Contrasting Principles of Classical and Operant Conditioning

He deciphered that dogs like humans salivate (reflex response) when they see food; it is a natural physiological reflex response. However he also demonstrated that a signal such as using a bell (stimulus) just before he gave the dog food would eventually lead the dog to salivate at the sound of the bell even if there was no food present. Pavlov verified by pairing or associating another stimulus (the bell) with food he could train the dogs to salivate. This theory could then be applied to people as well. According to Richard et al (2007) it was found that pairing one stimulus with another stimulus could also provoke a reflexive response in people. This is also called a stimulus – response theory of learning.

“The assistant’s footsteps, for example, seemed to act like a trigger (the stimulus) for the dog to start salivating (the response). Pavlov had discovered how associations develop through the process of learning, which he referred to as conditioning (Licht, 2016) The dog was correlating the sound of footsteps with the coming of food; it had been conditioned to subordinate certain sights and sounds with eating. Intrigued by his discovery, Pavlov decided to focus his research of dogs’ salivation (which he termed “psychic secretions”) in these types of scenarios (Fancher & Rutherford, 2012, p. 248; Watson, 1968). Pavlov’s examinations led to the development of classical conditioning.

a) Define Classical Conditioning and Behaviorism. b) Identify the two major characteristics that distinguish classical conditioning from operant conditioning.

Classical conditioning is a type of associative learning which occurs when two stimuli are paired together repetitively and therefore become associated with each other eventually producing the same response. Classical conditioning was developed from the findings of Ivan Pavlov to account for associations between neutral stimuli and reflexive behavior such as salivation. Pavlov (1927) accidently discovered that dogs began to salivate before they had tasted their food. To support his theory, he carried out experiments using dogs which involved measuring the amount of saliva they produced. In his experiments, food started off as an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) which produced salivation, an unconditioned response (UCR). They are both unconditioned as they occur naturally without being learned. The dogs were presented with a bell (NS), this provided no salivation. The bell and food were presented together and after many trails an

Classical conditioning is often associated with physiologist Ivan Pavlov’s experiment with the salivating dog (Hutchinson, 2015). This experiment focused on conditioning the dog to associate food with the bell while salivating, and eventually salivates when the bell is rung even without the presence of food. Operant conditioning theory is changed behavior as the result of a reinforcement (Hutchinson, 2015). In our society, we associate positive reinforcements with compliments, smiles, high-fives in order to encourage a behavior more. Negative reinforcement involves jail, detention, and grounding, and this is to stop a behavior from continuing. A cognitive social learning theory states that behavior can be learned through observations, beliefs, expectations, and imitation of others (Hutchinson, 2015). A major difference between cognitive social learning theory and the others, is a lack of manipulation to encourage the individual to follow through with a behavior. Rather, cognitive social learning theories suggest that a change in thinking can ultimately result in a change in behavior (Hutchinson, 2015).

Classical conditioning has showed me that some behaviors can be taught on a subconscious level without the organism even knowing. We are probably conditioned to many things that we are not even aware of. This is a powerful thing that shows how much we do not know about the brain and its processes. This study also helped me understand that some behaviors that are learned can be very hard to break or change. I think after learning about this concept I have found a new patience for people I come into contact with that have a behavior that I am not familiar to. Since Pavlov’s time there has been many new findings and developments made to this topic. Every day we learn more and more about the mind and how it controls us in different ways.

Is it possible to rouse fear from a stimulus that at first caused no such response? Classical conditioning is a type of learning where a response is produced from combining a conditioned stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus to produce an unconditioned response. Ivan Pavlov did a famous study, pairing the sound of a bell with food to produce salivation. After a while, just the sound alone would produce salivation. “Little Albert”, an infant that belonged to a wet nurse at the Harriet Lane Home was experimented on by John B. Watson and Rosalie Rayner. Watson and Rayner claim that “Little Albert” was a healthy, unemotional, and stable child. The experiment began with the introduction of a white rat, which alone, produced no fear response. At 11 months and 3 days, the rat was paired with a loud noise. The loud noise frightened “Little Albert”. He began to associate the fear he experienced with the white rat since it was paired with the loud noise.

Learning is a fascinating concept. Everyone does it and everyone always has, but not everyone explores its eclectic process. That being said, through the course of history, it has been studied vehemently. Ivan Pavlov, a behaviorist, had some groundbreaking research on subclass of learning called classical conditioning. Coming across it incidentally, he discovered that dogs would salivate not only from eating food, but anything associated with them getting fed. Anything unnatural in their feeding process, he termed as the conditioned stimulus, which would result in the conditioned response of them salivating (Daniels). Though classical conditioning seems rather simple and commonsensible, the information psychologists have gathered from it has been revolutionary. It has shown psychologists the very basics of how we learn and adapt as organisms and opened the door for other studies (Myers 268). According to psychologists, learning is the process of acquiring new and relatively enduring information or behaviors (Myers 268).

In 1903 a Russian physiologist by the name of Ivan Pavlov first developed an experiential model of learning called Classical Conditioning (Lautenheiser 1999). An example if Classical Conditioning would be ringing a bell when it is time for your pet to eat. The pet hears the bell and over time is conditioned that when the bell rings its dinner time thus begins to salivate, and eventually learns to be conditioned to responding to the bell in a specific manner. The bases was that neutral stimulus would be put together with an excitatory one and over time the neutral stimulus would, at some point down the line elicit the response that was associated with the original unlearned response. Pavlov later added an element known as the nonexcitatory, conditioned stimulus which is but together with an unconditioned stimulus (Lautenheiser 1999).

Classical conditioning is learning which has been acquired by experience (Terry, 2009).  Pavlov was the first one to experiment classical conditioning by training dogs how to salivate when they heard a bell ring.  In order for Pavlov to be able to do this, the first step was to show the dogs food.  The showing of food would cause the dogs to salivate.  Afterward, Pavlov would ring a bell whenever he brought food out. The experimenter continued to this many times.  Eventually, by the time the

Rescorla advances original theory by acknowledging a previous flaw of Pavlovian Conditioning and attempts to express a more ‘modern’ view by illustrating the circumstances producing learning in animals, the context of learning and the manner it effects behaviour. Thus suggesting that Pavlovian Conditioning is a form of associative learning, rather than reflex tradition as previously suggested. Furthermore, Rescorla emphasised how Pavlovian Conditioning still plays a fundamental role in modern psychology. However, it must be considered that this research is era dependent; being modern at the time of writing of 1988. Resultantly, one must consider if these arguments are still valid in 21st Century psychology, and if so, how. To further demonstrate

Conditioned Stimulus: A feature of the environment that has an effect through its association with a U.C.S. E.g. Pavlov’s dog learned to

In classical conditioning, a physical event (stimulus) that initially does not evoke a particular response gradually acquires the capacity to evoke that response as a result of repeated pairing with a stimulus that can evoke a response. Learning of this type is quite common and seems to play a role in such varied reactions as strong fears, taste aversions and even racial or ethnic prejudice. Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov discovered this method of learning while he was experimenting on the digestive systems of dogs. He noted that the dogs would naturally salivate after seeing the food, but that eventually the dogs also began to salivate whenever they saw the experimenter’s white lab coat.

Classical Conditioning 11695795 Oklahoma State University Classical Conditioning Classical conditioning is a way of learning in which something that did not previously have a particular response now has one due to exposure to another thing. Russian physiologist, Ivan Pavlov, discovered the phenomenon of classical conditioning while researching the digestive patterns of dogs. Pavlov would place some meat powder in the dogs’ mouths to measure their bodies’ reactions. Before the dogs were given the meat powder, a bell would ring. They repeated this several times, and “Eventually, conditioning occurs in that the dog salivates just to the bell alone” (Clark, 1998).

In order to induce a conditioned reflex Pavlov paired neutral stimuli, in this case a bell, with the meat powder. Acquisition is the root of learning in classical conditioning whereby the CS is paired several times with the US. The more pairings the more robust the learning as discussed by (Balkenius, 1999). Pavlov observed that after conditioning when the bell rang the dog salivated therefore, the neutral stimuli became conditioned stimuli (CS) and the dog, when presented with the bell would show the reflexive response (CR) salivation. Extinction occurred if the CS is no longer presented with the US. (Dhir, 2007). Conversely, reconditioning counters extinction when pairings are re-presented, this time however, the learning is faster, showing the initial acquisition is not completely removed from the memory of the animal. Spontaneous recovery is a phenomenon of the learned behaviour returning extemporaneously after the animal has rested. Hence the CS is again presented provoking the CR. Generalisation explains response to stimuli that is close to but not an exact match of the original CS. The closer the stimuli are to the original CS the stronger the CR.(Gleitman, Fridlund, & Reisberg, 1999)