The two theories created by different phycologists in the same era, Classical and instrumental conditioning were created by Skinner and Pavlov respectively. In classical conditioning, the participant does not learn the behaviour rather, it automatically occurs. Actions are due to reflexes, which are involuntary and occur below consciousness. Ivan Pavlov discovered classical conditioning while working with dogs. The psychologist discovered that every time he brought meat for the dogs, they would salivate. At the time, he believed that this was a normal behaviour for dogs but soon got interested in studying the exposed behaviour. In his study, he uncovered that the aspect of the dogs salivating was not learnt during that time, rather the behaviour was hard coded in the animal. This, he referred to as an unconditional response. The unconditioned response, this case being salivating of the dog and the unconditional stimulus was the food that Pavlov provided for the dogs. These two elements led him to conclude that there was a trigger for this behaviour. The dogs had learnt to associate the presence of food with salivating. In additional experiments, Pavlov used a bell. The bell, in this case, he referred to it, as neutral stimulus as there is no way that a bell would have an effect on dogs. I
n his creativity, Pavlov would ring the bell before giving the dogs their meal. The dogs soon learnt to recognize the bell as a signal of meals. In a way, the neutral stimulus, which was the bell, led to an unconditioned response, which was salivating in dogs. In his first experiment, Pavlov uses unconditioned stimulus that in this case is food to produce an unconditional response, which is salivation in dogs. In the experiment, he introduces a neutral condition, which is a bell. He rings the bell ‘the neutral stimulus’ gives rise to the desired effect which is salaivation (Coon " Mitterer, 2015). Although Pavlov uses different dogs and places them in different cages, the outcome is the same for all the animals. In Pavlov’s view, learning occurs, as a neutral event as ringing the bell would produce a learning effect as salivation of the dogs. In later years, Pavlov would include the use of sophisticated designs to test his theory buzzers in pigeon pens. As Pavlov proposes, classical conditioning occurs in three phases, before conditioning, the process of conditioning and the process of conditioning. In the beginning phase of conditioning, the unconditioned stimulus does yield an unconditioned response (Goldman " Goldman, 2018). I
n Pavlov terms, when the environment introduces a new stimulus the character under the study produces a new behaviour that was previously unlearned. In the case of dogs, the neutral stimulus has no effect on the dog before the conditioning process occurs. The experimenter needs to use neutral stimulus together with the unconditioned stimulus in the conditioning phase that rings the bell before giving the dog food. The experiment becomes successful if the neutral stimulus produces a conditioned response. At this point, the experimenter concludes that learning has occurred.
In instrumental conditioning, the learning process occurs as a resort of consequences of actions. Developers of the theory believed that classical conditioning was a weak form of behaviour description as it was far too simple and behaviour was a more complex process. Instrumental conditioning opted to describe behaviour by observing what caused it. E.L Thorndike carried out studies by observing cats. He would put a cat in a puzzle box and watch the animal try to find its way out of the maze. He observed that learning in cats was through a series of guesses that he referred to as ‘trial and error’. Using repeated trials, the cat would resort to intelligent methods of getting out of the box. BF Skinner, a major contributor to the theory argued that reinforcement is an important element in the learning of new behaviour. Reinforcement according to him was the process of repeating an action. Skinner observed that actions that were not continually repeated tend to die and repeated actions tend to gain influence on the subject. Therefore, for the subject to attain a certain behaviour, reinforcement was essential. Skinner classified reinforcement into two categories positive and negative (Kirsch, Miller " Vigorito, 2014). One could manipulate these two classes of reinforcement to bring out the desired behaviour in a subject. In positive reinforcement, the experimenter encourages desired behaviours through giving rewards when the subject displays the behaviour. This can be an example of a tutor complementing a student for answering a question. The complement is a reward that encourages the student to continually, answer questions. On the other hand, negative reinforcement occurs when an experimenter makes the environment of the subject more comfortable to encourage a certain behaviour. In this case, a tutor can exempt a student from taking an exam based on their class attendance. This way, the tutor has made the environment more comfortable for the student in an effort to encourage them to attend classes.
Similar to reinforcement, one can use punishment to produce a certain behaviour on a subject. In addition, punishment can be either positive or negative. In positive punishment, the experimenter introduces hostility to the environment to discourage a certain behaviour. In this case, a tutor may punish a student for exhibiting a bad behaviour in class. This ensures that the student does not repeat the behaviour. Negative reinforcement, on the other hand, is removing something that is good to discourage a certain behaviour. A tutor, for example, may order students who have failed a test to remain in class as the rest go out to play. The play is good and when it is taken away from the student, it is meant to encourage the behaviour of passing the test. Although Skinner worked with rats to prove his theory, he argued that the same technique is applicable to complex organisms as humans (Naik, 2018). He showed that complex behaviour can be easily learnt if the experimenter delivers punishments and rewards in a way to strengthen or discourage certain behaviours.
Classical and instrumental conditioning played an important role in their invention. The two theories helped move psychology from just another discipline to becoming a fully-fledged science. A psychologist could now experiment in a lab setting and develop visible results (Goldman " Goldman, 2018). As Pavlov experimented with dogs and Skinner with rats, their findings proved how learning occurred not only in these animals but also in humans. Their experiments also showed how the environment influenced the learning process. The theories also helped explain the difference in behaviour in humans. The amount of reward and punishment plays a significant role in determining our actions. A change in this factor leads to modification of behaviour. The principles of the theories have also been significant in the modification of behaviours in rehab canters. Patients can refrain from adverse behaviours as alcoholism based on the rewards and punishment received.
Despite the significant impact that the two theories have had, they have their limitations. Scholars argue that in formulating the theories, Pavlov and Skinner failed to take into account cognitive factors. The theories assume that the governing of actions is only through stimuli and the environment. In human, this is barely the case as the reasoning process plays the main role in determining the cause of action and not stimuli. In addition, many scholars argue that generalization of animal behaviour to human is an overkill. The anatomy of humans and animals is different and the theories failed to consider this factor. The other limitation of the theories is that the theories do not support learning (Heffner, 2017). Since learning involves behavioural change, the subject does not acquire new behaviour rather they respond to stimuli. Lastly, the theories are effective with an animal where the experimenter can control the variables. As the case with Pavlov and the dogs, it was easier for him to control the environment. However, when it would be very difficult to test the theories on a human. There number of variables involved are numerous that would render the results of the experiment inconclusive. In addition, unlike animals, humans are not controlled by stimuli.
References
Coon, D., " Mitterer, J. (2015). Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and Behavior (14th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Goldman, J., " Goldman, J. (2018). What Is Classical Conditioning? (And Why Does It Matter?). Scientific American Blog Network. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtful-animal/what-is-classical-conditioning-and-why-does-it-matter/
Heffner, C. (2017). Classical and Operant Conditioning in Psychology 101 at AllPsych Online | AllPsych. Allpsych.com. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from https://allpsych.com/psychology101/conditioning/
Kirsch, L., Miller, R., " Vigorito, M. (2014). The role of cognition in classical and operant conditioning. - PubMed - NCBI. Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15022268
Naik, P. (2018). Behaviorism: A Critical Look. Personalityresearch.org. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/naik.html
