Which Of The Following Is True Regarding Learning Through Operant Conditioning?

Type of associative learning process

Operant conditioning (too called instrumental conditioning) is a type of associative learning process through which the forcefulness of a behavior is modified by reinforcement or punishment. Information technology is as well a procedure that is used to bring about such learning.

Although operant and classical workout both involve behaviors controlled by environmental stimuli, they differ in nature. In operant workout, behavior is controlled by external stimuli. For example, a child may learn to open a box to get the sweets inside, or learn to avert touching a hot stove; in operant terms, the box and the stove are "discriminative stimuli". Operant beliefs is said to exist "voluntary". The responses are under the control of the organism and are operants. For case, the child may face a choice between opening the box and petting a puppy.

In dissimilarity, classical conditioning involves involuntary behavior based on the pairing of stimuli with biologically significant events. The responses are under the control of some stimulus because they are reflexes, automatically elicited by the advisable stimuli. For case, sight of sweets may cause a child to salivate, or the sound of a door slam may signal an angry parent, causing a kid to tremble. Salivation and trembling are not operants; they are non reinforced by their consequences, and they are not voluntarily "chosen".

Notwithstanding, both kinds of learning tin can touch behavior. Classically conditioned stimuli—for example, a picture of sweets on a box—might enhance operant workout by encouraging a child to approach and open the box. Enquiry has shown this to be a beneficial phenomenon in cases where operant behavior is mistake-decumbent.^[one]

The report of brute learning in the 20th century was dominated by the analysis of these ii sorts of learning,^[2] and they are still at the core of behavior assay. They take also been practical to the study of social psychology, helping to analyze certain phenomena such every bit the simulated consensus issue.^[ane]

Operant conditioning

Extinction

Reinforcement Increase behavior

Punishment Decrease behavior

Positive reinforcement Add appetitive stimulus following correct behavior

Negative reinforcement

Positive punishment Add noxious stimulus following behavior

Negative punishment Remove appetitive stimulus following beliefs

Escape Remove noxious stimulus following correct behavior

Active avoidance Behavior avoids noxious stimulus

Historical notation [edit]

Thorndike'south law of effect [edit]

Operant workout, sometimes chosen instrumental learning, was first extensively studied by Edward L. Thorndike (1874–1949), who observed the beliefs of cats trying to escape from domicile-made puzzle boxes.^[3] A cat could escape from the box by a simple response such every bit pulling a string or pushing a pole, but when first constrained, the cats took a long fourth dimension to get out. With repeated trials ineffective responses occurred less frequently and successful responses occurred more than frequently, so the cats escaped more and more chop-chop.^[3] Thorndike generalized this finding in his law of effect, which states that behaviors followed by satisfying consequences tend to be repeated and those that produce unpleasant consequences are less probable to exist repeated. In brusque, some consequences strengthen behavior and some consequences weaken behavior. By plotting escape time confronting trial number Thorndike produced the first known fauna learning curves through this procedure.^[iv]

Humans appear to acquire many unproblematic behaviors through the sort of procedure studied past Thorndike, now called operant conditioning. That is, responses are retained when they atomic number 82 to a successful outcome and discarded when they exercise not, or when they produce aversive furnishings. This normally happens without being planned by any "teacher", but operant conditioning has been used by parents in teaching their children for thousands of years.^[5]

B. F. Skinner [edit]

B.F. Skinner at the Harvard Psychology Department, circa 1950

B.F. Skinner (1904–1990) is referred to as the Father of operant workout, and his work is oftentimes cited in connectedness with this topic. His 1938 book "The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis",^[half-dozen] initiated his lifelong report of operant workout and its awarding to human and animal behavior. Following the ideas of Ernst Mach, Skinner rejected Thorndike's reference to unobservable mental states such equally satisfaction, building his analysis on observable beliefs and its equally appreciable consequences.^[seven]

Skinner believed that classical conditioning was too simplistic to be used to draw something as complex as human beliefs. Operant workout, in his opinion, better described human beliefs as information technology examined causes and effects of intentional beliefs.

To implement his empirical approach, Skinner invented the operant conditioning chamber, or "Skinner Box", in which subjects such as pigeons and rats were isolated and could exist exposed to carefully controlled stimuli. Unlike Thorndike'due south puzzle box, this arrangement allowed the subject to make one or 2 simple, repeatable responses, and the charge per unit of such responses became Skinner's primary behavioral measure.^[eight] Another invention, the cumulative recorder, produced a graphical record from which these response rates could be estimated. These records were the primary information that Skinner and his colleagues used to explore the effects on response rate of diverse reinforcement schedules.^[9] A reinforcement schedule may be divers equally "whatever procedure that delivers reinforcement to an organism according to some well-defined dominion".^[10] The effects of schedules became, in turn, the basic findings from which Skinner adult his account of operant conditioning. He also drew on many less formal observations of human and animal behavior.^[xi]

Many of Skinner's writings are devoted to the application of operant workout to human behavior.^[12] In 1948 he published Walden Ii, a fictional business relationship of a peaceful, happy, productive customs organized around his conditioning principles.^[13] In 1957, Skinner published Verbal Behavior,^[xiv] which extended the principles of operant workout to language, a grade of human beliefs that had previously been analyzed quite differently by linguists and others. Skinner defined new functional relationships such every bit "mands" and "tacts" to capture some essentials of language, but he introduced no new principles, treating verbal beliefs like any other behavior controlled by its consequences, which included the reactions of the speaker's audience.

Concepts and procedures [edit]

Origins of operant beliefs: operant variability [edit]

Operant behavior is said to be "emitted"; that is, initially it is not elicited past any item stimulus. Thus i may ask why it happens in the get-go identify. The reply to this question is similar Darwin's answer to the question of the origin of a "new" actual structure, namely, variation and selection. Similarly, the beliefs of an private varies from moment to moment, in such aspects as the specific motions involved, the amount of force applied, or the timing of the response. Variations that lead to reinforcement are strengthened, and if reinforcement is consistent, the behavior tends to remain stable. However, behavioral variability tin can itself be contradistinct through the manipulation of certain variables.^[15]

Modifying operant behavior: reinforcement and punishment [edit]

Reinforcement and punishment are the core tools through which operant behavior is modified. These terms are divers by their effect on behavior. Either may be positive or negative.

• Positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement increase the probability of a behavior that they follow, while positive penalisation and negative punishment reduce the probability of behavior that they follow.

Another process is called "extinction".

• Extinction occurs when a previously reinforced beliefs is no longer reinforced with either positive or negative reinforcement. During extinction the behavior becomes less likely. Occasional reinforcement can lead to an fifty-fifty longer filibuster before behavior extinction due to the learning factor of repeated instances becoming necessary to get reinforcement, when compared with reinforcement beingness given at each opportunity before extinction.^[16]

There are a total of 5 consequences.

1. Positive reinforcement occurs when a behavior (response) is rewarding or the behavior is followed by another stimulus that is rewarding, increasing the frequency of that behavior.^[17] For example, if a rat in a Skinner box gets food when it presses a lever, its charge per unit of pressing will go up. This procedure is usually called simply reinforcement.
2. Negative reinforcement (a.g.a. escape) occurs when a behavior (response) is followed by the removal of an aversive stimulus, thereby increasing the original behavior's frequency. In the Skinner Box experiment, the aversive stimulus might be a loud dissonance continuously inside the box; negative reinforcement would happen when the rat presses a lever to turn off the racket.
3. Positive penalty (also referred to as "penalization by contingent stimulation") occurs when a behavior (response) is followed by an aversive stimulus. Example: pain from a spanking, which would often issue in a decrease in that behavior. Positive punishment is a disruptive term, then the procedure is usually referred to as "punishment".
4. Negative punishment (punishment) (also called "penalty by contingent withdrawal") occurs when a behavior (response) is followed by the removal of a stimulus. Example: taking away a child'due south toy following an undesired behavior by him/her, which would result in a decrease in the undesirable behavior.
5. Extinction occurs when a behavior (response) that had previously been reinforced is no longer constructive. Example: a rat is offset given food many times for pressing a lever, until the experimenter no longer gives out food as a reward. The rat would typically press the lever less often and then stop. The lever pressing would then be said to exist "extinguished."

It is important to note that actors (eastward.thou. a rat) are not spoken of equally being reinforced, punished, or extinguished; it is the deportment that are reinforced, punished, or extinguished. Reinforcement, penalization, and extinction are not terms whose use is restricted to the laboratory. Naturally-occurring consequences can likewise reinforce, punish, or extinguish beliefs and are non always planned or delivered on purpose.

Schedules of reinforcement [edit]

Schedules of reinforcement are rules that control the commitment of reinforcement. The rules specify either the time that reinforcement is to be made available, or the number of responses to be made, or both. Many rules are possible, simply the post-obit are the most basic and normally used^{[18] [nine]}

• Fixed interval schedule: Reinforcement occurs post-obit the first response after a fixed time has elapsed later on the previous reinforcement. This schedule yields a "pause-run" design of response; that is, after training on this schedule, the organism typically pauses after reinforcement, then begins to answer rapidly every bit the time for the next reinforcement approaches.
• Variable interval schedule: Reinforcement occurs following the first response after a variable fourth dimension has elapsed from the previous reinforcement. This schedule typically yields a relatively steady charge per unit of response that varies with the average time betwixt reinforcements.
• Fixed ratio schedule: Reinforcement occurs after a stock-still number of responses accept been emitted since the previous reinforcement. An organism trained on this schedule typically pauses for a while after a reinforcement and then responds at a high rate. If the response requirement is low in that location may exist no break; if the response requirement is loftier the organism may quit responding altogether.
• Variable ratio schedule: Reinforcement occurs after a variable number of responses have been emitted since the previous reinforcement. This schedule typically yields a very high, persistent rate of response.
• Continuous reinforcement: Reinforcement occurs after each response. Organisms typically respond as rapidly as they can, given the time taken to obtain and swallow reinforcement, until they are satiated.

Factors that modify the effectiveness of reinforcement and penalisation [edit]

The effectiveness of reinforcement and punishment tin can be changed.

1. Satiation/Deprivation: The effectiveness of a positive or "appetitive" stimulus will be reduced if the individual has received enough of that stimulus to satisfy his/her appetite. The opposite effect will occur if the individual becomes deprived of that stimulus: the effectiveness of a consequence volition then increase. A subject with a total stomach wouldn't feel every bit motivated as a hungry one.^[xix]
2. Immediacy: An firsthand event is more than effective than a delayed one. If ane gives a dog a treat for sitting within 5 seconds, the dog will learn faster than if the care for is given later on 30 seconds.^[xx]
3. Contingency: To be most effective, reinforcement should occur consistently after responses and not at other times. Learning may be slower if reinforcement is intermittent, that is, following but some instances of the same response. Responses reinforced intermittently are usually slower to extinguish than are responses that have always been reinforced.^[nineteen]
4. Size: The size, or amount, of a stimulus oft affects its potency every bit a reinforcer. Humans and animals appoint in cost-benefit analysis. If a lever printing brings ten food pellets, lever pressing may be learned more apace than if a press brings but i pellet. A pile of quarters from a slot automobile may continue a gambler pulling the lever longer than a single quarter.

Almost of these factors serve biological functions. For case, the process of satiation helps the organism maintain a stable internal environment (homeostasis). When an organism has been deprived of sugar, for example, the gustation of saccharide is an constructive reinforcer. When the organism'southward blood carbohydrate reaches or exceeds an optimum level the gustation of sugar becomes less effective or fifty-fifty aversive.

Shaping [edit]

Shaping is a conditioning method much used in fauna training and in teaching nonverbal humans. Information technology depends on operant variability and reinforcement, every bit described in a higher place. The trainer starts past identifying the desired final (or "target") behavior. Next, the trainer chooses a behavior that the fauna or person already emits with some probability. The form of this behavior is and so gradually changed across successive trials by reinforcing behaviors that approximate the target beliefs more and more closely. When the target behavior is finally emitted, it may be strengthened and maintained past the use of a schedule of reinforcement.

Noncontingent reinforcement [edit]

Noncontingent reinforcement is the commitment of reinforcing stimuli regardless of the organism's behavior. Noncontingent reinforcement may be used in an endeavour to reduce an undesired target behavior past reinforcing multiple alternative responses while extinguishing the target response.^[21] As no measured beliefs is identified as existence strengthened, in that location is controversy surrounding the apply of the term noncontingent "reinforcement".^[22]

Stimulus control of operant behavior [edit]

Though initially operant behavior is emitted without an identified reference to a particular stimulus, during operant conditioning operants come up under the control of stimuli that are present when behavior is reinforced. Such stimuli are called "discriminative stimuli." A so-called "three-term contingency" is the result. That is, discriminative stimuli set the occasion for responses that produce reward or penalty. Example: a rat may be trained to press a lever simply when a light comes on; a dog rushes to the kitchen when it hears the rattle of his/her food pocketbook; a child reaches for processed when south/he sees it on a table.

Bigotry, generalization & context [edit]

Most beliefs is under stimulus control. Several aspects of this may be distinguished:

• Discrimination typically occurs when a response is reinforced but in the presence of a specific stimulus. For example, a pigeon might be fed for pecking at a blood-red light and not at a light-green light; in consequence, information technology pecks at red and stops pecking at greenish. Many complex combinations of stimuli and other conditions accept been studied; for example an organism might be reinforced on an interval schedule in the presence of 1 stimulus and on a ratio schedule in the presence of another.
• Generalization is the trend to respond to stimuli that are similar to a previously trained discriminative stimulus. For instance, having been trained to peck at "red" a dove might too peck at "pink", though usually less strongly.
• Context refers to stimuli that are continuously present in a situation, like the walls, tables, chairs, etc. in a room, or the interior of an operant conditioning chamber. Context stimuli may come to control behavior as do discriminative stimuli, though unremarkably more than weakly. Behaviors learned in i context may be absent-minded, or altered, in another. This may cause difficulties for behavioral therapy, because behaviors learned in the therapeutic setting may fail to occur in other situations.

Behavioral sequences: conditioned reinforcement and chaining [edit]

Most behavior cannot easily be described in terms of private responses reinforced one by ane. The scope of operant analysis is expanded through the idea of behavioral bondage, which are sequences of responses bound together by the iii-term contingencies divers above. Chaining is based on the fact, experimentally demonstrated, that a discriminative stimulus not but sets the occasion for subsequent behavior, but information technology can also reinforce a behavior that precedes it. That is, a discriminative stimulus is also a "conditioned reinforcer". For example, the calorie-free that sets the occasion for lever pressing may be used to reinforce "turning around" in the presence of a dissonance. This results in the sequence "noise – turn-around – light – printing lever – food". Much longer chains can be congenital by adding more stimuli and responses.

Escape and avoidance [edit]

In escape learning, a behavior terminates an (aversive) stimulus. For instance, shielding 1'south eyes from sunlight terminates the (aversive) stimulation of bright light in one's eyes. (This is an example of negative reinforcement, divers above.) Behavior that is maintained past preventing a stimulus is called "avoidance," equally, for case, putting on sun glasses before going outdoors. Avoidance behavior raises the then-called "abstention paradox", for, it may be asked, how tin the non-occurrence of a stimulus serve equally a reinforcer? This question is addressed by several theories of avoidance (come across beneath).

Two kinds of experimental settings are commonly used: discriminated and complimentary-operant avoidance learning.

Discriminated avoidance learning [edit]

A discriminated avoidance experiment involves a series of trials in which a neutral stimulus such as a lite is followed by an aversive stimulus such as a stupor. Later the neutral stimulus appears an operant response such every bit a lever press prevents or terminate the aversive stimulus. In early trials, the subject does not make the response until the aversive stimulus has come up on, so these early trials are called "escape" trials. As learning progresses, the subject area begins to respond during the neutral stimulus and thus prevents the aversive stimulus from occurring. Such trials are called "avoidance trials." This experiment is said to involve classical conditioning because a neutral CS (conditioned stimulus) is paired with the aversive US (unconditioned stimulus); this idea underlies the two-factor theory of avoidance learning described below.

Complimentary-operant abstention learning [edit]

In gratis-operant abstention a subject periodically receives an aversive stimulus (often an electric daze) unless an operant response is made; the response delays the onset of the stupor. In this state of affairs, different discriminated abstention, no prior stimulus signals the shock. 2 crucial time intervals determine the charge per unit of avoidance learning. This starting time is the S-Due south (shock-shock) interval. This is time between successive shocks in the absence of a response. The 2nd interval is the R-S (response-stupor) interval. This specifies the time by which an operant response delays the onset of the next shock. Note that each fourth dimension the subject field performs the operant response, the R-S interval without daze begins anew.

Two-process theory of avoidance [edit]

This theory was originally proposed in order to explain discriminated avoidance learning, in which an organism learns to avert an aversive stimulus by escaping from a signal for that stimulus. 2 processes are involved: classical workout of the signal followed by operant conditioning of the escape response:

a) Classical conditioning of fear. Initially the organism experiences the pairing of a CS with an aversive US. The theory assumes that this pairing creates an association between the CS and the US through classical conditioning and, because of the aversive nature of the Usa, the CS comes to elicit a conditioned emotional reaction (CER) – "fear." b) Reinforcement of the operant response by fearfulness-reduction. As a effect of the outset process, the CS now signals fear; this unpleasant emotional reaction serves to motivate operant responses, and responses that terminate the CS are reinforced by fear termination. Notation that the theory does non say that the organism "avoids" the United states of america in the sense of anticipating it, but rather that the organism "escapes" an aversive internal state that is caused by the CS. Several experimental findings seem to run counter to two-cistron theory. For case, abstention beliefs often extinguishes very slowly fifty-fifty when the initial CS-US pairing never occurs again, so the fear response might be expected to extinguish (see Classical conditioning). Further, animals that have learned to avoid often show little prove of fear, suggesting that escape from fright is not necessary to maintain avoidance beliefs.^[23]

Operant or "1-factor" theory [edit]

Some theorists suggest that avoidance beliefs may simply be a special instance of operant behavior maintained by its consequences. In this view the idea of "consequences" is expanded to include sensitivity to a pattern of events. Thus, in avoidance, the consequence of a response is a reduction in the rate of aversive stimulation. Indeed, experimental evidence suggests that a "missed shock" is detected as a stimulus, and tin act as a reinforcer. Cerebral theories of avoidance take this idea a pace farther. For instance, a rat comes to "await" stupor if it fails to press a lever and to "expect no shock" if it presses it, and avoidance behavior is strengthened if these expectancies are confirmed.^[23]

Operant hoarding [edit]

Operant hoarding refers to the observation that rats reinforced in a certain way may let food pellets to accrue in a food tray instead of retrieving those pellets. In this procedure, retrieval of the pellets always instituted a 1-minute period of extinction during which no boosted food pellets were available simply those that had been accumulated earlier could exist consumed. This finding appears to contradict the usual finding that rats acquit impulsively in situations in which at that place is a pick betwixt a smaller food object correct away and a larger food object subsequently some delay. See schedules of reinforcement.^[24]

Neurobiological correlates [edit]

The first scientific studies identifying neurons that responded in ways that suggested they encode for conditioned stimuli came from work past Mahlon deLong^{[25] [26]} and by R.T. Richardson.^[26] They showed that nucleus basalis neurons, which release acetylcholine broadly throughout the cerebral cortex, are activated shortly later on a conditioned stimulus, or after a primary advantage if no conditioned stimulus exists. These neurons are every bit active for positive and negative reinforcers, and accept been shown to be related to neuroplasticity in many cortical regions.^[27] Prove too exists that dopamine is activated at like times. At that place is considerable show that dopamine participates in both reinforcement and aversive learning.^[28] Dopamine pathways project much more densely onto frontal cortex regions. Cholinergic projections, in contrast, are dumbo even in the posterior cortical regions like the primary visual cortex. A study of patients with Parkinson'due south affliction, a status attributed to the insufficient activeness of dopamine, further illustrates the role of dopamine in positive reinforcement.^[29] It showed that while off their medication, patients learned more readily with aversive consequences than with positive reinforcement. Patients who were on their medication showed the contrary to exist the case, positive reinforcement proving to exist the more effective form of learning when dopamine activity is high.

A neurochemical procedure involving dopamine has been suggested to underlie reinforcement. When an organism experiences a reinforcing stimulus, dopamine pathways in the brain are activated. This network of pathways "releases a brusk pulse of dopamine onto many dendrites, thus dissemination a global reinforcement betoken to postsynaptic neurons."^[30] This allows recently activated synapses to increase their sensitivity to efferent (conducting outward) signals, thus increasing the probability of occurrence for the recent responses that preceded the reinforcement. These responses are, statistically, the most likely to accept been the beliefs responsible for successfully achieving reinforcement. But when the awarding of reinforcement is either less immediate or less contingent (less consistent), the power of dopamine to act upon the appropriate synapses is reduced.

Questions almost the law of effect [edit]

A number of observations seem to show that operant behavior can be established without reinforcement in the sense defined in a higher place. Virtually cited is the phenomenon of autoshaping (sometimes called "sign tracking"), in which a stimulus is repeatedly followed by reinforcement, and in consequence the animal begins to respond to the stimulus. For case, a response key is lighted and so nutrient is presented. When this is repeated a few times a pigeon subject begins to peck the cardinal even though food comes whether the bird pecks or non. Similarly, rats begin to handle small objects, such every bit a lever, when food is presented nearby.^{[31] [32]} Strikingly, pigeons and rats persist in this beliefs fifty-fifty when pecking the key or pressing the lever leads to less food (omission training).^{[33] [34]} Another apparent operant behavior that appears without reinforcement is contrafreeloading.

These observations and others appear to contradict the law of effect, and they have prompted some researchers to propose new conceptualizations of operant reinforcement (eastward.grand.^{[35] [36] [37]}) A more general view is that autoshaping is an instance of classical conditioning; the autoshaping procedure has, in fact, become one of the most common ways to measure classical conditioning. In this view, many behaviors tin can be influenced by both classical contingencies (stimulus-response) and operant contingencies (response-reinforcement), and the experimenter's chore is to piece of work out how these interact.^[38]

Applications [edit]

Reinforcement and penalisation are ubiquitous in homo social interactions, and a slap-up many applications of operant principles accept been suggested and implemented. The following are some examples.

Addiction and dependence [edit]

Positive and negative reinforcement play primal roles in the evolution and maintenance of habit and drug dependence. An addictive drug is intrinsically rewarding; that is, information technology functions as a principal positive reinforcer of drug use. The brain's reward system assigns it incentive salience (i.due east., it is "wanted" or "desired"),^{[39] [forty] [41]} and then as an addiction develops, deprivation of the drug leads to craving. In improver, stimuli associated with drug use – e.g., the sight of a syringe, and the location of employ – become associated with the intense reinforcement induced by the drug.^{[39] [40] [41]} These previously neutral stimuli acquire several backdrop: their advent can induce peckish, and they can go conditioned positive reinforcers of continued use.^{[39] [40] [41]} Thus, if an addicted individual encounters one of these drug cues, a craving for the associated drug may reappear. For case, anti-drug agencies previously used posters with images of drug paraphernalia as an effort to prove the dangers of drug employ. Nevertheless, such posters are no longer used because of the effects of incentive salience in causing relapse upon sight of the stimuli illustrated in the posters.

In drug dependent individuals, negative reinforcement occurs when a drug is self-administered in order to convalesce or "escape" the symptoms of physical dependence (due east.k., tremors and sweating) and/or psychological dependence (east.g., anhedonia, restlessness, irritability, and anxiety) that arise during the state of drug withdrawal.^[39]

Brute grooming [edit]

Animal trainers and pet owners were applying the principles and practices of operant conditioning long before these ideas were named and studied, and animate being preparation notwithstanding provides ane of the clearest and most convincing examples of operant control. Of the concepts and procedures described in this commodity, a few of the almost salient are the post-obit: (a) availability of primary reinforcement (due east.g. a bag of dog yummies); (b) the use of secondary reinforcement, (e.g. sounding a clicker immediately afterwards a desired response, and so giving yummy); (c) contingency, assuring that reinforcement (e.g. the clicker) follows the desired behavior and not something else; (d) shaping, as in gradually getting a dog to jump college and higher; (east) intermittent reinforcement, as in gradually reducing the frequency of reinforcement to induce persistent behavior without satiation; (f) chaining, where a circuitous behavior is gradually constructed from smaller units.^[42]

Example of creature training from Seaworld related on Operant conditioning ^[43]

Animal training has effects on positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement. Schedules of reinforcements may play a large function on the animal training instance.

Applied beliefs analysis [edit]

Applied behavior assay is the discipline initiated past B. F. Skinner that applies the principles of conditioning to the modification of socially significant man behavior. It uses the bones concepts of workout theory, including conditioned stimulus (S^C), discriminative stimulus (S^d), response (R), and reinforcing stimulus (S^rein or S^r for reinforcers, sometimes S^ave for aversive stimuli).^[23] A conditioned stimulus controls behaviors developed through respondent (classical) conditioning, such as emotional reactions. The other three terms combine to form Skinner'due south "three-term contingency": a discriminative stimulus sets the occasion for responses that lead to reinforcement. Researchers accept establish the following protocol to be effective when they utilize the tools of operant conditioning to modify human beliefs:^{[ citation needed ]}

1. State goal Clarify exactly what changes are to be brought about. For instance, "reduce weight by 30 pounds."
2. Monitor behavior Keep track of behavior then that ane tin see whether the desired effects are occurring. For case, keep a nautical chart of daily weights.
3. Reinforce desired beliefs For case, congratulate the private on weight losses. With humans, a tape of behavior may serve as a reinforcement. For example, when a participant sees a pattern of weight loss, this may reinforce constancy in a behavioral weight-loss programme. Even so, individuals may perceive reinforcement which is intended to be positive as negative and vice versa. For instance, a tape of weight loss may act as negative reinforcement if it reminds the individual how heavy they actually are. The token economic system, is an exchange organisation in which tokens are given as rewards for desired behaviors. Tokens may later be exchanged for a desired prize or rewards such as power, prestige, appurtenances or services.
4. Reduce incentives to perform undesirable behavior For example, remove candy and fatty snacks from kitchen shelves.

Practitioners of applied beliefs assay (ABA) bring these procedures, and many variations and developments of them, to comport on a variety of socially significant behaviors and issues. In many cases, practitioners use operant techniques to develop effective, socially acceptable behaviors to replace aberrant behaviors. The techniques of ABA have been effectively practical in to such things equally early on intensive behavioral interventions for children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD)^[44] research on the principles influencing criminal behavior, HIV prevention,^[45] conservation of natural resource,^[46] teaching,^[47] gerontology,^[48] health and practice,^[49] industrial safety,^[50] linguistic communication acquisition,^[51] littering,^[52] medical procedures,^[53] parenting,^[54] psychotherapy,^{[ citation needed ]} seatbelt use,^[55] severe mental disorders,^[56] sports,^[57] substance abuse, phobias, pediatric feeding disorders, and zoo direction and intendance of animals.^[58] Some of these applications are among those described beneath.

Child beliefs – parent management preparation [edit]

Providing positive reinforcement for appropriate kid behaviors is a major focus of parent direction preparation. Typically, parents larn to reward appropriate behavior through social rewards (such equally praise, smiles, and hugs) as well as concrete rewards (such every bit stickers or points towards a larger advantage as office of an incentive organisation created collaboratively with the kid).^[59] In addition, parents larn to select simple behaviors as an initial focus and reward each of the small-scale steps that their kid achieves towards reaching a larger goal (this concept is called "successive approximations").^{[59] [60]}

Economics [edit]

Both psychologists and economists take get interested in applying operant concepts and findings to the beliefs of humans in the marketplace. An example is the analysis of consumer demand, as indexed by the amount of a article that is purchased. In economic science, the degree to which price influences consumption is called "the price elasticity of demand." Certain commodities are more elastic than others; for example, a change in price of sure foods may take a large effect on the corporeality bought, while gasoline and other everyday consumables may be less affected by price changes. In terms of operant analysis, such effects may be interpreted in terms of motivations of consumers and the relative value of the bolt as reinforcers.^[61]

Gambling – variable ratio scheduling [edit]

Equally stated earlier in this article, a variable ratio schedule yields reinforcement afterwards the emission of an unpredictable number of responses. This schedule typically generates rapid, persistent responding. Slot machines pay off on a variable ratio schedule, and they produce just this sort of persistent lever-pulling behavior in gamblers. The variable ratio payoff from slot machines and other forms of gambling has often been cited as a cistron underlying gambling addiction.^[62]

Military psychology [edit]

Human beings accept an innate resistance to killing and are reluctant to human activity in a direct, aggressive way towards members of their own species, fifty-fifty to relieve life. This resistance to killing has caused infantry to be remarkably inefficient throughout the history of military warfare.^[63]

This phenomenon was not understood until S.L.A. Marshall (Brigadier General and armed forces historian) undertook interview studies of WWII infantry immediately following combat engagement. Marshall's well-known and controversial book, Men Against Fire, revealed that only 15% of soldiers fired their rifles with the purpose of killing in combat.^[64] Following acceptance of Marshall's research by the Usa Army in 1946, the Homo Resource Research Role of the US Army began implementing new preparation protocols which resemble operant conditioning methods. Subsequent applications of such methods increased the per centum of soldiers able to kill to around fifty% in Korea and over 90% in Vietnam.^[63] Revolutions in grooming included replacing traditional pop-up firing ranges with three-dimensional, homo-shaped, popular-upwards targets which collapsed when striking. This provided firsthand feedback and acted as positive reinforcement for a soldier'due south behavior.^[65] Other improvements to military training methods take included the timed firing course; more realistic training; high repetitions; praise from superiors; marksmanship rewards; and group recognition. Negative reinforcement includes peer accountability or the requirement to retake courses. Modern military training conditions mid-encephalon response to combat pressure by closely simulating bodily combat, using mainly Pavlovian classical conditioning and Skinnerian operant conditioning (both forms of behaviorism).^[63]

Modernistic marksmanship training is such an first-class case of behaviorism that it has been used for years in the introductory psychology course taught to all cadets at the Us Armed forces Academy at West Point equally a classic case of operant workout. In the 1980s, during a visit to West Point, B.F. Skinner identified mod military marksmanship training as a near-perfect application of operant workout.^[65]

Lt. Col. Dave Grossman states about operant workout and United states Military training that:

It is entirely possible that no ane intentionally saturday down to use operant conditioning or behavior modification techniques to train soldiers in this area…But from the standpoint of a psychologist who is also a historian and a career soldier, it has become increasingly obvious to me that this is exactly what has been achieved.^[63]

Nudge theory [edit]

Nudge theory (or nudge) is a concept in behavioural science, political theory and economic science which argues that indirect suggestions to endeavor to reach non-forced compliance tin influence the motives, incentives and decision making of groups and individuals, at least as effectively – if not more than effectively – than direct pedagogy, legislation, or enforcement.

Praise [edit]

The concept of praise as a ways of behavioral reinforcement is rooted in B.F. Skinner's model of operant conditioning. Through this lens, praise has been viewed equally a ways of positive reinforcement, wherein an observed behavior is fabricated more likely to occur past contingently praising said behavior.^[66] Hundreds of studies accept demonstrated the effectiveness of praise in promoting positive behaviors, notably in the written report of instructor and parent use of praise on child in promoting improved behavior and bookish operation,^{[67] [68]} merely also in the study of work functioning.^[69] Praise has also been demonstrated to reinforce positive behaviors in non-praised adjacent individuals (such every bit a classmate of the praise recipient) through vicarious reinforcement.^[70] Praise may be more or less effective in changing beliefs depending on its grade, content and commitment. In order for praise to effect positive behavior change, it must be contingent on the positive behavior (i.e., only administered afterwards the targeted behavior is enacted), must specify the particulars of the beliefs that is to be reinforced, and must be delivered sincerely and credibly.^[71]

Acknowledging the effect of praise as a positive reinforcement strategy, numerous behavioral and cognitive behavioral interventions have incorporated the use of praise in their protocols.^{[72] [73]} The strategic use of praise is recognized as an evidence-based exercise in both classroom management^[72] and parenting training interventions,^[68] though praise is often subsumed in intervention enquiry into a larger category of positive reinforcement, which includes strategies such as strategic attention and behavioral rewards.

Several studies take been done on the effect cognitive-behavioral therapy and operant-behavioral therapy take on different medical conditions. When patients adult cognitive and behavioral techniques that inverse their behaviors, attitudes, and emotions; their pain severity decreased. The results of these studies showed an influence of cognitions on pain perception and impact presented explained the general efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral therapy (CBT) and Operant-Behavioral therapy (OBT).

Psychological manipulation [edit]

Braiker identified the following ways that manipulators control their victims:^[74]

• Positive reinforcement: includes praise, superficial charm, superficial sympathy (crocodile tears), excessive apologizing, money, approval, gifts, attention, facial expressions such equally a forced express mirth or smile, and public recognition.
• Negative reinforcement: may involve removing one from a negative situation
• Intermittent or partial reinforcement: Partial or intermittent negative reinforcement can create an effective climate of fright and doubtfulness. Partial or intermittent positive reinforcement tin encourage the victim to persist – for example in well-nigh forms of gambling, the gambler is likely to win now and once more but nonetheless lose money overall.
• Penalisation: includes nagging, yelling, the silent treatment, intimidation, threats, swearing, emotional blackmail, the guilt trip, sulking, crying, and playing the victim.
• Traumatic i-trial learning: using exact abuse, explosive anger, or other intimidating behavior to found say-so or superiority; even one incident of such beliefs tin can status or train victims to avoid upsetting, against or contradicting the manipulator.

Traumatic bonding [edit]

Traumatic bonding occurs every bit the result of ongoing cycles of abuse in which the intermittent reinforcement of reward and penalisation creates powerful emotional bonds that are resistant to change.^{[75] [76]}

The other source indicated that ^[77] 'The necessary conditions for traumatic bonding are that ane person must boss the other and that the level of abuse chronically spikes and and then subsides. The relationship is characterized by periods of permissive, compassionate, and even affectionate behavior from the ascendant person, punctuated by intermittent episodes of intense abuse. To maintain the upper hand, the victimizer manipulates the behavior of the victim and limits the victim's options so as to perpetuate the ability imbalance. Any threat to the residue of dominance and submission may be met with an escalating cycle of punishment ranging from seething intimidation to intensely violent outbursts. The victimizer too isolates the victim from other sources of support, which reduces the likelihood of detection and intervention, impairs the victim'southward ability to receive countervailing self-referent feedback, and strengthens the sense of unilateral dependency...The traumatic effects of these calumniating relationships may include the harm of the victim's capacity for authentic self-appraisal, leading to a sense of personal inadequacy and a subordinate sense of dependence upon the dominating person. Victims also may encounter a multifariousness of unpleasant social and legal consequences of their emotional and behavioral affiliation with someone who perpetrated aggressive acts, even if they themselves were the recipients of the aggression. '.

Video games [edit]

The majority^{[ citation needed ]} of video games are designed around a compulsion loop, calculation a type of positive reinforcement through a variable rate schedule to keep the player playing. This can pb to the pathology of video game addiction.^[78]

Every bit part of a trend in the monetization of video games during the 2010s, some games offered loot boxes as rewards or as items purchasable by existent world funds. Boxes contains a random choice of in-game items. The exercise has been tied to the aforementioned methods that slot machines and other gambling devices dole out rewards, as it follows a variable charge per unit schedule. While the general perception that loot boxes are a form of gambling, the practice is only classified as such in a few countries. However, methods to utilise those items as virtual currency for online gambling or trading for real world money has created a peel gambling marketplace that is under legal evaluation.^[79]

Workplace culture of fear [edit]

Ashforth discussed potentially destructive sides of leadership and identified what he referred to equally lilliputian tyrants: leaders who exercise a tyrannical style of management, resulting in a climate of fright in the workplace.^[80] Partial or intermittent negative reinforcement can create an constructive climate of fright and doubt.^[74] When employees get the sense that bullies are tolerated, a climate of fright may be the result.^[81]

Individual differences in sensitivity to reward, penalisation, and motivation take been studied under the premises of reinforcement sensitivity theory and have besides been applied to workplace performance.

One of the many reasons proposed for the dramatic costs associated with healthcare is the do of defensive medicine. Prabhu reviews the article by Cole and discusses how the responses of two groups of neurosurgeons are archetype operant behavior. One group practice in a state with restrictions on medical lawsuits and the other group with no restrictions. The group of neurosurgeons were queried anonymously on their practice patterns. The physicians changed their exercise in response to a negative feedback (fear from lawsuit) in the group that practiced in a state with no restrictions on medical lawsuits.^[82]

Meet also [edit]

• Abusive power and control
• Creature testing
• Behavioral contrast
• Behaviorism (branch of psychology referring to methodological and radical behaviorism)
• Behavior modification (quondam expression for ABA; modifies behavior either through consequences without incorporating stimulus command or involves the use of flooding—also referred to as prolonged exposure therapy)
• Carrot and stick
• Child grooming
• Cognitivism (psychology) (theory of internal mechanisms without reference to behavior)
• Consumer demand tests (animals)
• Educational psychology
• Educational applied science
• Experimental analysis of behavior (experimental inquiry principles in operant and respondent conditioning)
• Exposure therapy (also called desensitization)
• Graduated exposure therapy (besides called systematic desensitization)
• Habituation
• Jerzy Konorski
• Learned industriousness
• Matching constabulary
• Negative (positive) contrast effect
• Radical behaviorism (conceptual theory of behavior analysis that expands behaviorism to also encompass private events (thoughts and feelings) every bit forms of behavior)
• Reinforcement
• Pavlovian-instrumental transfer
• Preference tests (animals)
• Premack principle
• Sensitization
• Social conditioning
• Society for Quantitative Analysis of Behavior
• Spontaneous recovery

References [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b} Tarantola, Tor; Kumaran, Dharshan; Dayan, Peters; De Martino, Benedetto (x Oct 2017). "Prior preferences beneficially influence social and non-social learning". Nature Communications. 8 (one): 817. Bibcode:2017NatCo...8..817T. doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00826-8. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC5635122. PMID 29018195.
2. ^ Jenkins, H. M. "Animal Learning and Behavior Theory" Ch. v in Hearst, E. "The First Century of Experimental Psychology" Hillsdale Northward. J., Earlbaum, 1979
3. ^ ^{a b} Thorndike, East.L. (1901). "Beast intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals". Psychological Review Monograph Supplement. ii: one–109.
4. ^ Miltenberger, R. Chiliad. "Behavioral Modification: Principles and Procedures". Thomson/Wadsworth, 2008. p. 9.
5. ^ Miltenberger, R. G., & Crosland, Chiliad. A. (2014). Parenting. The wiley blackwell handbook of operant and classical conditioning. (pp. 509–531) Wiley-Blackwell. doi:ten.1002/9781118468135.ch20
6. ^ Skinner, B. F. "The Beliefs of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis", 1938 New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
7. ^ Skinner, B. F. (1950). "Are theories of learning necessary?". Psychological Review. 57 (four): 193–216. doi:ten.1037/h0054367. PMID 15440996. S2CID 17811847.
8. ^ Schacter, Daniel L., Daniel T. Gilbert, and Daniel M. Wegner. "B. F. Skinner: The function of reinforcement and Punishment", subsection in: Psychology; Second Edition. New York: Worth, Incorporated, 2011, 278–288.
9. ^ ^{a b} Ferster, C. B. & Skinner, B. F. "Schedules of Reinforcement", 1957 New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
10. ^ Staddon, J. E. R; D. T Cerutti (February 2003). "Operant Conditioning". Annual Review of Psychology. 54 (1): 115–144. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145124. PMC1473025. PMID 12415075.
11. ^ Mecca Chiesa (2004) Radical Behaviorism: The philosophy and the scientific discipline
12. ^ Skinner, B. F. "Scientific discipline and Human Behavior", 1953. New York: MacMillan
13. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1948). Walden 2. Indianapolis: Hackett
14. ^ Skinner, B. F. "Verbal Behavior", 1957. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
15. ^ Neuringer, A (2002). "Operant variability: Evidence, functions, and theory". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 9 (4): 672–705. doi:x.3758/bf03196324. PMID 12613672.
16. ^ Skinner, B.F. (2014). Science and Homo Behavior (PDF). Cambridge, MA: The B.F. Skinner Foundation. p. 70. Retrieved thirteen March 2019.
17. ^ Schultz West (2015). "Neuronal reward and decision signals: from theories to information". Physiological Reviews. 95 (three): 853–951. doi:10.1152/physrev.00023.2014. PMC4491543. PMID 26109341. Rewards in operant conditioning are positive reinforcers. ... Operant behavior gives a expert definition for rewards. Annihilation that makes an individual come dorsum for more is a positive reinforcer and therefore a reward. Although it provides a expert definition, positive reinforcement is simply 1 of several advantage functions. ... Rewards are attractive. They are motivating and make the states exert an effort. ... Rewards induce approach behavior, also called appetitive or preparatory behavior, and consummatory behavior. ... Thus any stimulus, object, consequence, activity, or situation that has the potential to brand us arroyo and eat information technology is by definition a reward.
18. ^ Schacter et al.2011 Psychology 2nd ed. pg.280–284 Reference for entire section Principles version 130317
19. ^ ^{a b} Miltenberger, R. 1000. "Behavioral Modification: Principles and Procedures". Thomson/Wadsworth, 2008. p. 84.
20. ^ Miltenberger, R. G. "Behavioral Modification: Principles and Procedures". Thomson/Wadsworth, 2008. p. 86.
21. ^ Tucker, Grand.; Sigafoos, J.; Bushell, H. (1998). "Use of noncontingent reinforcement in the treatment of challenging behavior". Behavior Modification. 22 (4): 529–547. doi:10.1177/01454455980224005. PMID 9755650. S2CID 21542125.
22. ^ Poling, A.; Normand, M. (1999). "Noncontingent reinforcement: an inappropriate clarification of time-based schedules that reduce behavior". Journal of Practical Behavior Assay. 32 (2): 237–238. doi:x.1901/jaba.1999.32-237. PMC1284187.
23. ^ ^{a b c} Pierce & Cheney (2004) Behavior Analysis and Learning
24. ^ Cole, Thousand.R. (1990). "Operant hoarding: A new paradigm for the study of self-command". Periodical of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 53 (ii): 247–262. doi:10.1901/jeab.1990.53-247. PMC1323010. PMID 2324665.
25. ^ "Activity of pallidal neurons during move", G.R. DeLong, J. Neurophysiol., 34:414–27, 1971
26. ^ ^{a b} Richardson RT, DeLong MR (1991): Electrophysiological studies of the part of the nucleus basalis in primates. In Napier TC, Kalivas P, Hamin I (eds), The Basal Forebrain: Anatomy to Role (Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology), vol. 295. New York, Plenum, pp. 232–252
27. ^ PNAS 93:11219-24 1996, Science 279:1714–8 1998
28. ^ Neuron 63:244–253, 2009, Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 3: Article thirteen, 2009
29. ^ Michael J. Frank, Lauren C. Seeberger, and Randall C. O'Reilly (2004) "Past Carrot or by Stick: Cerebral Reinforcement Learning in Parkinsonism," Scientific discipline 4, November 2004
30. ^ Schultz, Wolfram (1998). "Predictive Reward Indicate of Dopamine Neurons". The Periodical of Neurophysiology. lxxx (1): i–27. doi:ten.1152/jn.1998.80.1.1. PMID 9658025.
31. ^ Timberlake, Westward (1983). "Rats' responses to a moving object related to food or water: A beliefs-systems analysis". Beast Learning & Behavior. xi (three): 309–320. doi:10.3758/bf03199781.
32. ^ Neuringer, A.J. (1969). "Animals respond for food in the presence of free food". Scientific discipline. 166 (3903): 399–401. Bibcode:1969Sci...166..399N. doi:10.1126/scientific discipline.166.3903.399. PMID 5812041. S2CID 35969740.
33. ^ Williams, D.R.; Williams, H. (1969). "Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent not-reinforcement". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 12 (4): 511–520. doi:ten.1901/jeab.1969.12-511. PMC1338642. PMID 16811370.
34. ^ Peden, B.F.; Chocolate-brown, M.P.; Hearst, East. (1977). "Persistent approaches to a signal for food despite nutrient omission for budgeted". Periodical of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes. 3 (4): 377–399. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.three.iv.377.
35. ^ Gardner, R.A.; Gardner, B.T. (1988). "Feedforward vs feedbackward: An ethological alternative to the law of effect". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 11 (3): 429–447. doi:10.1017/s0140525x00058258.
36. ^ Gardner, R. A. & Gardner B.T. (1998) The construction of learning from sign stimuli to sign language. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assembly.
37. ^ Baum, Westward. M. (2012). "Rethinking reinforcement: Resource allotment, consecration and contingency". Periodical of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 97 (1): 101–124. doi:10.1901/jeab.2012.97-101. PMC3266735. PMID 22287807.
38. ^ Locurto, C. K., Terrace, H. S., & Gibbon, J. (1981) Autoshaping and conditioning theory. New York: Academic Press.
39. ^ ^{a b c d} Edwards S (2016). "Reinforcement principles for addiction medicine; from recreational drug use to psychiatric disorder". Neuroscience for Habit Medicine: From Prevention to Rehabilitation - Constructs and Drugs. Prog. Encephalon Res. Progress in Brain Enquiry. Vol. 223. pp. 63–76. doi:10.1016/bs.pbr.2015.07.005. ISBN9780444635457. PMID 26806771. Abused substances (ranging from alcohol to psychostimulants) are initially ingested at regular occasions according to their positive reinforcing properties. Importantly, repeated exposure to rewarding substances sets off a chain of secondary reinforcing events, whereby cues and contexts associated with drug utilise may themselves go reinforcing and thereby contribute to the continued use and possible abuse of the substance(s) of selection. ...
    An important dimension of reinforcement highly relevant to the addiction procedure (and peculiarly relapse) is secondary reinforcement (Stewart, 1992). Secondary reinforcers (in many cases also considered conditioned reinforcers) likely drive the bulk of reinforcement processes in humans. In the specific case of drug [addiction], cues and contexts that are intimately and repeatedly associated with drug use volition frequently themselves become reinforcing ... A fundamental piece of Robinson and Berridge's incentive-sensitization theory of habit posits that the incentive value or attractive nature of such secondary reinforcement processes, in addition to the primary reinforcers themselves, may persist and even become sensitized over fourth dimension in league with the development of drug addiction (Robinson and Berridge, 1993). ...
    Negative reinforcement is a special status associated with a strengthening of behavioral responses that stop some ongoing (presumably aversive) stimulus. In this case we tin can define a negative reinforcer as a motivational stimulus that strengthens such an "escape" response. Historically, in relation to drug addiction, this phenomenon has been consistently observed in humans whereby drugs of abuse are self-administered to quench a motivational need in the state of withdrawal (Wikler, 1952).
40. ^ ^{a b c} Berridge KC (April 2012). "From prediction error to incentive salience: mesolimbic ciphering of reward motivation". Eur. J. Neurosci. 35 (seven): 1124–1143. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.07990.x. PMC3325516. PMID 22487042. When a Pavlovian CS+ is attributed with incentive salience it non only triggers 'wanting' for its UCS, only often the cue itself becomes highly attractive – even to an irrational degree. This cue attraction is some other signature characteristic of incentive salience. The CS becomes hard not to wait at (Wiers & Stacy, 2006; Hickey et al., 2010a; Piech et al., 2010; Anderson et al., 2011). The CS even takes on some incentive properties similar to its UCS. An attractive CS oft elicits behavioral motivated approach, and sometimes an individual may fifty-fifty attempt to 'consume' the CS somewhat equally its UCS (due east.g., eat, drink, smoke, take sex with, take as drug). 'Wanting' of a CS can turn also plough the formerly neutral stimulus into an instrumental conditioned reinforcer, then that an private will work to obtain the cue (withal, at that place exist alternative psychological mechanisms for conditioned reinforcement too).
41. ^ ^{a b c} Berridge KC, Kringelbach ML (May 2015). "Pleasure systems in the encephalon". Neuron. 86 (three): 646–664. doi:x.1016/j.neuron.2015.02.018. PMC4425246. PMID 25950633. An important goal in hereafter for addiction neuroscience is to understand how intense motivation becomes narrowly focused on a particular target. Habit has been suggested to be partly due to excessive incentive salience produced by sensitized or hyper-reactive dopamine systems that produce intense 'wanting' (Robinson and Berridge, 1993). Just why one target becomes more 'wanted' than all others has not been fully explained. In addicts or agonist-stimulated patients, the repetition of dopamine-stimulation of incentive salience becomes attributed to particular individualized pursuits, such equally taking the addictive drug or the detail compulsions. In Pavlovian reward situations, some cues for reward become more than 'wanted' more others every bit powerful motivational magnets, in ways that differ across individuals (Robinson et al., 2014b; Saunders and Robinson, 2013). ... However, hedonic effects might well change over time. As a drug was taken repeatedly, mesolimbic dopaminergic sensitization could consequently occur in susceptible individuals to amplify 'wanting' (Leyton and Vezina, 2013; Lodge and Grace, 2011; Wolf and Ferrario, 2010), even if opioid hedonic mechanisms underwent downward-regulation due to continual drug stimulation, producing 'liking' tolerance. Incentive-sensitization would produce addiction, by selectively magnifying cue-triggered 'wanting' to accept the drug again, so powerfully cause motivation even if the drug became less pleasant (Robinson and Berridge, 1993).
42. ^ McGreevy, P & Boakes, R."Carrots and Sticks: Principles of Animal Training".(Sydney: "Sydney Academy Press"., 2011)
43. ^ "All Almost Creature Preparation - Nuts | SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment". Beast training basics. Seaworld parks.
44. ^ Dillenburger, K.; Keenan, M. (2009). "None of the As in ABA stand for autism: dispelling the myths". J Intellect Dev Disabil. 34 (2): 193–95. doi:ten.1080/13668250902845244. PMID 19404840. S2CID 1818966.
45. ^ DeVries, J.E.; Burnette, M.One thousand.; Redmon, Due west.Thou. (1991). "AIDS prevention: Improving nurses' compliance with glove wearing through performance feedback". Journal of Practical Behavior Assay. 24 (4): 705–xi. doi:10.1901/jaba.1991.24-705. PMC1279627. PMID 1797773.
46. ^ Brothers, K.J.; Krantz, P.J.; McClannahan, L.E. (1994). "Role newspaper recycling: A function of container proximity". Journal of Applied Behavior Assay. 27 (i): 153–threescore. doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-153. PMC1297784. PMID 16795821.
47. ^ Dardig, Jill C.; Heward, William Fifty.; Heron, Timothy East.; Nancy A. Neef; Peterson, Stephanie; Diane M. Sainato; Cartledge, Gwendolyn; Gardner, Ralph; Peterson, Lloyd R.; Susan B. Hersh (2005). Focus on behavior assay in education: achievements, challenges, and opportunities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall. ISBN978-0-13-111339-viii.
48. ^ Gallagher, S.Chiliad.; Keenan K. (2000). "Contained apply of action materials by the elderly in a residential setting". Journal of Practical Beliefs Assay. 33 (3): 325–28. doi:10.1901/jaba.2000.33-325. PMC1284256. PMID 11051575.
49. ^ De Luca, R.V.; Holborn, South.West. (1992). "Furnishings of a variable-ratio reinforcement schedule with changing criteria on practise in obese and nonobese boys". Journal of Practical Behavior Analysis. 25 (3): 671–79. doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-671. PMC1279749. PMID 1429319.
50. ^ Fox, D.Thou.; Hopkins, B.L.; Anger, W.K. (1987). "The long-term effects of a token economy on safety operation in open up-pit mining". Periodical of Applied Behavior Analysis. 20 (three): 215–24. doi:10.1901/jaba.1987.xx-215. PMC1286011. PMID 3667473.
51. ^ Drasgow, East.; Halle, J.W.; Ostrosky, M.M. (1998). "Effects of differential reinforcement on the generalization of a replacement mand in three children with severe language delays". Journal of Applied Beliefs Analysis. 31 (3): 357–74. doi:10.1901/jaba.1998.31-357. PMC1284128. PMID 9757580.
52. ^ Powers, R.B.; Osborne, J.Yard.; Anderson, Eastward.G. (1973). "Positive reinforcement of litter removal in the natural environment". Journal of Practical Behavior Analysis. 6 (4): 579–86. doi:x.1901/jaba.1973.six-579. PMC1310876. PMID 16795442.
53. ^ Hagopian, L.P.; Thompson, R.H. (1999). "Reinforcement of compliance with respiratory handling in a child with cystic fibrosis". Journal of Practical Beliefs Analysis. 32 (2): 233–36. doi:10.1901/jaba.1999.32-233. PMC1284184. PMID 10396778.
54. ^ Kuhn, S.A.C.; Lerman, D.C.; Vorndran, C.Thou. (2003). "Pyramidal training for families of children with problem behavior". Journal of Applied Beliefs Analysis. 36 (1): 77–88. doi:10.1901/jaba.2003.36-77. PMC1284418. PMID 12723868.
55. ^ Van Houten, R.; Malenfant, J.E.L.; Austin, J.; Lebbon, A. (2005). Vollmer, Timothy (ed.). "The furnishings of a seatbelt-gearshift delay prompt on the seatbelt use of motorists who do not regularly vesture seatbelts". Journal of Applied Beliefs Analysis. 38 (two): 195–203. doi:10.1901/jaba.2005.48-04. PMC1226155. PMID 16033166.
56. ^ Wong, S.Due east.; Martinez-Diaz, J.A.; Massel, H.M.; Edelstein, B.A.; Wiegand, Westward.; Bowen, L.; Liberman, R.P. (1993). "Conversational skills training with schizophrenic inpatients: A study of generalization across settings and conversants". Behavior Therapy. 24 (ii): 285–304. doi:x.1016/S0005-7894(05)80270-9.
57. ^ Brobst, B.; Ward, P. (2002). "Effects of public posting, goal setting, and oral feedback on the skills of female soccer players". Journal of Applied Behavior Assay. 35 (3): 247–57. doi:x.1901/jaba.2002.35-247. PMC1284383. PMID 12365738.
58. ^ Forthman, D.L.; Ogden, J.J. (1992). "The office of applied behavior analysis in zoo management: Today and tomorrow". Periodical of Applied Behavior Analysis. 25 (three): 647–52. doi:ten.1901/jaba.1992.25-647. PMC1279745. PMID 16795790.
59. ^ ^{a b} Kazdin AE (2010). Problem-solving skills training and parent direction preparation for oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder. Bear witness-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (second ed.), 211–226. New York: Guilford Press.
60. ^ Forgatch MS, Patterson GR (2010). Parent management training — Oregon model: An intervention for antisocial beliefs in children and adolescents. Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (2nd ed.), 159–78. New York: Guilford Press.
61. ^ Domjan, Chiliad. (2009). The Principles of Learning and Behavior. Wadsworth Publishing Company. 6th Edition. pages 244–249.
62. ^ Bleda, Miguel Ángel Pérez; Nieto, José Héctor Lozano (2012). "Impulsivity, Intelligence, and Discriminating Reinforcement Contingencies in a Fixed-Ratio three Schedule". The Castilian Periodical of Psychology. 3 (15): 922–929. doi:x.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n3.39384. PMID 23156902. S2CID 144193503. ProQuest 1439791203.
63. ^ ^{a b c d} Grossman, Dave (1995). On Killing: the Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in State of war and Guild. Boston: Little Brown. ISBN978-0316040938.
64. ^ Marshall, Southward.Fifty.A. (1947). Men Confronting Fire: the Problem of Boxing Command in Future State of war. Washington: Infantry Journal. ISBN978-0-8061-3280-viii.
65. ^ ^{a b} Murray, K.A., Grossman, D., & Kentridge, R.W. (21 October 2018). "Behavioral Psychology". killology.com/behavioral-psychology. {{cite spider web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors listing (link)
66. ^ Kazdin, Alan (1978). History of behavior modification: Experimental foundations of contemporary research . Baltimore: University Park Press. ISBN9780839112051.
67. ^ Strain, Phillip South.; Lambert, Deborah L.; Kerr, Mary Margaret; Stagg, Vaughan; Lenkner, Donna A. (1983). "Naturalistic assessment of children's compliance to teachers' requests and consequences for compliance". Journal of Practical Beliefs Analysis. 16 (2): 243–249. doi:x.1901/jaba.1983.16-243. PMC1307879. PMID 16795665.
68. ^ ^{a b} Garland, Ann F.; Hawley, Kristin 1000.; Brookman-Frazee, Lauren; Hurlburt, Michael Southward. (May 2008). "Identifying Common Elements of Show-Based Psychosocial Treatments for Children's Disruptive Behavior Problems". Periodical of the American Academy of Kid & Adolescent Psychiatry. 47 (5): 505–514. doi:10.1097/CHI.0b013e31816765c2. PMID 18356768.
69. ^ Crowell, Charles R.; Anderson, D. Chris; Abel, Dawn M.; Sergio, Joseph P. (1988). "Job clarification, performance feedback, and social praise: Procedures for improving the customer service of bank tellers". Periodical of Applied Behavior Analysis. 21 (1): 65–71. doi:ten.1901/jaba.1988.21-65. PMC1286094. PMID 16795713.
70. ^ Kazdin, Alan E. (1973). "The event of vicarious reinforcement on attentive beliefs in the classroom". Journal of Applied Behavior Assay. vi (one): 71–78. doi:x.1901/jaba.1973.6-71. PMC1310808. PMID 16795397.
71. ^ Brophy, Jere (1981). "On praising effectively". The Elementary School Journal. 81 (5): 269–278. doi:x.1086/461229. JSTOR 1001606. S2CID 144444174.
72. ^ ^{a b} Simonsen, Brandi; Fairbanks, Sarah; Briesch, Amy; Myers, Diane; Sugai, George (2008). "Bear witness-based Practices in Classroom Management: Considerations for Enquiry to Do". Instruction and Treatment of Children. 31 (1): 351–380. doi:ten.1353/etc.0.0007. S2CID 145087451.
73. ^ Weisz, John R.; Kazdin, Alan E. (2010). Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents. Guilford Printing.
74. ^ ^{a b} Braiker, Harriet B. (2004). Who's Pulling Your Strings ? How to Interruption The Cycle of Manipulation. ISBN978-0-07-144672-3.
75. ^ Dutton; Painter (1981). "Traumatic Bonding: The evolution of emotional attachments in battered women and other relationships of intermittent abuse". Victimology: An International Journal (7).
76. ^ Chrissie Sanderson. Counselling Survivors of Domestic Abuse. Jessica Kingsley Publishers; 15 June 2008. ISBN 978-one-84642-811-1. p. 84.
77. ^ "Traumatic Bonding | Encyclopedia.com". www.encyclopedia.com.
78. ^ John Hopson: Behavioral Game Design, Gamasutra, 27 Apr 2001
79. ^ Hood, Vic (12 October 2017). "Are loot boxes gambling?". Eurogamer . Retrieved 12 October 2017.
80. ^ Petty tyranny in organizations, Ashforth, Blake, Man Relations, Vol. 47, No. 7, 755–778 (1994)
81. ^ Helge H, Sheehan MJ, Cooper CL, Einarsen S "Organisational Furnishings of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Exercise (2010)
82. ^ Operant Conditioning and the Practice of Defensive Medicine. Vikram C. Prabhu World Neurosurgery, 2016-07-01, Volume 91, Pages 603–605

External links [edit]

Look up operant in Wiktionary, the free lexicon.

• Operant conditioning article in Scholarpedia
• Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
• Periodical of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
• Negative reinforcement
• scienceofbehavior.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning

Posted by: davisfreples.blogspot.com

Share this post