Operant Conditioning vs. Classical Conditioning: A Comparison of Learning Processes.
Classical conditioning and operant conditioning are two important concepts in the study of learning and behavior modification. While both involve forming associations that can change behaviors, they differ in their underlying processes and applications. This paper will provide an overview of classical conditioning and operant conditioning, comparing their key characteristics and mechanisms.
Classical conditioning was first described by Ivan Pavlov in the late 19th century through his famous dog experiments. In classical conditioning, an inherent, unlearned response becomes linked to a new stimulus through repeated pairings (Martin & Caramazza, 2014). For example, in Pavlov’s experiments dogs naturally salivated, an unconditioned response, to the unconditioned stimulus of food. Over time of pairing the ringing of a bell, a conditioned stimulus, with the arrival of food, the dogs learned to associate the bell with the food. Eventually the dogs would salivate to the bell alone as a conditioned response (McLeod, 2018).
The process of classical conditioning is passive, with the subject having no control over the association that is formed. A conditioned stimulus simply must precede an unconditioned stimulus repeatedly for them to become linked in the subject’s mind. However, classical conditioning underlies important phenomena like phobias and brand recognition that are learned involuntarily (Martin & Caramazza, 2014). It also explains stimulus generalization and discrimination, processes by which similar or different stimuli elicit conditioned responses (McLeod, 2018).
Operant conditioning, proposed by B.F. Skinner, is a more active process where voluntary behaviors are purposefully modified by their consequences (Martin & Caramazza, 2014). Through reinforcement or punishment, behaviors can be strengthened or weakened. Reinforcement, such as rewards or escape from an unpleasant stimulus, increases the likelihood of behaviors. Punishment, including negative stimuli like electric shocks or loss of privileges, decreases behaviors (McLeod, 2018).
Complex behaviors can be taught using operant conditioning techniques like shaping and chaining. For example, training an animal may start with rewarding closer approximations to a final behavior until it is learned. Multistep tasks can also be broken down and strengthened individually. Operant conditioning explains how reinforcement schedules impact response rates and resistance to extinction (Martin & Caramazza, 2014).
In summary, while both classical and operant conditioning are forms of associative learning, they differ in whether the subject plays a passive or active role. Classical conditioning links stimuli involuntarily, whereas operant conditioning modifies behaviors purposefully based on consequences. Together these concepts provide comprehensive frameworks for understanding a wide variety of learned behaviors.
Martin, G. N., & Caramazza, A. (2014). Learning and transfer: Introduction and overview. In Learning and memory: conditioning is to generate some form of change in behavior. Psychology essay writing help . Dissertation Homework help – WritersA comprehensive reference (pp. 3-14). Academic Press.
McLeod, S. A. (2018, May 21). Classical and operant conditioning. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/classical-conditioning.html
###
Study Notes.
Operant vs Classical Conditioning
Operant and classical conditioning are two types of learning processes that are based on the association of stimuli and responses. However, they differ in the nature of the stimuli and responses, as well as the role of reinforcement and punishment.
Classical conditioning is a type of learning in which a neutral stimulus becomes associated with a stimulus that elicits a reflexive response. For example, Pavlov’s dogs learned to salivate at the sound of a bell that was paired with food. The food was the unconditioned stimulus (UCS) that elicited the unconditioned response (UCR) of salivation. The bell was the conditioned stimulus (CS) that elicited the conditioned response (CR) of salivation after repeated pairings with the UCS.
Operant conditioning is a type of learning in which the consequences of a behavior influence the likelihood of its repetition. For example, Skinner’s rats learned to press a lever to obtain food or avoid shock. The food and shock were the reinforcers that increased or decreased the frequency of the lever-pressing behavior. The lever-pressing behavior was the operant response that was shaped by the reinforcement contingencies.
Both operant and classical conditioning are forms of associative learning, but they have different implications for behavior modification. Classical conditioning can be used to create or change emotional responses, such as phobias, preferences, or attitudes. Operant conditioning can be used to increase or decrease voluntary behaviors, such as studying, exercising, or smoking. Both types of conditioning can be influenced by factors such as timing, frequency, intensity, and extinction of the stimuli and responses.
Works Cited
Cherry, Kendra. “Classical vs Operant Conditioning: How Are They Different?” Verywell Mind, 8 Oct. 2021, https://www.verywellmind.com/classical-vs-operant-conditioning-2794861.
McLeod, Saul. “Operant Conditioning.” Simply Psychology, 6 Aug. 2018, https://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html.
Weiten, Wayne et al. Psychology: Themes and Variations. 11th ed., Cengage Learning, 2017.
