thinking Exercises • How would you define learning? Provide school-based examples of changes that

define learning. • Summarize the theories of Pavlov, Watson, Thorndike, Skinner, and Bandura. How

are the theories similar? How are they different? • How can you use classical and operant conditioning to improve learning and behav-

ior in the classroom? • Explain the difference between negative reinforcement and punishment. Can you

provide classroom examples of each? • How would you incorporate schedules of reinforcement into your lesson plan? • What is one example of how one of the effects of imitation might be applied in the

classroom?

Web Resources For more information on Pavlov’s work in classical conditioning, visit:

http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/pavlov/

For more information on Skinner and his work, visit the B. F. Skinner Foundation website at:

http://www.bfskinner.org

For more information on the life, the theories, the writings, and the awards of Albert Bandura, visit:

http://stanford.edu/dept/psychology/bandura/

Answers to Pretest

1. True. Learning occurs from learners’ experiences that change their knowledge, skills, habits, attitudes, or beliefs.

2. False. Learning occurs in classical conditioning when the neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus that elicits a conditioned response.

3. False. Watson believed that people were born with the same behaviors (nature) and differences occurred because of people’s experiences (nurture).

4. False. Primary reinforcers are typically stimuli that reflect basic needs that don’t need to be learned, such as food.

5. True. One of Skinner’s early findings is that receiving too much of a reward can stop the behavior.

6. False. Bandura’s “Bobo” doll experiments involved a group of children seeing adult experimenters be physically and verbally aggressive to a “Bobo” doll. The children who saw this behavior modeled it.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 174 12/14/17 4:36 PM

http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/pavlov/

http://www.bfskinner.org

http://stanford.edu/dept/psychology/bandura/

175

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

Answers to Posttest

1. In this scenario, finishing his meal becomes the conditioned stimulus that results in the conditioned response of Giuseppe putting the dishes in the dishwasher without his mother asking.

2. Thorndike’s research led him to suggest that humans and animals use trial and error, which means trying different actions until the problem is resolved.

3. According to Thorndike’s Law of Effect, caffeinated beverages are satisfiers. Joaquin continues the behavior of drinking caffeinated beverages because it has pleasurable effects.

4. Presentation punishment describes when an aversive stimulus is added into the environment to affect behavior. Adding names on the board due to bad behavior is an example of presentation punishment.

5. A fixed-interval reinforcement schedule is when reinforcement occurs after a correct response and a specified amount of time.

6. The eliciting effect happens when a response doesn’t exactly match that of the model’s actions, but is similar. In this case, Bertrand gives his coach a bratwurst, rather than an apple.

Key Terms aversive control The control of human behavior through the use of noxious (unpleasant) stimuli (punishment and nega- tive reinforcement), in contrast to tech- niques of positive control, which generally use positive reinforcement.

behaviorism A general term for theories of learning primarily concerned with the observable components of behavior (stimuli and responses).

behavioristic theories See stimulus– response (S–R) theory.

capability A capacity to do something. To be capable is to have the necessary knowl- edge and skills.

classical conditioning Also called “learning- through-stimulus substitution” because it involves the repeated pairing of two stimuli so that a previously neutral (conditioned) stimulus comes to elicit the response (con- ditioned response) that was previously elicited by the first stimulus (unconditioned stimulus). See also conditioning, operant conditioning.

cognitivism Theories of learning primarily concerned with topics such as perception, problem solving, information processing, and understanding.

concurrent schedules A situation in which two or more different reinforcement sched- ules, each typically related to a different behavior, are presented concurrently (at the same time).

conditioned response (CR) A response elicited by a conditioned stimulus. See also neutral stimulus.

conditioned stimulus (CS) A stimulus that initially does not elicit any response or that elicits a global, orienting response but that, as a function of being paired with an unconditioned stimulus and its response, acquires the capability of eliciting that same response.

conditioning A type of learning describable in terms of changing relationships between stimuli, between responses, or between both stimuli and responses. See also classical con- ditioning, operant conditioning.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 175 12/14/17 4:36 PM

176

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

connectionism A theory that explains learning as the formation of bonds (con- nections) between stimuli and responses (Thorndike).

contiguity The occurrence of things both simultaneously and in the same space, often used to explain classical conditioning.

continuous reinforcement A reinforce- ment schedule in which every correct response is followed by a reinforcer. See also fixed schedule, intermittent reinforcement, interval schedule, random schedule, ratio schedule, schedule of reinforcement.

direct reinforcement The type of rein- forcement that affects an individual directly rather than vicariously. See also vicarious reinforcement.

discriminated stimulus (SD) A stimulus that is perceived by the organism. In oper- ant conditioning, the discriminated stimu- lus may elicit a response after learning has occurred.

discrimination Learning that certain responses are appropriate in specific situ- ations but inappropriate in other, similar situations. See also generalization.

disinhibitory effect The type of imitative behavior that results in the appearance (dis- inhibition) of previously acquired deviant behavior. See also modeling effect, observa- tional learning.

disposition An inclination or tendency to do (or not to do) something; an aspect of motivation.

elicited response A response brought about by a stimulus (also termed a respon- dent.) See also operant, respondent, uncondi- tioned response (UR).

emitted response A response not elicited by a stimulus but simply emitted by the organism (called an operant).

environmentalism The belief that what- ever a child becomes is determined by experience (the environment) rather than by genetic makeup.

exemplary model A good example. A teacher, for example.

extinction rate The lapse of time between the cessation of a response and the with- drawal of reinforcement.

fixed schedule An intermittent schedule of reinforcement in which reinforcement occurs at fixed intervals of time (an interval schedule) or after a specified number of trials (a ratio schedule). See also continuous reinforcement, intermittent reinforcement, interval schedule, random schedule, ratio schedule, schedule of reinforcement.

generalization The transference of a response from one stimulus to a simi- lar stimulus (stimulus generalization) or the transference of a similar response for another response in the face of a single stimulus (response generalization). Also termed transfer. See also discrimination.

generalized reinforcer Stimuli, such as social prestige, praise, and money, that become reinforcing as a result of being repeatedly paired with other reinforcers. See also primary reinforcer.

inhibitory effect The type of imitative behavior that results in the suppression (inhibition) of previously acquired deviant behavior. See also modeling effect, observa- tional learning.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 176 12/14/17 4:36 PM

177

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

insight The perception of relationships among elements of a problem situation.

intermittent reinforcement A schedule of reinforcement that does not present a rein- forcer for all correct responses. Also termed partial reinforcement. See also continuous reinforcement, fixed schedule, interval sched- ule, random schedule, ratio schedule, schedule of reinforcement.

interval schedule An intermittent sched- ule of reinforcement based on the passage of time. See also continuous reinforcement, fixed schedule, intermittent reinforcement, random schedule, ratio schedule, schedule of reinforcement.

law of effect A Thorndikean law of learning that states that the effect of a response leads to its being learned (stamped in) or not learned (stamped out).

learning Relatively permanent changes in behavior due to experience; does not include changes due to motivation, fatigue, or drugs.

modeling effect A type of imitative behav- ior that involves learning a novel response. See also inhibitory effect, disinhibitory effect, observational learning.

negative reinforcer Ordinarily takes the form of an unpleasant or noxious stimulus that is removed following a response and that has the effect of increasing the probabil- ity of occurrence of the response. See also positive reinforcer, reinforcement.

neutral stimulus A stimulus that does not initially lead reliably to a predictable response, but may do so after conditioning. See also conditioned response.

observational learning A term used syn- onymously with the expression “learning through imitation.”

one-shot taste aversion learning A powerful disinclination toward eating or drinking certain substances, acquired after a single pairing of the substance with subse- quent nausea or illness.

operant Skinner’s term for a response not elicited by any known or obvious stimulus. See also respondent, unconditioned response.

operant conditioning A type of learning that involves an increase in the probability that a response will occur as a function of reinforcement. See also classical condition- ing, conditioning.

penalty The type of punishment that involves losing or giving up something pleasant.

performance Actual behavior. The infer- ence that learning has occurred is typically based on observed changes in performance.

positive control Control of human behav- ior, usually through the presentation of pleasant stimuli. See also aversive control.

positive reinforcer A stimulus that, when added to a situation, increases the prob- ability that a response will recur. This usually takes the form of a pleasant stimu- lus (reward). See also negative reinforcer, reinforcement.

primary reinforcer A stimulus that is rein- forcing in the absence of any learning (food and drink are primary reinforcers). See also generalized reinforcer.

random or variable schedule A type of intermittent schedule of reinforcement char- acterized by the presentation of rewards at random intervals or on random trials. See also continuous reinforcement, fixed schedule, intermittent reinforcement, interval schedule, ratio schedule, schedule of reinforcement.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 177 12/14/17 4:36 PM

178

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

rate of learning A measure of the amount of time required to learn a correct response or, alternatively, a measure of the number of trials required before the correct response occurs.

rate of responding A measure of the fre- quency of a specific response over a period of time.

ratio schedule An intermittent schedule of reinforcement that is based on a proportion of correct responses. See also continuous reinforcement, fixed schedule, interval sched- ule, intermittent reinforcement, random or variable schedule, schedule of reinforcement.

reinforcement The effect of a reinforcer; specifically, to increase the probability that a response will occur. See also negative rein- forcer, positive reinforcer.

relief A common expression for negative reinforcement—the type of reinforcement that results when an unpleasant stimulus is removed as a consequence of behavior.

respondent In contrast to an operant, a response elicited by a known, specific stimu- lus. See also operant, unconditioned response.

response Any organic, muscular, glandu- lar, or psychic process that results from stimulation.

response rate The number of responses emitted by an organism in a given period of time.

schedule of reinforcement The time and frequency of presentation of reinforcement to organisms. See also continuous reinforce- ment, fixed schedule, intermittent reinforce- ment, interval schedule, random or variable schedule, ratio schedule.

shaping A technique whereby animals and people are taught to perform com- plex behaviors by systematically reinforc- ing responses that are increasingly closer approximations to the desired behavior. Also termed the method of successive approxima- tions or the method of differential reinforce- ment of successive approximations.

Skinner box Any of the various experi- mental environments used by Skinner in his investigations of operant conditioning. The typical Skinner box is a cagelike struc- ture equipped with a lever and a food tray attached to a food mechanism.

social cognitive theory An explanation of learning and behavior that emphasizes the role of social reinforcement and imitation as well as the importance of the cognitive processes that allow people to imagine and to anticipate.

social learning The acquisition of patterns of behavior that conform to social expectations—learning what is acceptable and what is unacceptable in a given culture.

stimulus (pl. stimuli) Any change in the physical environment capable of exciting a sense organ.

stimulus–response (S–R) theory A learning theory with primary emphasis on stimuli and responses and the relation- ships between them. Such theories are also termed behavioristic theories.

superstitious schedule A fixed-interval schedule of reinforcement in which the reward is not given after every correct response but rather after the passage of a specified period of time. Leads to the learn- ing of behaviors that are only incidentally related to the reinforcement.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 178 12/14/17 4:36 PM

179

Chapter 5 Summary and Resources

symbolic model A model other than a real- life person (for example, books, television, and written instructions).

triadic reciprocal determinism Bandura’s notion that personal characteristics, behav- ior, and the environment all affect each other reciprocally—that individuals are both prod- ucts and producers of their environments.

trial-and-error learning A Thorndikean explanation for learning based on the idea that when placed in a problem situation, an individual will emit a variety of responses but will eventually learn the correct one as a result of reinforcement.

unconditioned response (UR) A response that is elicited by an unconditioned stimu- lus—hence a response, such as eye-blinking in response to a puff of air, that is unlearned and appears to be automatic. See also oper- ant, respondent.

unconditioned stimulus (US) A stimulus that elicits a response before any learning having had to take place—such as a stimulus capable of eliciting reflexive behaviors such as salivation.

vicarious reinforcement Reinforce- ment that results from observing some- one else being reinforced. See also direct reinforcement.

ሁ Hall and Kelson (1959) list exactly 130 subspecies and types of bears, ranging alphabetically from Ursus absarokus, found in 1914 at the head of the Little Bighorn River in Montana, to Ursus yesoensis.

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 179 12/14/17 4:36 PM

Lef83909_05_ch05_143-180.indd 180 12/14/17 4:36 PM