The Historical and Cultural Factors that Contribute to the Development of the Learning Perspective

After reading through chapter six, I began reading chapter seven of our psychology text titled, Learning. Learning is something we do everyday even we don’t realize it. While reading chapter seven, I learned that there are three different types of learning, classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and cognitive learning. Classical conditioning stands for two types of stimuli linking providing us the tools to have a reaction; this is the type of learning that involves automatic behaviors. Operant conditioning is the type of learning that causes a change in behavior, in reaction to consequences; this is the behavior that involves choosing of choices. Lastly, cognitive learning is the obtaining of new skills, behaviors, and information through

Our understanding of classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and observational learning has allowed us to unlock many of the answers we sought to learn about human behavior. Classical conditioning is a technique of behavioral training, coined by Ivan Pavlov, which basically states that an organism learns through establishing associations between different events and stimuli. This helps us understand human behavior in an assortment of ways. It makes it clear that almost everything we do is based on patterns of stimulus and response. For example, if you were bitten aggressively by a dog as a child, you may be still scared of dogs today. That is because the dog caused you pain, which in turn caused you have anxiety towards dogs.

Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936) was a Russian psychologist who inadvertently discovered classical conditioning; a way to view the functioning of the nervous system, this remains his greatest psychological contribution

In Psychology learning is seen as a change in behaviour caused by an experience. Behaviorism, is seen as a learning theory; an attempt to explain how people or animals learn by studying their behaviour. The Behaviourists Approach has two theories to help explain how we learn, Classical conditioning and operant conditioning. In this task I will attempt to describe and evaluate this approach.

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).

Two prominent researchers, B.F. Skinner and Albert Bandura, have developed theories which provide differing perspectives and explanations regarding the learning behavior of individuals. The purpose of this writing is to explore the theoretical perspectives of Operant Conditioning Theory developed by B.F. Skinner and Social Learning Theory developed by Albert Bandura. An overview of both theories is presented, followed by a discussion of their similarities and differences.

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.

Behaviourist theory of learning can believe that learning occurs when the environmental stimuli produce a relatively permanent and observable change in a learner’s response (Barblett, 2015). For example when someone is taught a new behaviour it is changed by the environmental stimuli, which occurs a response. In behaviourism instructors or educators drive a specific behavioural outcome from learners through a set of learning objectives. In the 20th century B.F Skinner (1938) did major work on behaviour and its consequences. Skinner’s work was on behaviourism, namely operant conditioning; it means changing behaviour by the use of reinforcement, which is given by a desired response. Behaviourist strongly believe behaviour is learnt either by

The learning perspective what is it? This is the study of how exactly a person is effected through what they learn on a daily basis. Through family, their surroundings and behavior. The people who believe this line of thinking are called behaviorists. Many people look at the learning perspective in a suspiciouse manner not believeing or trusting any of the experiments. But there are many contributions and many limitations of the learning perspective.

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

Classical conditioning is the theory that involves a subject learning a new behavior by the process of association. A naturally occuring stimulus (the unconditioned stimulus) is paired with a response (the unconditioned response). Then, a neutral stimulus (the conditioned stimulus) is paired with the unconditioned stimulus and eventually the conditioned stimulus produces the initial response of the unconditioned stimulus without the unconditioned stimulus being present. The response, therefore, becomes the conditioned response. This study had a major influence on the psychological study of behaviorism. “Behaviorism is based on the assumption that learning occurs through interactions with the environment” (Cherry 1). Classical conditioning

Reflection is thought by linking recent experience with early experience to promote more complex and interrelated mental models or patterns. The thinking involves looking for commonalities, differences, and interrelations beyond their superficial elements. The goal is to develop higher order thinking skills.

The Behavioral Perspective: This perspective is based on environmental rewards and punishers to encourage or discourage behaviors. This is usually notes through direct observation of the particular act in the specific environment. Social cognitive learning is used to further explain values, expectations, and intentions of the individual. This theory was the main stream behaviorist theory for over 50 years, as it focuses on precision and objectivity. It is thought to have advanced science as a whole and has given psychology some of the most accurate and detailed finding to date.

Cognitive and behavioral learning theories tend to dominate modern discussions of learning theories. Employed in both educational and clinical settings, both have important contributions to understanding how and why individuals learn. Is one approach statistically better than the other, or do they each have their own place where one approach may be more effective under specific circumstances? Each theory has supporters who claim the efficacy of their theory is superior. Comparison of the theories is necessary to determine if one is significantly better than the other, or even if one theory may be slightly more effective than the other. Determining if one competing theory

Learning has been described by Howe (1980) as ‘cumulative’ i.e. whatever we learn at any time is influenced by previous learning. It is also clear that developmental processes and learning processes are closely interlinked. Whilst psychologists agree that learning is affected by past experience and is relatively permanent there are differing theories about exactly what changes when learning takes place and what mechanisms are involved. An important issue is whether the focus is on overt behavioural changes (that which can be seen) or covert, cognitive changes (the unseen change in thoughts). The concept of learning is broad and there are different psychological theories as to what is involved in that learning process.