Behaviorism is primarily concerned with observable and measurable aspects of human behavior. In defining behavior, behaviorist learning theories emphasize changes in behavior that result from stimulus-response associations made by the learner. Several social psychologists studied behavior and identified different theories on how behaviors can be learned and/or changed through reinforcement. They called this conditioning.
John B. Watson (1878-1958) and B. F. Skinner (1904-1990) are the two principal originators of behaviorist approaches to learning. Watson believed that human behavior resulted from specific stimuli that elicited certain responses. Watson's basic premise was that conclusions about human development should be based on observation of overt behavior rather than speculation about subconscious motives or latent cognitive processes (Shaffer, 2000). He hypothesized that behavior could be dependent on the environment (culture). Watson's basic premise was that conclusions about human development should be based on observation of overt behavior rather than speculation about subconscious motives or latent cognitive processes (Shaffer, 2000). Through this experiment, he conditioned a little boy to fear a white rat by repeatedly showing the boy the rat, then introducing a scary, loud, clanking sound. In time, the young boy feared all white furry objects because he associated them with a scary, loud noise.
Watson's theories were built upon the work of Ivan Pavlov. Pavlov was well known for his research on a learning process called classical conditioning. Classical conditioning refers to learning that occurs when a neutral stimulus becomes associated with a stimulus that naturally produces a behavior. Pavlov earned the 1904 Nobel Prize in Psychology for his work on the theory of classical conditioning. In Watson's case, Little Albert became afraid of furry, white objects because he associated them with a scary noise. Similar to the work of Watson but more developed, in Pavlov's case, dogs drooled when they heard a ringing bell because they associated the sound with food.
For the purposes of our work with children, we can see how neutral stimulus become associated with naturally produces a behavior. Advertisements are a prime example of classical conditioning. Food advertisements are a great example of classical conditioning. We are conditioned to desire foods that look good. That's why we salivate when we see a commercial for our favorite steakhouse!
B.F. Skinner: Operant Conditioning
Psychologist B.F. Skinner saw that classical conditioning is limited to existing behaviors that are reflexively elicited, and doesn’t account for new behaviors such as riding a bike.[1] He proposed a theory about how such behaviors come about. Skinner believed that behavior is motivated by the consequences we receive for the behavior: reinforcements and punishments. His idea that learning is the result of consequences is based on the law of effect, which was first proposed by psychologist Edward Thorndike. According to the law of effect, behaviors that are followed by consequences that are satisfying to the organism are more likely to be repeated, and behaviors that are followed by unpleasant consequences are less likely to be repeated (Thorndike, 1911). Essentially, if an organism does something that brings about a desired result, the organism is more likely to do it again. If an organism does something that does not bring about the desired result, the organism is less likely to do it again. An example of the law of effect is employment. One of the reasons (and often the main reason) we show up for work is because we get paid to do so. If we stop getting paid, we will likely stop showing up—even if we love our job.
Table 1. Classical and Operant Conditioning Compared
Type of Approach
Classical Conditioning
Operant Conditioning
Conditioning approach
An unconditioned stimulus (such as food) is paired with a neutral stimulus (such as a bell). The neutral stimulus eventually becomes the conditioned stimulus, which brings about the conditioned response (salivation).
The target behavior is followed by reinforcement or punishment to either strengthen or weaken it so that the learner is more likely to exhibit the desired behavior in the future.
Stimulus timing
The stimulus occurs immediately before the response.
The stimulus (either reinforcement or punishment) occurs soon after the response.
Working with Thorndike’s law of effect as his foundation, Skinner began conducting scientific experiments on animals (mainly rats and pigeons) to determine how organisms learn through operant conditioning (Skinner, 1938). He placed these animals inside an operant conditioning chamber, which has come to be known as a “Skinner box” (See Figure 1.). A Skinner box contains a lever (for rats) or disk (for pigeons) that the animal can press or peck for a food reward via the dispenser. Speakers and lights can be associated with certain behaviors. A recorder counts the number of responses made by the animal.
Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): B. F. Skinner developed operant conditioning for systematic study of how behaviors are strengthened or weakened according to their consequences. (CC BY-3.0; Silly rabbit via Wikimedia)Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\): In a Skinner box, a rat presses a lever in an operant conditioning chamber to receive a food reward. (CC BY-SA 4.0; Wikimedia)
In discussing operant conditioning, we use several everyday words—positive, negative, reinforcement, and punishment—in a specialized manner. In operant conditioning, positive and negative do not mean good and bad. Instead, positive means you are adding something, and negative means you are taking something away. Reinforcement means you are increasing a behavior, and punishment means you are decreasing a behavior. Reinforcement can be positive or negative, and punishment can also be positive or negative. All reinforcers (positive or negative) increase the likelihood of a behavioral response. All punishers (positive or negative) decrease the likelihood of a behavioral response. Now let us combine these four terms: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment (Table 2).
Table 2. Positive and Negative Reinforcement and Punishment
Reinforcement
Punishment
Positive
Something is added to increase the likelihood of a behavior.
Something is added to decrease the likelihood of a behavior.
Negative
Something is removed to increase the likelihood of a behavior.
Something is removed to decrease the likelihood of a behavior.
Reinforcement
The most effective way to teach a person or animal a new behavior is with positive reinforcement. In positive reinforcement, a desirable stimulus is added to increase a behavior.
For example, let’s say you tell your five-year-old son, Jerome, that if he cleans his room, he will get a toy. Jerome quickly cleans his room because he wants a new art set. Some people might say, “Why should I reward my child for doing what is expected?” However, we are constantly and consistently rewarded in our lives. Our paychecks are rewards, as are high grades or acceptance into our preferred schools. Being praised for doing a good job or for passing a driver’s test are also rewards. Positive reinforcement as a learning tool is extremely effective. It has been found that one of the most effective ways to increase achievement in school districts with below-average reading scores was to pay the children to read.
An example of this can be seen in Dallas, where second-grade students in Dallas were paid $2 each time they read a book and passed a short quiz about the book. The result was a significant increase in reading comprehension (Fryer, 2010). What do you think about this program? If Skinner were alive today, he would probably think this was a great idea. He was a strong proponent of using operant conditioning principles to influence students’ behavior at school. In fact, in addition to the Skinner box, he also invented what he called a teaching machine that was designed to reward small steps in learning—an early forerunner of computer-assisted learning (Skinner, 1961). His teaching machine tested students’ knowledge as they worked through various school subjects. If students answered questions correctly, they received immediate positive reinforcement and could continue; if they answered incorrectly, they did not receive any reinforcement. The idea was that students would spend additional time studying the material to increase their chance of being reinforced the next time.
In negative reinforcement, an undesirable stimulus is removed to increase a behavior. For example, car manufacturers use the principles of negative reinforcement in their seatbelt systems, which go “beep, beep, beep” until you fasten your seatbelt. The annoying sound stops when you exhibit the desired behavior, increasing the likelihood that you will buckle up in the future. Negative reinforcement is also used frequently in horse training. Riders apply pressure—by pulling the reins or squeezing their legs—and then remove the pressure when the horse performs the desired behavior, such as turning or speeding up. The pressure is the negative stimulus that the horse wants to remove.
Punishment
Many people confuse negative reinforcement with punishment in operant conditioning, but they are two very different concepts. Remember that reinforcement, even when it is negative, always increases a behavior. In contrast, punishment always decreases a behavior. In positive punishment, you add an undesirable stimulus to decrease a behavior. An example of positive punishment is reprimanding a student to get the student to stop texting in class. In this case, a stimulus (the reprimand) is added in order to decrease the behavior (texting in class). In negative punishment, you remove a pleasant stimulus to decrease a behavior, such as something the child enjoys (e.g., a toy or a scheduled outing). One controversial and misunderstood discipline technique is time out. Depending on how it is applied, time-outs can be negative punishment or seen as removal from items that are positively reinforcing such access to something they enjoy like a toy (Allen et.al, 1964).
Punishment, especially when it is immediate, is one way to decrease undesirable behavior. For example, imagine your four-year-old son, Brandon, runs into a busy street to get his ball. You give him a time-out (positive punishment) and tell him never to go into the street again. Chances are he will not repeat this behavior. While strategies like time-outs are common today, in the past children were often subject to physical punishment, such as spanking. It’s important to be aware of some of the drawbacks of using physical punishment on children. Within the context of parenting, it is important to note that the term “punishment” doesn’t mean that the consequence should be harmful.
In fact, experts caution that punishments like spanking can cause more harm than good (Murphy, 2017). First, punishment may teach fear. Brandon may become fearful of the street, but he also may become fearful of the person who delivered the punishment—you, his parent. Similarly, children who are punished by teachers may start to fear the teacher and try to avoid school (Gerschoff, 2013). Consequently, most schools in the United States have banned corporal punishment. Second, punishment may cause children to become more aggressive and prone to antisocial behavior and delinquency (Gershoff, 2002). They see their parents resort to spanking when they become angry and frustrated, so, in turn, they may act out this same behavior when they become angry and frustrated. For example, because you spank Brenda when you are angry with her for her misbehavior, she might start hitting her friends when they will not share their toys.
While positive punishment can be effective in some cases, Skinner suggested that the use of punishment should be weighed against the possible negative effects. Today’s psychologists and parenting experts favor reinforcement over punishment—they recommend that you catch your child doing something good and reward her for it.
The socialization implications are evident when behavior is viewed within cultural practices. For example there has been a great deal of research related to anxiety levels for Asian Americans compared to western White Americans (Krieg and Xu 2018). Asian Americans consistently report higher social anxiety symptoms. The theory is that there is conflict navigating the high levels of interdependence in Asian American culture versus the low levels of interdependence in Western culture. This conflicts makes social situations "high stakes." Social situations trigger fears and anxiety as Asian Americans are concerned about how one's behavior impacts the group. This is important to keep in mind when working with children whose culture values the collective or group but the typical Western classroom values children demonstrating independence.
References
Allen, K. E., Hart, B., Buell, J. S., Harris, F. R., & Wolf, M. (1964). Effects of social reinforcement on isolate behavior of a nursery school child. Child Development, 35(2), 511–518.
