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

Blazon of associative learning process

Operant conditioning (besides called instrumental workout) is a type of associative learning process through which the strength of a behavior is modified by reinforcement or punishment. It is also a procedure that is used to bring about such learning.

Although operant and classical conditioning both involve behaviors controlled by ecology stimuli, they differ in nature. In operant conditioning, 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 behavior is said to be "voluntary". The responses are under the control of the organism and are operants. For example, the child may face a choice between opening the box and petting a puppy.

In contrast, 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 appropriate stimuli. For example, sight of sweets may cause a child to salivate, or the sound of a door slam may signal an angry parent, causing a child to tremble. Salivation and trembling are not operants; they are not reinforced past their consequences, and they are non voluntarily "called".

However, both kinds of learning tin affect beliefs. Classically conditioned stimuli—for example, a movie of sweets on a box—might enhance operant conditioning by encouraging a child to approach and open up the box. Inquiry has shown this to be a benign phenomenon in cases where operant behavior is error-prone.^[1]

The report of animal learning in the 20th century was dominated past the analysis of these 2 sorts of learning,^[2] and they are still at the core of behavior analysis. They accept also been applied to the study of social psychology, helping to clarify certain phenomena such as the false consensus issue.^[i]

Operant conditioning

Extinction

Reinforcement Increase behavior

Punishment Decrease behavior

Positive reinforcement Add appetitive stimulus following correct behavior

Negative reinforcement

Positive punishment Add noxious stimulus post-obit behavior

Negative punishment Remove appetitive stimulus following behavior

Escape Remove noxious stimulus following correct beliefs

Active abstention Behavior avoids noxious stimulus

Historical notation [edit]

Thorndike'southward law of issue [edit]

Operant conditioning, sometimes called instrumental learning, was kickoff extensively studied past Edward L. Thorndike (1874–1949), who observed the beliefs of cats trying to escape from home-made puzzle boxes.^[iii] A cat could escape from the box by a simple response such as pulling a string or pushing a pole, but when first constrained, the cats took a long time to go out. With repeated trials ineffective responses occurred less frequently and successful responses occurred more frequently, then the cats escaped more and more quickly.^[3] Thorndike generalized this finding in his police force of consequence, which states that behaviors followed by satisfying consequences tend to be repeated and those that produce unpleasant consequences are less likely to be repeated. In brusque, some consequences strengthen behavior and some consequences weaken behavior. Past plotting escape time confronting trial number Thorndike produced the get-go known brute learning curves through this procedure.^[four]

Humans appear to learn many simple behaviors through the sort of process studied by Thorndike, now chosen operant conditioning. That is, responses are retained when they lead to a successful outcome and discarded when they do not, or when they produce aversive effects. This usually happens without being planned by whatever "teacher", but operant conditioning has been used past parents in teaching their children for thousands of years.^[five]

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 conditioning, and his work is frequently cited in connection with this topic. His 1938 volume "The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis",^[6] initiated his lifelong report of operant conditioning and its awarding to homo and animal beliefs. Following the ideas of Ernst Mach, Skinner rejected Thorndike's reference to unobservable mental states such every bit satisfaction, building his analysis on observable behavior and its equally observable consequences.^[7]

Skinner believed that classical conditioning was likewise simplistic to be used to depict something as circuitous as human being behavior. Operant conditioning, in his opinion, better described homo beliefs as it examined causes and effects of intentional behavior.

To implement his empirical approach, Skinner invented the operant conditioning bedroom, or "Skinner Box", in which subjects such equally pigeons and rats were isolated and could be exposed to carefully controlled stimuli. Unlike Thorndike's puzzle box, this arrangement immune the subject field to brand one or two unproblematic, repeatable responses, and the charge per unit of such responses became Skinner's primary behavioral mensurate.^[8] Another invention, the cumulative recorder, produced a graphical record from which these response rates could be estimated. These records were the chief data that Skinner and his colleagues used to explore the effects on response rate of diverse reinforcement schedules.^[9] A reinforcement schedule may be defined as "any procedure that delivers reinforcement to an organism according to some well-defined rule".^[10] The furnishings of schedules became, in plough, the bones findings from which Skinner adult his business relationship of operant workout. He as well drew on many less formal observations of homo and animate being beliefs.^[11]

Many of Skinner'southward writings are devoted to the application of operant workout to human beliefs.^[12] In 1948 he published Walden Two, a fictional account of a peaceful, happy, productive customs organized around his conditioning principles.^[13] In 1957, Skinner published Exact Behavior,^[xiv] which extended the principles of operant workout to linguistic communication, a grade of human behavior 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, just he introduced no new principles, treating verbal behavior like any other behavior controlled by its consequences, which included the reactions of the speaker's audition.

Concepts and procedures [edit]

Origins of operant behavior: operant variability [edit]

Operant behavior is said to be "emitted"; that is, initially information technology is not elicited by any detail stimulus. Thus one may ask why it happens in the beginning place. The answer to this question is similar Darwin's answer to the question of the origin of a "new" bodily structure, namely, variation and pick. Similarly, the behavior of an private varies from moment to moment, in such aspects every bit 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. All the same, behavioral variability can itself exist altered 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 upshot on beliefs. Either may be positive or negative.

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

Another procedure is called "extinction".

• Extinction occurs when a previously reinforced behavior is no longer reinforced with either positive or negative reinforcement. During extinction the behavior becomes less likely. Occasional reinforcement can pb to an even longer delay earlier beliefs extinction due to the learning cistron of repeated instances becoming necessary to get reinforcement, when compared with reinforcement being 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 process is commonly called simply reinforcement.
2. Negative reinforcement (a.k.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 noise continuously within the box; negative reinforcement would happen when the rat presses a lever to turn off the racket.
3. Positive punishment (likewise referred to every bit "punishment by contingent stimulation") occurs when a behavior (response) is followed by an aversive stimulus. Instance: hurting from a spanking, which would oftentimes result in a decrease in that behavior. Positive punishment is a disruptive term, so the procedure is usually referred to every bit "penalization".
4. Negative penalisation (punishment) (also called "penalisation by contingent withdrawal") occurs when a beliefs (response) is followed past the removal of a stimulus. Example: taking away a child's toy post-obit an undesired beliefs by him/her, which would result in a decrease in the undesirable beliefs.
5. Extinction occurs when a behavior (response) that had previously been reinforced is no longer effective. Instance: a rat is first given nutrient 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 ofttimes and and so stop. The lever pressing would so be said to be "extinguished."

It is important to note that actors (e.g. a rat) are not spoken of as being reinforced, punished, or extinguished; it is the deportment that are reinforced, punished, or extinguished. Reinforcement, punishment, and extinction are not terms whose utilize is restricted to the laboratory. Naturally-occurring consequences tin also reinforce, punish, or extinguish behavior and are not ever 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, but the following are the most basic and commonly used^{[xviii] [9]}

• Stock-still interval schedule: Reinforcement occurs post-obit the beginning response after a fixed fourth dimension has elapsed later the previous reinforcement. This schedule yields a "intermission-run" pattern of response; that is, later training on this schedule, the organism typically pauses after reinforcement, and and so begins to respond rapidly as the fourth dimension for the next reinforcement approaches.
• Variable interval schedule: Reinforcement occurs post-obit the first response subsequently a variable time has elapsed from the previous reinforcement. This schedule typically yields a relatively steady charge per unit of response that varies with the average time between reinforcements.
• Stock-still ratio schedule: Reinforcement occurs afterward 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 and so responds at a high rate. If the response requirement is low there may be no pause; if the response requirement is loftier the organism may quit responding altogether.
• Variable ratio schedule: Reinforcement occurs later 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 answer equally rapidly every bit they can, given the fourth dimension taken to obtain and eat reinforcement, until they are satiated.

Factors that alter the effectiveness of reinforcement and punishment [edit]

The effectiveness of reinforcement and penalty tin exist changed.

1. Satiation/Impecuniousness: The effectiveness of a positive or "appetitive" stimulus volition be reduced if the individual has received plenty 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 result will so increase. A subject with a full stomach wouldn't feel as motivated every bit a hungry one.^[nineteen]
2. Immediacy: An firsthand consequence is more constructive than a delayed one. If one gives a dog a treat for sitting within five seconds, the dog volition learn faster than if the treat is given later on thirty seconds.^[20]
3. Contingency: To exist near effective, reinforcement should occur consistently after responses and not at other times. Learning may be slower if reinforcement is intermittent, that is, following just some instances of the same response. Responses reinforced intermittently are usually slower to extinguish than are responses that have e'er been reinforced.^[nineteen]
4. Size: The size, or amount, of a stimulus often affects its potency equally a reinforcer. Humans and animals engage in cost-benefit analysis. If a lever printing brings ten food pellets, lever pressing may be learned more than speedily than if a press brings only i pellet. A pile of quarters from a slot machine may keep a gambler pulling the lever longer than a single quarter.

Most of these factors serve biological functions. For instance, the process of satiation helps the organism maintain a stable internal environment (homeostasis). When an organism has been deprived of saccharide, for instance, the taste of sugar is an effective reinforcer. When the organism'southward claret sugar reaches or exceeds an optimum level the taste of sugar becomes less effective or even aversive.

Shaping [edit]

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

Noncontingent reinforcement [edit]

Noncontingent reinforcement is the delivery of reinforcing stimuli regardless of the organism's behavior. Noncontingent reinforcement may be used in an attempt to reduce an undesired target behavior by reinforcing multiple alternative responses while extinguishing the target response.^[21] As no measured behavior is identified as beingness strengthened, there 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 under the control of stimuli that are nowadays when beliefs is reinforced. Such stimuli are called "discriminative stimuli." A so-called "three-term contingency" is the issue. That is, discriminative stimuli gear up the occasion for responses that produce reward or penalization. Example: a rat may be trained to press a lever simply when a light comes on; a domestic dog rushes to the kitchen when it hears the rattle of his/her food bag; a child reaches for processed when due south/he sees it on a table.

Discrimination, generalization & context [edit]

Nearly behavior is under stimulus command. Several aspects of this may be distinguished:

• Discrimination typically occurs when a response is reinforced simply in the presence of a specific stimulus. For instance, a pigeon might be fed for pecking at a red calorie-free and not at a green light; in result, information technology pecks at red and stops pecking at green. Many complex combinations of stimuli and other conditions have been studied; for example an organism might be reinforced on an interval schedule in the presence of one stimulus and on a ratio schedule in the presence of another.
• Generalization is the trend to respond to stimuli that are like to a previously trained discriminative stimulus. For example, having been trained to peck at "red" a pigeon might also 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 beliefs as exercise discriminative stimuli, though usually more weakly. Behaviors learned in one context may be absent, or altered, in another. This may crusade 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]

Well-nigh behavior cannot easily be described in terms of individual responses reinforced ane by one. The telescopic of operant analysis is expanded through the idea of behavioral chains, which are sequences of responses bound together by the three-term contingencies defined higher up. Chaining is based on the fact, experimentally demonstrated, that a discriminative stimulus non only sets the occasion for subsequent behavior, just it can also reinforce a beliefs that precedes information technology. That is, a discriminative stimulus is as well a "conditioned reinforcer". For case, the lite that sets the occasion for lever pressing may be used to reinforce "turning around" in the presence of a noise. This results in the sequence "noise – turn-around – calorie-free – press lever – nutrient". Much longer bondage can exist built by adding more stimuli and responses.

Escape and avoidance [edit]

In escape learning, a behavior terminates an (aversive) stimulus. For case, shielding one'south eyes from sunlight terminates the (aversive) stimulation of bright low-cal in one'south eyes. (This is an case of negative reinforcement, defined above.) Behavior that is maintained by preventing a stimulus is called "avoidance," as, for example, putting on sun glasses before going outdoors. Abstention beliefs raises the so-chosen "avoidance paradox", for, it may be asked, how can the not-occurrence of a stimulus serve as a reinforcer? This question is addressed past several theories of avoidance (see below).

Two kinds of experimental settings are normally used: discriminated and gratis-operant avoidance learning.

Discriminated avoidance learning [edit]

A discriminated abstention experiment involves a series of trials in which a neutral stimulus such every bit a light is followed by an aversive stimulus such every bit a daze. After the neutral stimulus appears an operant response such as a lever printing prevents or terminate the aversive stimulus. In early on trials, the discipline does not make the response until the aversive stimulus has come on, so these early trials are called "escape" trials. Every bit 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 workout because a neutral CS (conditioned stimulus) is paired with the aversive US (unconditioned stimulus); this idea underlies the ii-factor theory of avoidance learning described beneath.

Complimentary-operant avoidance learning [edit]

In complimentary-operant avoidance a subject periodically receives an aversive stimulus (often an electric stupor) unless an operant response is fabricated; the response delays the onset of the daze. In this state of affairs, dissimilar discriminated avoidance, no prior stimulus signals the shock. Two crucial time intervals determine the rate of avoidance learning. This first is the Due south-Due south (stupor-stupor) interval. This is time between successive shocks in the absenteeism of a response. The second interval is the R-S (response-shock) interval. This specifies the fourth dimension by which an operant response delays the onset of the next shock. Note that each time the subject area performs the operant response, the R-Southward interval without shock begins afresh.

Ii-procedure theory of avoidance [edit]

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

a) Classical conditioning of fearfulness. Initially the organism experiences the pairing of a CS with an aversive US. The theory assumes that this pairing creates an association betwixt the CS and the US through classical conditioning and, because of the aversive nature of the US, the CS comes to arm-twist a conditioned emotional reaction (CER) – "fear." b) Reinforcement of the operant response by fear-reduction. As a result of the first process, the CS now signals fear; this unpleasant emotional reaction serves to motivate operant responses, and responses that terminate the CS are reinforced past fear termination. Note that the theory does not say that the organism "avoids" the US in the sense of anticipating it, but rather that the organism "escapes" an aversive internal land that is caused by the CS. Several experimental findings seem to run counter to two-cistron theory. For example, avoidance beliefs often extinguishes very slowly even when the initial CS-United states pairing never occurs once again, so the fear response might be expected to extinguish (come across Classical conditioning). Farther, animals that have learned to avoid oftentimes show little evidence of fear, suggesting that escape from fear is not necessary to maintain avoidance behavior.^[23]

Operant or "one-gene" theory [edit]

Some theorists suggest that abstention beliefs may just be a special case 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 upshot 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 can act every bit a reinforcer. Cognitive theories of avoidance take this thought a step farther. For example, a rat comes to "look" shock if it fails to press a lever and to "expect no shock" if it presses it, and abstention beliefs is strengthened if these expectancies are confirmed.^[23]

Operant hoarding [edit]

Operant hoarding refers to the ascertainment that rats reinforced in a certain way may permit nutrient pellets to accumulate in a nutrient tray instead of retrieving those pellets. In this procedure, retrieval of the pellets e'er instituted a 1-minute period of extinction during which no additional food pellets were bachelor just those that had been accumulated earlier could exist consumed. This finding appears to contradict the usual finding that rats behave impulsively in situations in which in that location is a choice between a smaller food object right away and a larger food object after 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 by 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 a conditioned stimulus, or later on a chief advantage if no conditioned stimulus exists. These neurons are equally active for positive and negative reinforcers, and take been shown to be related to neuroplasticity in many cortical regions.^[27] Prove besides exists that dopamine is activated at similar times. In that location is considerable bear witness that dopamine participates in both reinforcement and aversive learning.^[28] Dopamine pathways project much more densely onto frontal cortex regions. Cholinergic projections, in dissimilarity, are dense even in the posterior cortical regions like the master visual cortex. A study of patients with Parkinson's disease, a condition attributed to the insufficient action 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 opposite to be the instance, positive reinforcement proving to be the more constructive form of learning when dopamine activeness is loftier.

A neurochemical process 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 short pulse of dopamine onto many dendrites, thus broadcasting a global reinforcement signal to postsynaptic neurons."^[thirty] 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 have been the behavior responsible for successfully achieving reinforcement. Simply when the application of reinforcement is either less firsthand or less contingent (less consistent), the power of dopamine to deed upon the advisable synapses is reduced.

Questions about the police force of effect [edit]

A number of observations seem to evidence that operant behavior can exist established without reinforcement in the sense divers above. Most 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 example, a response key is lighted so food is presented. When this is repeated a few times a pigeon bailiwick begins to peck the cardinal even though food comes whether the bird pecks or not. Similarly, rats brainstorm to handle small objects, such as a lever, when food is presented nearby.^{[31] [32]} Strikingly, pigeons and rats persist in this behavior even when pecking the key or pressing the lever leads to less nutrient (omission training).^{[33] [34]} Some other apparent operant behavior that appears without reinforcement is contrafreeloading.

These observations and others appear to contradict the law of event, and they have prompted some researchers to propose new conceptualizations of operant reinforcement (east.thou.^{[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 exist influenced by both classical contingencies (stimulus-response) and operant contingencies (response-reinforcement), and the experimenter'southward task is to work out how these interact.^[38]

Applications [edit]

Reinforcement and penalty are ubiquitous in human social interactions, and a nifty many applications of operant principles have been suggested and implemented. The post-obit are some examples.

Addiction and dependence [edit]

Positive and negative reinforcement play central roles in the evolution and maintenance of habit and drug dependence. An addictive drug is intrinsically rewarding; that is, information technology functions every bit a primary positive reinforcer of drug apply. The encephalon's advantage system assigns information technology incentive salience (i.due east., information technology is "wanted" or "desired"),^{[39] [40] [41]} and so as an addiction develops, deprivation of the drug leads to craving. In addition, stimuli associated with drug use – e.k., the sight of a syringe, and the location of employ – become associated with the intense reinforcement induced past the drug.^{[39] [40] [41]} These previously neutral stimuli acquire several properties: their advent can induce peckish, and they tin become conditioned positive reinforcers of continued use.^{[39] [forty] [41]} Thus, if an addicted individual encounters 1 of these drug cues, a peckish for the associated drug may reappear. For example, anti-drug agencies previously used posters with images of drug paraphernalia equally an try to evidence the dangers of drug utilize. However, 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 alleviate or "escape" the symptoms of concrete dependence (east.thou., tremors and sweating) and/or psychological dependence (e.g., anhedonia, restlessness, irritability, and feet) that arise during the state of drug withdrawal.^[39]

Animal preparation [edit]

Brute trainers and pet owners were applying the principles and practices of operant workout long earlier these ideas were named and studied, and animal training still provides 1 of the clearest and almost convincing examples of operant control. Of the concepts and procedures described in this commodity, a few of the nigh salient are the following: (a) availability of primary reinforcement (e.thousand. a bag of domestic dog yummies); (b) the use of secondary reinforcement, (e.m. sounding a clicker immediately later on a desired response, then giving yummy); (c) contingency, assuring that reinforcement (e.m. the clicker) follows the desired behavior and not something else; (d) shaping, as in gradually getting a dog to jump higher and college; (e) intermittent reinforcement, as in gradually reducing the frequency of reinforcement to induce persistent beliefs without satiation; (f) chaining, where a complex behavior is gradually constructed from smaller units.^[42]

Example of animal training from Seaworld related on Operant workout ^[43]

Animate being training has effects on positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement. Schedules of reinforcements may play a large role on the creature training instance.

Applied behavior assay [edit]

Applied behavior analysis is the subject area initiated by B. F. Skinner that applies the principles of conditioning to the modification of socially significant human behavior. Information technology uses the basic concepts of conditioning theory, including conditioned stimulus (Southward^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 3 terms combine to form Skinner's "three-term contingency": a discriminative stimulus sets the occasion for responses that lead to reinforcement. Researchers have constitute the following protocol to be constructive when they use the tools of operant workout to modify homo beliefs:^{[ citation needed ]}

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

Practitioners of applied behavior analysis (ABA) bring these procedures, and many variations and developments of them, to bear on a multifariousness of socially meaning behaviors and issues. In many cases, practitioners use operant techniques to develop effective, socially acceptable behaviors to replace aberrant behaviors. The techniques of ABA take been finer applied in to such things every bit early intensive behavioral interventions for children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD)^[44] enquiry on the principles influencing criminal beliefs, HIV prevention,^[45] conservation of natural resource,^[46] education,^[47] gerontology,^[48] health and exercise,^[49] industrial safety,^[l] language acquisition,^[51] littering,^[52] medical procedures,^[53] parenting,^[54] psychotherapy,^{[ citation needed ]} seatbelt use,^[55] astringent mental disorders,^[56] sports,^[57] substance abuse, phobias, pediatric feeding disorders, and zoo management and care of animals.^[58] Some of these applications are amongst those described below.

Child behavior – parent management training [edit]

Providing positive reinforcement for appropriate child behaviors is a major focus of parent direction training. Typically, parents learn to reward appropriate behavior through social rewards (such as praise, smiles, and hugs) also as physical rewards (such equally stickers or points towards a larger reward every bit part of an incentive system created collaboratively with the child).^[59] In add-on, parents larn to select simple behaviors as an initial focus and reward each of the minor steps that their kid achieves towards reaching a larger goal (this concept is chosen "successive approximations").^{[59] [lx]}

Economics [edit]

Both psychologists and economists have get interested in applying operant concepts and findings to the behavior of humans in the market place. An example is the analysis of consumer demand, as indexed by the corporeality of a commodity that is purchased. In economic science, the degree to which price influences consumption is called "the cost elasticity of demand." Certain commodities are more rubberband than others; for example, a modify in price of certain foods may accept a large effect on the amount bought, while gasoline and other everyday consumables may be less affected by toll 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]

Every bit 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 but 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 habit.^[62]

Military machine psychology [edit]

Human beings have an innate resistance to killing and are reluctant to act in a direct, aggressive way towards members of their own species, even to save life. This resistance to killing has caused infantry to exist remarkably inefficient throughout the history of military machine warfare.^[63]

This phenomenon was not understood until S.L.A. Marshall (Brigadier General and military historian) undertook interview studies of WWII infantry immediately post-obit combat appointment. Marshall'south well-known and controversial volume, Men Against Burn down, revealed that only fifteen% of soldiers fired their rifles with the purpose of killing in gainsay.^[64] Following acceptance of Marshall'southward research past the US Ground forces in 1946, the Human being Resources Research Office of the Usa Army began implementing new grooming protocols which resemble operant conditioning methods. Subsequent applications of such methods increased the percentage of soldiers able to kill to around 50% in Korea and over 90% in Vietnam.^[63] Revolutions in grooming included replacing traditional pop-upwardly firing ranges with three-dimensional, man-shaped, pop-upwardly targets which collapsed when striking. This provided immediate feedback and acted as positive reinforcement for a soldier's beliefs.^[65] Other improvements to military grooming methods accept included the timed firing course; more realistic training; high repetitions; praise from superiors; marksmanship rewards; and grouping recognition. Negative reinforcement includes peer accountability or the requirement to retake courses. Modern military training conditions mid-brain response to combat pressure level past closely simulating actual combat, using mainly Pavlovian classical conditioning and Skinnerian operant conditioning (both forms of behaviorism).^[63]

Modern marksmanship training is such an excellent example of behaviorism that information technology has been used for years in the introductory psychology grade taught to all cadets at the US Armed services Academy at West Signal as a classic case of operant conditioning. In the 1980s, during a visit to West Betoken, B.F. Skinner identified modern military marksmanship training equally a well-nigh-perfect awarding of operant conditioning.^[65]

Lt. Col. Dave Grossman states about operant conditioning and US War machine preparation that:

It is entirely possible that no i intentionally sabbatum downwardly to use operant conditioning or behavior modification techniques to railroad train soldiers in this expanse…But from the standpoint of a psychologist who is likewise a historian and a career soldier, information technology has become increasingly obvious to me that this is exactly what has been accomplished.^[63]

Nudge theory [edit]

Nudge theory (or nudge) is a concept in behavioural science, political theory and economics which argues that indirect suggestions to attempt to accomplish non-forced compliance can influence the motives, incentives and decision making of groups and individuals, at least as finer – if non more effectively – than direct education, legislation, or enforcement.

Praise [edit]

The concept of praise as a means 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 beliefs is made more probable to occur by contingently praising said behavior.^[66] Hundreds of studies take demonstrated the effectiveness of praise in promoting positive behaviors, notably in the written report of teacher and parent employ of praise on child in promoting improved behavior and academic performance,^{[67] [68]} but also in the report of work operation.^[69] Praise has also been demonstrated to reinforce positive behaviors in non-praised side by side individuals (such as a classmate of the praise recipient) through vicarious reinforcement.^[70] Praise may be more or less effective in changing behavior depending on its form, content and delivery. In order for praise to consequence positive beliefs modify, it must be contingent on the positive behavior (i.due east., just administered after the targeted beliefs is enacted), must specify the particulars of the behavior that is to exist reinforced, and must be delivered sincerely and credibly.^[71]

Acknowledging the effect of praise every bit a positive reinforcement strategy, numerous behavioral and cerebral behavioral interventions have incorporated the apply of praise in their protocols.^{[72] [73]} The strategic apply of praise is recognized as an evidence-based practice in both classroom management^[72] and parenting preparation 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 have been done on the effect cerebral-behavioral therapy and operant-behavioral therapy have on different medical conditions. When patients adult cognitive and behavioral techniques that changed their behaviors, attitudes, and emotions; their pain severity decreased. The results of these studies showed an influence of cognitions on pain perception and affect presented explained the general efficacy of Cerebral-Behavioral therapy (CBT) and Operant-Behavioral therapy (OBT).

Psychological manipulation [edit]

Braiker identified the post-obit 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 every bit a forced express mirth or smile, and public recognition.
• Negative reinforcement: may involve removing i from a negative situation
• Intermittent or fractional reinforcement: Partial or intermittent negative reinforcement can create an constructive climate of fear and dubiety. Partial or intermittent positive reinforcement can encourage the victim to persist – for example in virtually forms of gambling, the gambler is likely to win at present and once again but nonetheless lose money overall.
• Punishment: includes nagging, yelling, the silent treatment, intimidation, threats, swearing, emotional blackmail, the guilt trip, sulking, crying, and playing the victim.
• Traumatic one-trial learning: using exact corruption, explosive acrimony, or other intimidating behavior to plant say-so or superiority; even one incident of such behavior can condition or train victims to avoid upsetting, confronting or contradicting the manipulator.

Traumatic bonding [edit]

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

The other source indicated that ^[77] 'The necessary conditions for traumatic bonding are that ane person must dominate the other and that the level of abuse chronically spikes and so subsides. The human relationship is characterized by periods of permissive, empathetic, and even affectionate beliefs 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'south options and so as to perpetuate the power imbalance. Any threat to the balance of dominance and submission may be met with an escalating bicycle of punishment ranging from seething intimidation to intensely violent outbursts. The victimizer also isolates the victim from other sources of support, which reduces the likelihood of detection and intervention, impairs the victim'south ability to receive countervailing self-referent feedback, and strengthens the sense of unilateral dependency...The traumatic effects of these abusive relationships may include the impairment of the victim'south capacity for authentic cocky-appraisal, leading to a sense of personal inadequacy and a subordinate sense of dependence upon the dominating person. Victims also may run into a diversity of unpleasant social and legal consequences of their emotional and behavioral amalgamation 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, adding a blazon of positive reinforcement through a variable rate schedule to proceed the player playing. This can lead to the pathology of video game addiction.^[78]

Equally function of a trend in the monetization of video games during the 2010s, some games offered loot boxes as rewards or as items purchasable by real world funds. Boxes contains a random selection of in-game items. The practice has been tied to the aforementioned methods that slot machines and other gambling devices dole out rewards, as it follows a variable rate 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 utilize those items every bit virtual currency for online gambling or trading for existent world money has created a pare gambling marketplace that is under legal evaluation.^[79]

Workplace civilization of fear [edit]

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

Private differences in sensitivity to reward, punishment, and motivation have been studied under the bounds 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 practice of defensive medicine. Prabhu reviews the article by Cole and discusses how the responses of ii groups of neurosurgeons are archetype operant behavior. Ane grouping practice in a land 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 inverse their exercise in response to a negative feedback (fear from lawsuit) in the grouping that practiced in a state with no restrictions on medical lawsuits.^[82]

See also [edit]

• Abusive power and control
• Animal testing
• Behavioral dissimilarity
• Behaviorism (branch of psychology referring to methodological and radical behaviorism)
• Behavior modification (old expression for ABA; modifies beliefs either through consequences without incorporating stimulus control 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 beliefs)
• Consumer demand tests (animals)
• Educational psychology
• Educational technology
• Experimental analysis of behavior (experimental enquiry principles in operant and respondent conditioning)
• Exposure therapy (also called desensitization)
• Graduated exposure therapy (also called systematic desensitization)
• Habituation
• Jerzy Konorski
• Learned industriousness
• Matching police force
• Negative (positive) contrast effect
• Radical behaviorism (conceptual theory of behavior analysis that expands behaviorism to also cover private events (thoughts and feelings) as forms of behavior)
• Reinforcement
• Pavlovian-instrumental transfer
• Preference tests (animals)
• Premack principle
• Sensitization
• Social conditioning
• Order for Quantitative Analysis of Behavior
• Spontaneous recovery

References [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b} Tarantola, Tor; Kumaran, Dharshan; Dayan, Peters; De Martino, Benedetto (10 October 2017). "Prior preferences beneficially influence social and not-social learning". Nature Communications. 8 (1): 817. Bibcode:2017NatCo...eight..817T. doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00826-eight. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC5635122. PMID 29018195.
2. ^ Jenkins, H. M. "Creature Learning and Behavior Theory" Ch. 5 in Hearst, Due east. "The Beginning Century of Experimental Psychology" Hillsdale N. J., Earlbaum, 1979
3. ^ ^{a b} Thorndike, E.L. (1901). "Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals". Psychological Review Monograph Supplement. two: i–109.
4. ^ Miltenberger, R. One thousand. "Behavioral Modification: Principles and Procedures". Thomson/Wadsworth, 2008. p. 9.
5. ^ Miltenberger, R. G., & Crosland, K. A. (2014). Parenting. The wiley blackwell handbook of operant and classical conditioning. (pp. 509–531) Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118468135.ch20
6. ^ Skinner, B. F. "The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Assay", 1938 New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
7. ^ Skinner, B. F. (1950). "Are theories of learning necessary?". Psychological Review. 57 (4): 193–216. doi:10.1037/h0054367. PMID 15440996. S2CID 17811847.
8. ^ Schacter, Daniel L., Daniel T. Gilbert, and Daniel M. Wegner. "B. F. Skinner: The role of reinforcement and Punishment", subsection in: Psychology; 2nd 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". Almanac 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 science
12. ^ Skinner, B. F. "Science and Man Behavior", 1953. New York: MacMillan
13. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1948). Walden Two. Indianapolis: Hackett
14. ^ Skinner, B. F. "Exact 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:10.3758/bf03196324. PMID 12613672.
16. ^ Skinner, B.F. (2014). Science and Man Behavior (PDF). Cambridge, MA: The B.F. Skinner Foundation. p. 70. Retrieved thirteen March 2019.
17. ^ Schultz W (2015). "Neuronal reward and decision signals: from theories to data". Physiological Reviews. 95 (iii): 853–951. doi:ten.1152/physrev.00023.2014. PMC4491543. PMID 26109341. Rewards in operant conditioning are positive reinforcers. ... Operant behavior gives a good definition for rewards. Anything that makes an individual come back for more is a positive reinforcer and therefore a reward. Although it provides a skillful definition, positive reinforcement is only one of several reward functions. ... Rewards are attractive. They are motivating and make us exert an endeavour. ... Rewards induce approach behavior, too called appetitive or preparatory behavior, and consummatory beliefs. ... Thus any stimulus, object, result, action, or situation that has the potential to make us approach and swallow it is by definition a reward.
18. ^ Schacter et al.2011 Psychology 2nd ed. pg.280–284 Reference for unabridged department Principles version 130317
19. ^ ^{a b} Miltenberger, R. G. "Behavioral Modification: Principles and Procedures". Thomson/Wadsworth, 2008. p. 84.
20. ^ Miltenberger, R. M. "Behavioral Modification: Principles and Procedures". Thomson/Wadsworth, 2008. p. 86.
21. ^ Tucker, M.; Sigafoos, J.; Bushell, H. (1998). "Utilize 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, Yard. (1999). "Noncontingent reinforcement: an inappropriate description of time-based schedules that reduce behavior". Journal of Practical Behavior Analysis. 32 (two): 237–238. doi:10.1901/jaba.1999.32-237. PMC1284187.
23. ^ ^{a b c} Pierce & Cheney (2004) Beliefs Analysis and Learning
24. ^ Cole, One thousand.R. (1990). "Operant hoarding: A new image for the report of self-command". Periodical of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 53 (2): 247–262. doi:ten.1901/jeab.1990.53-247. PMC1323010. PMID 2324665.
25. ^ "Activity of pallidal neurons during move", M.R. DeLong, J. Neurophysiol., 34:414–27, 1971
26. ^ ^{a b} Richardson RT, DeLong MR (1991): Electrophysiological studies of the office of the nucleus basalis in primates. In Napier TC, Kalivas P, Hamin I (eds), The Basal Forebrain: Anatomy to Function (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 13, 2009
29. ^ Michael J. Frank, Lauren C. Seeberger, and Randall C. O'Reilly (2004) "Past Carrot or by Stick: Cognitive Reinforcement Learning in Parkinsonism," Science 4, November 2004
30. ^ Schultz, Wolfram (1998). "Predictive Reward Betoken of Dopamine Neurons". The Journal of Neurophysiology. lxxx (ane): 1–27. doi:10.1152/jn.1998.fourscore.1.1. PMID 9658025.
31. ^ Timberlake, W (1983). "Rats' responses to a moving object related to food or water: A behavior-systems analysis". Animate being Learning & Behavior. 11 (3): 309–320. doi:ten.3758/bf03199781.
32. ^ Neuringer, A.J. (1969). "Animals answer for food in the presence of gratis food". Scientific discipline. 166 (3903): 399–401. Bibcode:1969Sci...166..399N. doi:x.1126/science.166.3903.399. PMID 5812041. S2CID 35969740.
33. ^ Williams, D.R.; Williams, H. (1969). "Auto-maintenance in the dove: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 12 (4): 511–520. doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-511. PMC1338642. PMID 16811370.
34. ^ Peden, B.F.; Brown, M.P.; Hearst, East. (1977). "Persistent approaches to a signal for nutrient despite food omission for approaching". Periodical of Experimental Psychology: Animal Beliefs Processes. 3 (4): 377–399. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.3.iv.377.
35. ^ Gardner, R.A.; Gardner, B.T. (1988). "Feedforward vs feedbackward: An ethological alternative to the law of issue". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 11 (3): 429–447. doi:10.1017/s0140525x00058258.
36. ^ Gardner, R. A. & Gardner B.T. (1998) The structure of learning from sign stimuli to sign linguistic communication. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. ^ Baum, W. M. (2012). "Rethinking reinforcement: Allocation, induction and contingency". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 97 (1): 101–124. doi:x.1901/jeab.2012.97-101. PMC3266735. PMID 22287807.
38. ^ Locurto, C. M., Terrace, H. Due south., & Gibbon, J. (1981) Autoshaping and workout theory. New York: Academic Press.
39. ^ ^{a b c d} Edwards S (2016). "Reinforcement principles for habit medicine; from recreational drug use to psychiatric disorder". Neuroscience for Addiction Medicine: From Prevention to Rehabilitation - Constructs and Drugs. Prog. Brain Res. Progress in Encephalon Research. Vol. 223. pp. 63–76. doi:x.1016/bs.pbr.2015.07.005. ISBN9780444635457. PMID 26806771. Driveling substances (ranging from alcohol to psychostimulants) are initially ingested at regular occasions according to their positive reinforcing properties. Chiefly, repeated exposure to rewarding substances sets off a chain of secondary reinforcing events, whereby cues and contexts associated with drug use may themselves become reinforcing and thereby contribute to the continued use and possible abuse of the substance(s) of choice. ...
    An important dimension of reinforcement highly relevant to the habit procedure (and especially relapse) is secondary reinforcement (Stewart, 1992). Secondary reinforcers (in many cases likewise considered conditioned reinforcers) likely drive the majority of reinforcement processes in humans. In the specific case of drug [addiction], cues and contexts that are intimately and repeatedly associated with drug use will often themselves get reinforcing ... A cardinal 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 improver to the primary reinforcers themselves, may persist and even get sensitized over time 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 terminate some ongoing (presumably aversive) stimulus. In this case nosotros tin ascertain a negative reinforcer equally 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 corruption are self-administered to quench a motivational need in the country of withdrawal (Wikler, 1952).
40. ^ ^{a b c} Berridge KC (April 2012). "From prediction error to incentive salience: mesolimbic computation of reward motivation". Eur. J. Neurosci. 35 (vii): 1124–1143. doi:ten.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.07990.10. PMC3325516. PMID 22487042. When a Pavlovian CS+ is attributed with incentive salience it not only triggers 'wanting' for its UCS, but often the cue itself becomes highly bonny – even to an irrational degree. This cue attraction is another signature feature of incentive salience. The CS becomes difficult non to look 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 effort to 'consume' the CS somewhat every bit its UCS (e.g., consume, drink, smoke, take sex with, take every bit drug). 'Wanting' of a CS can plow also turn the formerly neutral stimulus into an instrumental conditioned reinforcer, and then that an individual volition work to obtain the cue (yet, at that place exist alternative psychological mechanisms for conditioned reinforcement also).
41. ^ ^{a b c} Berridge KC, Kringelbach ML (May 2015). "Pleasure systems in the brain". Neuron. 86 (iii): 646–664. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.02.018. PMC4425246. PMID 25950633. An important goal in future for addiction neuroscience is to understand how intense motivation becomes narrowly focused on a particular target. Habit has been suggested to exist partly due to excessive incentive salience produced past sensitized or hyper-reactive dopamine systems that produce intense 'wanting' (Robinson and Berridge, 1993). Just why one target becomes more than '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 as taking the addictive drug or the particular compulsions. In Pavlovian reward situations, some cues for reward become more 'wanted' more than others every bit powerful motivational magnets, in ways that differ across individuals (Robinson et al., 2014b; Saunders and Robinson, 2013). ... All the same, hedonic effects might well change over fourth dimension. Every bit 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), fifty-fifty if opioid hedonic mechanisms underwent down-regulation due to continual drug stimulation, producing 'liking' tolerance. Incentive-sensitization would produce habit, by selectively magnifying cue-triggered 'wanting' to take the drug over again, and and then powerfully cause motivation fifty-fifty if the drug became less pleasant (Robinson and Berridge, 1993).
42. ^ McGreevy, P & Boakes, R."Carrots and Sticks: Principles of Animal Training".(Sydney: "Sydney University Press"., 2011)
43. ^ "All Most Brute Training - Basics | SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment". Animal training nuts. Seaworld parks.
44. ^ Dillenburger, K.; Keenan, Yard. (2009). "None of the As in ABA represent autism: dispelling the myths". J Intellect Dev Disabil. 34 (2): 193–95. doi:10.1080/13668250902845244. PMID 19404840. S2CID 1818966.
45. ^ DeVries, J.E.; Burnette, M.M.; Redmon, W.One thousand. (1991). "AIDS prevention: Improving nurses' compliance with glove wearing through performance feedback". Journal of Practical Behavior Analysis. 24 (4): 705–11. doi:x.1901/jaba.1991.24-705. PMC1279627. PMID 1797773.
46. ^ Brothers, Grand.J.; Krantz, P.J.; McClannahan, L.East. (1994). "Office paper recycling: A function of container proximity". Periodical of Applied Behavior Analysis. 27 (i): 153–60. doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-153. PMC1297784. PMID 16795821.
47. ^ Dardig, Jill C.; Heward, William L.; 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 analysis in education: achievements, challenges, and opportunities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall. ISBN978-0-13-111339-eight.
48. ^ Gallagher, S.G.; Keenan One thousand. (2000). "Independent use of activity materials by the elderly in a residential setting". Periodical of Applied Behavior Analysis. 33 (3): 325–28. doi:10.1901/jaba.2000.33-325. PMC1284256. PMID 11051575.
49. ^ De Luca, R.V.; Holborn, S.West. (1992). "Effects of a variable-ratio reinforcement schedule with changing criteria on exercise in obese and nonobese boys". Journal of Practical Beliefs Analysis. 25 (iii): 671–79. doi:x.1901/jaba.1992.25-671. PMC1279749. PMID 1429319.
50. ^ Fox, D.K.; Hopkins, B.L.; Acrimony, W.G. (1987). "The long-term furnishings of a token economy on condom functioning in opencast mining". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 20 (iii): 215–24. doi:10.1901/jaba.1987.20-215. PMC1286011. PMID 3667473.
51. ^ Drasgow, E.; Halle, J.W.; Ostrosky, G.M. (1998). "Effects of differential reinforcement on the generalization of a replacement mand in three children with severe language delays". Journal of Practical Behavior Analysis. 31 (iii): 357–74. doi:10.1901/jaba.1998.31-357. PMC1284128. PMID 9757580.
52. ^ Powers, R.B.; Osborne, J.M.; Anderson, Eastward.G. (1973). "Positive reinforcement of litter removal in the natural environment". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 6 (4): 579–86. doi:ten.1901/jaba.1973.six-579. PMC1310876. PMID 16795442.
53. ^ Hagopian, L.P.; Thompson, R.H. (1999). "Reinforcement of compliance with respiratory treatment in a child with cystic fibrosis". Periodical of Practical Beliefs Analysis. 32 (ii): 233–36. doi:10.1901/jaba.1999.32-233. PMC1284184. PMID 10396778.
54. ^ Kuhn, S.A.C.; Lerman, D.C.; Vorndran, C.M. (2003). "Pyramidal training for families of children with problem behavior". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 36 (1): 77–88. doi:x.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 apply of motorists who exercise not regularly habiliment seatbelts". Periodical of Applied Behavior Analysis. 38 (two): 195–203. doi:x.1901/jaba.2005.48-04. PMC1226155. PMID 16033166.
56. ^ Wong, South.E.; Martinez-Diaz, J.A.; Massel, H.G.; Edelstein, B.A.; Wiegand, W.; Bowen, 50.; Liberman, R.P. (1993). "Conversational skills training with schizophrenic inpatients: A study of generalization across settings and conversants". Behavior Therapy. 24 (2): 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 Beliefs Analysis. 35 (three): 247–57. doi:10.1901/jaba.2002.35-247. PMC1284383. PMID 12365738.
58. ^ Forthman, D.Fifty.; Ogden, J.J. (1992). "The role of applied behavior assay in zoo management: Today and tomorrow". Journal of Practical Behavior Analysis. 25 (iii): 647–52. doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-647. PMC1279745. PMID 16795790.
59. ^ ^{a b} Kazdin AE (2010). Problem-solving skills training and parent management grooming for oppositional defiant disorder and acquit disorder. Testify-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (2nd ed.), 211–226. New York: Guilford Press.
60. ^ Forgatch MS, Patterson GR (2010). Parent direction preparation — Oregon model: An intervention for antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (2d ed.), 159–78. New York: Guilford Printing.
61. ^ Domjan, Chiliad. (2009). The Principles of Learning and Beliefs. 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 Stock-still-Ratio 3 Schedule". The Spanish Journal of Psychology. 3 (15): 922–929. doi:10.5209/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 Impale in War and Society. Boston: Little Brown. ISBN978-0316040938.
64. ^ Marshall, S.L.A. (1947). Men Against Fire: the Problem of Battle Command in Futurity State of war. Washington: Infantry Journal. ISBN978-0-8061-3280-viii.
65. ^ ^{a b} Murray, Thou.A., Grossman, D., & Kentridge, R.W. (21 October 2018). "Behavioral Psychology". killology.com/behavioral-psychology. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
66. ^ Kazdin, Alan (1978). History of behavior modification: Experimental foundations of gimmicky enquiry . Baltimore: University Park Press. ISBN9780839112051.
67. ^ Strain, Phillip Southward.; Lambert, Deborah Fifty.; Kerr, Mary Margaret; Stagg, Vaughan; Lenkner, Donna A. (1983). "Naturalistic assessment of children's compliance to teachers' requests and consequences for compliance". Journal of Applied Behavior Assay. 16 (2): 243–249. doi:10.1901/jaba.1983.16-243. PMC1307879. PMID 16795665.
68. ^ ^{a b} Garland, Ann F.; Hawley, Kristin M.; Brookman-Frazee, Lauren; Hurlburt, Michael S. (May 2008). "Identifying Common Elements of Evidence-Based Psychosocial Treatments for Children's Disruptive Beliefs Problems". Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 47 (5): 505–514. doi:10.1097/CHI.0b013e31816765c2. PMID 18356768.
69. ^ Crowell, Charles R.; Anderson, D. Chris; Abel, Dawn Thou.; Sergio, Joseph P. (1988). "Task clarification, operation feedback, and social praise: Procedures for improving the customer service of banking concern tellers". Journal of Applied Beliefs Analysis. 21 (one): 65–71. doi:x.1901/jaba.1988.21-65. PMC1286094. PMID 16795713.
70. ^ Kazdin, Alan East. (1973). "The result of vicarious reinforcement on attentive behavior in the classroom". Journal of Applied Beliefs Analysis. 6 (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). "Evidence-based Practices in Classroom Management: Considerations for Enquiry to Practice". Didactics and Handling of Children. 31 (1): 351–380. doi:10.1353/etc.0.0007. S2CID 145087451.
73. ^ Weisz, John R.; Kazdin, Alan E. (2010). Bear witness-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents. Guilford Press.
74. ^ ^{a b} Braiker, Harriet B. (2004). Who'southward Pulling Your Strings ? How to Break The Cycle of Manipulation. ISBN978-0-07-144672-3.
75. ^ Dutton; Painter (1981). "Traumatic Bonding: The development of emotional attachments in battered women and other relationships of intermittent abuse". Victimology: An International Periodical (7).
76. ^ Chrissie Sanderson. Counselling Survivors of Domestic Abuse. Jessica Kingsley Publishers; xv June 2008. ISBN 978-1-84642-811-one. p. 84.
77. ^ "Traumatic Bonding | Encyclopedia.com". www.encyclopedia.com.
78. ^ John Hopson: Behavioral Game Design, Gamasutra, 27 April 2001
79. ^ Hood, Vic (12 October 2017). "Are loot boxes gambling?". Eurogamer . Retrieved 12 October 2017.
80. ^ Petty tyranny in organizations, Ashforth, Blake, Homo Relations, Vol. 47, No. vii, 755–778 (1994)
81. ^ Helge H, Sheehan MJ, Cooper CL, Einarsen Due south "Organisational Effects of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practise (2010)
82. ^ Operant Conditioning and the Practice of Defensive Medicine. Vikram C. Prabhu World Neurosurgery, 2016-07-01, Book 91, Pages 603–605

External links [edit]

Wait upwardly operant in Wiktionary, the complimentary lexicon.

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

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

Posted by: brownpiten2002.blogspot.com

Share this post