i need help PT2 Proj
Deasal75
Chapter6.Lecture-1.docxChapter 6
Operant Conditioning: Introduction
Now we are going to turn our attention to a second type of conditioning that is fundamental to the learning process. My guess is that many of you will be familiar with this type of conditioning and may use it already in your daily life! If you have children or pets it is quite likely that you have used rewards and/or punishments to bring about the behavior you desire in both. You may have also used such methods with your friends and even on yourself! Let’s learn more about this highly popular and successful method for learning new behaviors, establishing new routines, and eradicating bad habits.
The underlying premise to this approach is that organisms (both animals and humans) want to repeat acts that bring about a pleasant (or rewarding) outcome and avoid behaviors that result in an unpleasant (or punishing) outcome.
Edward Thorndike is often credited with being the father or founder of Educational Psychology. Whereas we examined learning from an approach based on associations occurring in a logical sequence in Classical Conditioning theory, this approach looks at connections between behaviors and consequences. Thus, Thorndike’s famous “Law of Effect,” also known as the theory of connectionism evolved to explain how voluntary behaviors come to be learned. Whereas Classical Conditioning looked at involuntary behavior (e.g., rooting reflex, imprinting, salivation), Operant Conditioning focuses on voluntary behavior (e.g., raising one’s hand in class before speaking, catching a ball directed towards us, running through a maze). Moreover, while we spoke of elicited behavior in Classical Conditioning, now we will talk about emitted behaviors in Operant Conditioning. These are some useful distinctions between the two theories to be aware of.
Thorndike created a clever study using a
puzzle box that he designed in which he placed a hungry cat. The situation was unfavorable for the cat because she was hungry and the food dish was placed outside of the box. Thus, the cat’s goal was to escape the box as quickly as possible so as to reach the food. However, in order to so, the cat had to figure out how to open the trap door (gate) which actually involved stepping on a treadle. At first when she was placed in the puzzle box she engaged in all manner of activities as she bumped into the metal bars of the cage and moved about in a chaotic, uncoordinated fashion. But eventually she stepped on the treadle and the door opened thus allowing her to escape and access the food (the favorable condition). At this point, is returned to the cage and the process of escape is continued.
What Thorndike discovered was that over time the cat escaped more quickly each time she was placed back in the box since she learned that stepping on the treadle was connected with the positive outcome of escaping the box and receiving food. Thus, the behavior of stepping on the treadle was “stamped in” (Thorndike’s jargon) as the cat learned to repeat the desired behavior. It is important to note that Thorndike didn’t believe the cat had gained “insight” in a manner where we might figure out the solution to escaping and then act upon it; but instead, argued that through “trial and error” learning the cat found the correct connection between behavior and outcome which then became wired as a pathway in her brain such that when she was placed in the familiar situation (the box) it stimulated the neuronal pathway that led the animal to step on the treadle to escape without her consciously cogitating about the event whatsoever.
Fast forward to B.F. Skinner, perhaps one of psychology’s most famous psychologists of all time.
Skinner capitalized on Thorndike’s puzzle box and created his own Skinner Box which was a sound-proof chamber rigged up with gadgets and gizmos that animals could be conditioned to press or avoid in order to receive rewards or avoid punishments. Skinner’s box was also equipped with a cumulative recording device that could measure the number of bar presses an animal made, as well as the speed of the bar pressing response. Initially this box was used to condition rats and pigeons, but other variations would be devised in the future for use with dogs, cats, and monkeys. There was even the famous air crib that he devised for his children!
When Skinner, or Behaviorists, speak of operant behavior they are typically referring to a class of responses. Thus, they might speak of pecking behavior, or lever pushes, or criminal acts. One key issue with this learning paradigm is the idea of shaping through successive approximations. It is unlikely that a complicated behavioral sequence for example, could be learned in one training/conditioning session. Instead, we would break down the complicated behavior into various components and then respond favorably along each step of the way, in essence guiding the animal (or person) towards the desired endpoint. So, here would be a typical animal and human example you might encounter.
Dogs can be trained to be of great assistance to humans from everything as small as pushing open a door to jumping up and getting an item off a high shelf. For a person who suffers with a physical limitation this can be a huge benefit. A dog will not instinctively know however, how to retrieve a desired item from a high shelf. This is something that will have to be taught to the dog in incremental steps where the dog is reinforced for each correct action leading up to the target behavior or end goal. This is the process of successive approximations!
A very common example involving humans that many of you will be familiar with is elementary school routines for returning or new students. Teachers typically devise a set of classroom routines (carpet time, morning work, quiet reading, etc.) that students are to follow upon entering the classroom, as well as rules for how they conduct themselves such as hands to oneself, single file through the halls, and so forth. You might fondly remember some of these rituals yourself! Anyway, this initial learning period which involves many re-directs and explanations for incorrect behavior, typically occurs over the first month of school which allows students to learn the ropes. By October however, you will see a well-oiled machine upon entering the classroom, where the children know what they are to be doing, when, and how to do it. They would learn these various components of elementary education etiquette gradually ( shaping through successive approximations) with reinforcement over time until they can perform the target behavior unassisted.
So what is this reinforcement I keep talking about? Reinforcers strengthen the behavior they follow, which means they increase the likelihood that the target behavior will occur again in the future. There are 2 types of reinforcement: positive and negative. Positive reinforcement is the presentation of something pleasant following a behavior, a positive consequence. So, if you give a fantastic musical performance and you receive praise and applause this would be considered positive reinforcement and you would likely want to perform again to receive the same public acclaim. As the cartoon depicts at the beginning of this lecture, the dog will continue to sit on demand as long as you continue offering him cookies for each sitting behavior. The cookies increase the likelihood that he will continue to sit when asked.
Negative reinforcement also increases the likelihood of a behavior occurring again BUT not because the behavior is being following by a treat or the presentation of something pleasant. Rather, in this case, we are removing something obnoxious, painful, annoying, or unpleasant. I have a classroom example that comes readily to mind! Picture a scenario with a student who is constantly off-task, messing around and bothering their neighbors. The teacher politely tells the student to return to their work, keep their hands to themselves, and be quiet. This continues for a solid 10 minutes with the teacher starting to get slightly exasperated and the student in question, becoming rather annoyed at being nagged at. Reaching a breaking point, the student decides to escape the noxious stimulus (the teacher and his nagging) by getting on-task and doing as the teacher has requested. In so doing the teacher, (the noxious stimulus), has gone away and ceases to bother him any longer. This might sound a lot like punishment and students typically get these two types of conditioning confused, but it’s not. The way that you can tell is by looking at the target behavior and asking yourself – is the behavior increasing or decreasing in frequency (occurrence)? The on-task behavior is occurring, thus its increasing in frequency. Therefore, it has to be reinforcement because it’s strengthening the behavior. The disruptive student is not on-task because they’re offered ice-cream for doing so (positive reinforcement), it’s because their getting away from the annoying nagging (negative reinforcement); they’re getting relief which is ultimately a pleasant outcome.
Reinforcers can be primary or secondary. Primary reinforcers can be thought of as elements necessary for survival: food, water, air, sleep, sex; whereas secondary reinforcers are those elements we have learned to associate with something positively reinforcing: money, applause, A+ grade, a smile. These can also apply to generalized reinforcers (see text). So, while secondary reinforcers aren’t necessary for survival, they can certainly add to our life satisfaction. … I can use money to buy ice-cream!
So, how does
punishment work? Well, in the opposite direction. Punishers
decrease the recurrence of the behavior they follow, thus they weaken the behavioral response. Again, we have positive and negative punishment. With positive punishment I am going to
add (or present) something negative
following the behavior – e.g., scold the dog for chewing my shoe, issue an
F grade on the paper for being late. Whereas with negative punishment I am going to
take away (or remove) something pleasant the person enjoys – e.g., take away car privileges, remove the cell phone, pay a fine for speeding in which case I’m giving up my money. You can think of positive punishment as
corporeal punishment or castigation, and negative punishment as inflicting a
penalty. The goal with punishment is usually extinction, in that we want the behavior to cease all together. You can also achieve extinction through reinforcement IF you discontinue the reinforcement. So let’s return to our sitting dog example. I now have Lynyrd rolling over on command in hopes of receiving an apple-sausage treat. But, now I no longer have any treats and don’t plan on giving him anymore. In fact, I don’t even praise him and say “good dog” when he rolls over. After a while it’s very likely that Lynyrd (name after Lynyrd Skynyrd for anyone who’s interested!) will decide not to sit on command anymore because there is nothing in it for him. He used to get treats but now that connection has ended he will no longer roll over when asked. This form of extinction will likely take a while to achieve as he learns this new connection.
So, let’s look at some practical applications with this approach. In Behavioral Analysis it is common to want to understand what environment may trigger an unwanted behavioral response. This is often referred to as A-B-C Charting (antecedent-behavior-consequence). [Your text refers to it as “three-term contingency.”] Many years ago I worked on a Mood Disorders Unit at the London Psychiatric Hospital in Ontario, Canada. We had one particular client who was suicidal and showed signs of deep depression and self-injurious behavior. Her family would come to visit her every few days but one particular visitor would always cause her to experience deeper emotional distress and consequently, she would start to act out. After one such visit, I recall ( feeling somewhat terrified at the time as I just had recently graduated with my B.A. in Psychology and had not spent much time working at the Psychiatric Hospital) being sent out with all the staff to look for the young woman on our locked ward who had disappeared following the visit of her father, the trigger for her extreme emotional reactions. Fearing the worst, we ran all over the Unit checking every nook and cranny for the young woman who was known to grab sharps and look for any means possible through which she could harm herself. I had the job of checking each shower stall which I did with extreme trepidation. Luckily we found her unharmed, folded up inside a cupboard. So, in this case the antecedent would be Dad’s visit – the behavior was acting in a manner intended to cause self-harm – and the consequence was escaping future visits. It was recommended that Dad’s visits decrease and ultimately stop until the young woman’s depression was under control. Our client was negatively reinforced to act out as it served the purpose of keeping Dad away from the Unit.
Here’s a quick reminder chart:
|
Added to Situation |
Positive Reinforcement (Reward) |
Positive Punishment (Castigation) |
|
Removed from Situation |
Punishment (Penalty) |
Negative Reinforcement (Relief) |
PLEASANT UNPLEASANT
Please watch the following 2 humorous videos that nicely depict Skinnerian conditioning!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPeRElll3Hw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teLoNYvOf90
I have put a sheet of practice questions online this week for you to try so that you can practice determining whether or not reinforcement or punishment is being used. Please see Reinforcement/Punishment Practice Sheet. [Answers available at the end of this lecture.]
Too Much of a Good Thing?
Which is better – intrinsic or extrinsic reinforcement and can one sabotage the other? Academe is a great place to consider these questions because we often see this issue play out with students and impact their motivation. To begin, why are you attending university and studying Learning? If your answer is because you love to learn and want to understand for the sake of understanding then you are intrinsically motivated. If however, your answer is because you need this course to get your degree and you think you can score a high grade, then you are externally motivated. Neither is inherently bad nor good, nor are you necessarily only one or the other, but either can impact your motivation to perform differently. As a professor I would love my students to be intrinsically motivated all the time, but I understand the practical need to achieve good grades and complete required coursework for one’s degree program. The motivation problem potentially arises when there is little to no intrinsic motivation and it’s all extrinsic. Learning without enjoyment or a true desire for understanding can appear tedious, boring, and unsatisfying. The problem we have found in our education system as it currently exists, is an over-reliance on standardized tests, grades, extrinsic rewards, and punishments. Learning becomes more about achieving high test scores, passing grades, and avoiding being sent to the principal’s office, and less about learning for mastery, competency, and the satisfaction that comes from possessing knowledge. Teachers will use trinkets and bonus activities to get children to complete simple worksheets or homework activities. Young children initially love to receive such plastic treasures and ice-cream parties until such reinforcers are stopped and they are told they just have to complete the work “because it’s assigned.” “But where’s my treat? Where’s my reward? I don’t see why I have to do my homework if you aren’t going to give me something for it.” When this type of response occurs educators have squelched the joy and intrinsic value of learning for its own sake, and created a motivation problem which is difficult to undo. See your text’s discussion of the Lepper, Green, and Nisbett (1977) study for more on this topic.
Let’s consider a few cognitive theories that examine the motivation to learn, where it stems from, and how it manifests in human behavior. We will begin with Albert Bandura’s theory of Self-Efficacy.
Self-efficacy a self-confidence, task-specific judgment about one’s own ability to perform a given task
Based on actual skills ( displayed competencies)
Personal estimates of competence ( beliefs you hold about your ability)
Judgments become increasingly differentiated with time and experience ( with increased metacognitive awareness and self-reflection, we become more specific in knowing our strengths and weaknesses)
Sources for our self-efficacious beliefs include:
· Performance accomplishments *(holds most weight) … how successful we’ve been in the past
· Verbal Persuasion … what others tell us about our performance
· Emotional Arousal … how we feel while performing the action
· Vicarious Experience … how our performance compares to others doing the same thing
Self-efficacy correlates with:
· Increased effort and persistence on a given task [motivational processes]
· Increased intrinsic interest [selection processes]
· Increased positive affect [affective processes]
· Increased use of higher level thinking strategies [cognitive processes]
· Personal agency [taking personal responsibility for the outcome of our actions]
·
A second theory to consider is Weiner’s Attribution Theory which considers where causal attribution is placed for success and failure on a given task.
Causal Attributions:
· Internal ability & effort … this is also termed an internal locus of control
If the learner perceives that they can control the outcome of their learning then they hold an internal, controllable attribution which results in more personal responsibility. This in turn generates more effort and perseverance and efforts to change strategies when what’s being tried in the past isn’t working.
· If I received a good grade I can put it down to trying hard, studying, and reading the textbook. I if failed the assessment I need to see where I went wrong and try something different next time to learn the material.
· External chance & luck … this is also termed an external locus of control
If the learner perceives that they cannot control the outcome of their learning then they hold an external, uncontrollable attribution which results in less personal responsibility. This in turn generates less effort and perseverance, and resistance to change strategies when what’s been tried in the past isn’t working.
· If I received a good grade I can put it down to chance or good fortune, the test was easy. I if failed the assessment I can blame the teacher for making the assessment too difficult or being a poor teacher. It’s not my fault!
The final theory is Ames’ Goal Theory.
Goal Orientations pattern of beliefs and attributions that produce an intention to do or accomplish something
Goals influence and affect behavior
2 goal types:
Learning Orientation – mastery driven [ I want to learn to gain understanding.]
Performance Orientation – outperform others [ I want to learn so that I can achieve the highest score in the class.]
While a performance orientation isn’t necessarily a bad goal, it’s often not the best goal for meaningful long-lasting learning, which will ultimately be its own intrinsic reinforcement.
So, where you fall on these 3 motivational theories? Do you feel efficacious in your academic life? Do you hold an internal locus of control? Do you learn for mastery? Things to ponder when you consider your approach to reaching your educational goals and future career aspirations!
Alright, that does it for this week. We have covered lots of material. Really work hard to process a clear conceptual understanding of the difference between reinforcement and punishment. Please take the time to complete the practice sheet, the quizzes in the book and the chapter test. Once you feel ready go online and take Quiz #6.
Answers to Practice Sheet
1. Increase positive reinforcement
2. Decrease positive punishment
3. Decrease positive punishment
4. Increase positive reinforcement
5. Increase negative reinforcement
6. Decrease extinction
7. Decrease negative punishment
** Numbers 3, 5, and 7 are particularly tricky. Be sure to read the paragraphs carefully and ask yourself is the target behavior increasing or decreasing and why?
