A Behavior Is Most Likely to Occur Again in the Future if

Type of associative learning process

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

Although operant and classical conditioning both involve behaviors controlled past environmental stimuli, they differ in nature. In operant workout, behavior is controlled past external stimuli. For example, a child may learn to open up a box to become the sweets inside, or larn 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 instance, the kid may face a choice between opening the box and petting a puppy.

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

However, both kinds of learning can touch on behavior. Classically conditioned stimuli—for instance, a picture of sweets on a box—might heighten operant workout past encouraging a child to approach and open up the box. Research has shown this to be a beneficial phenomenon in cases where operant behavior is mistake-prone.^[one]

The written report of animal learning in the 20th century was dominated by the assay of these two sorts of learning,^[2] and they are still at the cadre of behavior assay. They have also been applied to the study of social psychology, helping to clarify certain phenomena such equally the faux consensus result.^[1]

Operant workout

Extinction

Reinforcement Increase behavior

Punishment Decrease behavior

Positive reinforcement Add appetitive stimulus following right beliefs

Negative reinforcement

Positive punishment Add baneful stimulus following behavior

Negative penalisation Remove appetitive stimulus following beliefs

Escape Remove noxious stimulus following right behavior

Active avoidance Behavior avoids noxious stimulus

Historical notation [edit]

Thorndike's police force of event [edit]

Operant conditioning, sometimes called instrumental learning, was starting time extensively studied by Edward Fifty. Thorndike (1874–1949), who observed the behavior of cats trying to escape from home-fabricated puzzle boxes.^[three] A cat could escape from the box by a unproblematic response such as pulling a string or pushing a pole, but when first constrained, the cats took a long time to get out. With repeated trials ineffective responses occurred less frequently and successful responses occurred more frequently, so the cats escaped more than and more chop-chop.^[3] Thorndike generalized this finding in his law of effect, which states that behaviors followed by satisfying consequences tend to be repeated and those that produce unpleasant consequences are less likely to be repeated. In short, some consequences strengthen beliefs and some consequences weaken beliefs. By plotting escape time against trial number Thorndike produced the showtime known animal learning curves through this procedure.^[4]

Humans announced to learn many simple behaviors through the sort of process studied by Thorndike, at present called operant workout. That is, responses are retained when they lead to a successful consequence and discarded when they practise not, or when they produce aversive effects. This usually happens without being planned by any "instructor", but operant conditioning has been used by 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 oftentimes cited in connection with this topic. His 1938 book "The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Assay",^[6] initiated his lifelong written report of operant conditioning and its application to human and animal behavior. Following the ideas of Ernst Mach, Skinner rejected Thorndike's reference to unobservable mental states such every bit satisfaction, building his analysis on appreciable behavior and its equally observable consequences.^[7]

Skinner believed that classical conditioning was too simplistic to be used to describe something as complex as human behavior. Operant conditioning, in his opinion, better described homo beliefs as it examined causes and furnishings of intentional beliefs.

To implement his empirical approach, Skinner invented the operant workout chamber, or "Skinner Box", in which subjects such as pigeons and rats were isolated and could be exposed to carefully controlled stimuli. Unlike Thorndike's puzzle box, this arrangement allowed the subject to make one or two simple, repeatable responses, and the rate of such responses became Skinner's primary behavioral measure.^[8] Another invention, the cumulative recorder, produced a graphical record from which these response rates could be estimated. These records were the primary data that Skinner and his colleagues used to explore the furnishings on response charge per unit of various reinforcement schedules.^[9] A reinforcement schedule may exist defined as "any process that delivers reinforcement to an organism according to some well-divers dominion".^[10] The furnishings of schedules became, in turn, the basic findings from which Skinner developed his account of operant conditioning. He too drew on many less formal observations of human and beast behavior.^[11]

Many of Skinner's writings are devoted to the awarding of operant conditioning to homo beliefs.^[12] In 1948 he published Walden Two, a fictional business relationship of a peaceful, happy, productive community organized around his workout principles.^[13] In 1957, Skinner published Verbal Behavior,^[14] which extended the principles of operant workout to language, a course of human behavior that had previously been analyzed quite differently by linguists and others. Skinner defined new functional relationships such as "mands" and "tacts" to capture some essentials of linguistic communication, only he introduced no new principles, treating exact behavior like whatsoever other behavior controlled by its consequences, which included the reactions of the speaker's audience.

Concepts and procedures [edit]

Origins of operant behavior: operant variability [edit]

Operant behavior is said to be "emitted"; that is, initially it is not elicited by whatsoever particular stimulus. Thus i may enquire why it happens in the first 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 selection. Similarly, the beliefs of an private varies from moment to moment, in such aspects as the specific motions involved, the amount of strength applied, or the timing of the response. Variations that pb to reinforcement are strengthened, and if reinforcement is consistent, the behavior tends to remain stable. Withal, behavioral variability can itself be contradistinct through the manipulation of sure variables.^[15]

Modifying operant behavior: reinforcement and punishment [edit]

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

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

Another process 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 probable. Occasional reinforcement can lead to an even longer delay before behavior extinction due to the learning factor of repeated instances becoming necessary to get reinforcement, when compared with reinforcement being given at each opportunity before extinction.^[16]

At that place are a total of v consequences.

1. Positive reinforcement occurs when a beliefs (response) is rewarding or the beliefs 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 rate of pressing volition become up. This procedure is normally called just reinforcement.
2. Negative reinforcement (a.k.a. escape) occurs when a beliefs (response) is followed by the removal of an aversive stimulus, thereby increasing the original behavior'south frequency. In the Skinner Box experiment, the aversive stimulus might exist a loud racket continuously inside the box; negative reinforcement would happen when the rat presses a lever to turn off the noise.
3. Positive punishment (also referred to as "punishment by contingent stimulation") occurs when a behavior (response) is followed by an aversive stimulus. Instance: pain from a spanking, which would oft result in a decrease in that behavior. Positive punishment is a confusing term, so the process is usually referred to as "punishment".
4. Negative penalization (penalisation) (also called "punishment by contingent withdrawal") occurs when a behavior (response) is followed by the removal of a stimulus. Instance: taking away a child'due south toy post-obit an undesired behavior by him/her, which would result in a decrease in the undesirable behavior.
5. Extinction occurs when a beliefs (response) that had previously been reinforced is no longer effective. Instance: a rat is showtime given food many times for pressing a lever, until the experimenter no longer gives out food equally a reward. The rat would typically printing the lever less often and then stop. The lever pressing would so be said to exist "extinguished."

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

Schedules of reinforcement [edit]

Schedules of reinforcement are rules that command the delivery of reinforcement. The rules specify either the time that reinforcement is to exist made bachelor, or the number of responses to exist made, or both. Many rules are possible, but the following are the most basic and commonly used^{[18] [9]}

• Fixed interval schedule: Reinforcement occurs following the commencement response after a fixed time has elapsed after the previous reinforcement. This schedule yields a "break-run" pattern of response; that is, after preparation on this schedule, the organism typically pauses after reinforcement, and then begins to respond rapidly as the time for the next reinforcement approaches.
• Variable interval schedule: Reinforcement occurs following the first response afterwards a variable time has elapsed from the previous reinforcement. This schedule typically yields a relatively steady rate of response that varies with the average fourth dimension betwixt reinforcements.
• Stock-still ratio schedule: Reinforcement occurs after a fixed number of responses accept been emitted since the previous reinforcement. An organism trained on this schedule typically pauses for a while subsequently a reinforcement and and then responds at a high rate. If the response requirement is depression there may exist no pause; if the response requirement is loftier the organism may quit responding birthday.
• Variable ratio schedule: Reinforcement occurs afterward a variable number of responses have been emitted since the previous reinforcement. This schedule typically yields a very high, persistent charge per unit of response.
• Continuous reinforcement: Reinforcement occurs after each response. Organisms typically respond as speedily as they can, given the time taken to obtain and eat reinforcement, until they are satiated.

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

The effectiveness of reinforcement and punishment tin can be inverse.

1. Satiation/Deprivation: The effectiveness of a positive or "appetitive" stimulus will be reduced if the individual has received enough of that stimulus to satisfy his/her appetite. The opposite effect volition occur if the private becomes deprived of that stimulus: the effectiveness of a outcome will and then increase. A discipline with a full stomach wouldn't feel as motivated as a hungry 1.^[19]
2. Immediacy: An immediate consequence is more than effective than a delayed one. If ane gives a dog a care for for sitting within five seconds, the dog will learn faster than if the treat is given later thirty seconds.^[20]
3. Contingency: To be most effective, reinforcement should occur consistently after responses and non at other times. Learning may be slower if reinforcement is intermittent, that is, following only some instances of the same response. Responses reinforced intermittently are usually slower to extinguish than are responses that have e'er been reinforced.^[19]
4. Size: The size, or amount, of a stimulus frequently affects its potency as a reinforcer. Humans and animals engage in toll-do good analysis. If a lever press brings ten food pellets, lever pressing may be learned more rapidly than if a printing brings only one pellet. A pile of quarters from a slot machine may go on a gambler pulling the lever longer than a single quarter.

Near of these factors serve biological functions. For example, the process of satiation helps the organism maintain a stable internal surround (homeostasis). When an organism has been deprived of sugar, for case, the taste of sugar is an effective reinforcer. When the organism's blood carbohydrate reaches or exceeds an optimum level the taste of saccharide becomes less effective or even aversive.

Shaping [edit]

Shaping is a conditioning method much used in animal training and in teaching nonverbal humans. It depends on operant variability and reinforcement, every bit described higher up. The trainer starts by identifying the desired final (or "target") beliefs. Next, the trainer chooses a behavior that the animal or person already emits with some probability. The form of this behavior is so gradually inverse 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 past the use of a schedule of reinforcement.

Noncontingent reinforcement [edit]

Noncontingent reinforcement is the commitment of reinforcing stimuli regardless of the organism's behavior. Noncontingent reinforcement may be used in an attempt to reduce an undesired target behavior by reinforcing multiple alternative responses while extinguishing the target response.^[21] Equally no measured behavior is identified as being strengthened, there is controversy surrounding the use of the term noncontingent "reinforcement".^[22]

Stimulus control of operant behavior [edit]

Though initially operant behavior is emitted without an identified reference to a particular stimulus, during operant conditioning operants come up under the control of stimuli that are present when behavior is reinforced. Such stimuli are called "discriminative stimuli." A and then-called "three-term contingency" is the result. 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 only 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 candy when s/he sees it on a table.

Discrimination, generalization & context [edit]

Most behavior is nether stimulus control. Several aspects of this may be distinguished:

• Discrimination typically occurs when a response is reinforced only in the presence of a specific stimulus. For example, a pigeon might be fed for pecking at a blood-red light and not at a green light; in event, it pecks at red and stops pecking at green. Many complex combinations of stimuli and other conditions accept been studied; for instance 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 answer to stimuli that are similar to a previously trained discriminative stimulus. For example, having been trained to peck at "red" a dove might as well peck at "pink", though usually less strongly.
• Context refers to stimuli that are continuously present in a situation, similar the walls, tables, chairs, etc. in a room, or the interior of an operant workout bedchamber. Context stimuli may come to command behavior as exercise discriminative stimuli, though usually more weakly. Behaviors learned in one context may exist absent, or contradistinct, in another. This may cause difficulties for behavioral therapy, because behaviors learned in the therapeutic setting may fail to occur in other situations.

Behavioral sequences: conditioned reinforcement and chaining [edit]

Well-nigh behavior cannot easily be described in terms of individual responses reinforced one past ane. The scope of operant assay is expanded through the thought of behavioral bondage, which are sequences of responses jump together past the three-term contingencies defined above. Chaining is based on the fact, experimentally demonstrated, that a discriminative stimulus non only sets the occasion for subsequent beliefs, but information technology can besides reinforce a behavior that precedes it. That is, a discriminative stimulus is besides a "conditioned reinforcer". For example, the calorie-free that sets the occasion for lever pressing may exist used to reinforce "turning around" in the presence of a noise. This results in the sequence "racket – turn-around – calorie-free – press lever – nutrient". Much longer chains tin can be congenital past adding more than stimuli and responses.

Escape and abstention [edit]

In escape learning, a behavior terminates an (aversive) stimulus. For example, shielding ane'due south eyes from sunlight terminates the (aversive) stimulation of brilliant light in one'south eyes. (This is an example of negative reinforcement, defined in a higher place.) Behavior that is maintained by preventing a stimulus is called "abstention," as, for instance, putting on lord's day glasses before going outdoors. Abstention beliefs raises the then-called "avoidance paradox", for, information technology may exist asked, how can the non-occurrence of a stimulus serve as a reinforcer? This question is addressed past several theories of avoidance (see below).

Ii kinds of experimental settings are commonly used: discriminated and free-operant avoidance learning.

Discriminated avoidance learning [edit]

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

Costless-operant abstention learning [edit]

In free-operant avoidance a field of study periodically receives an aversive stimulus (often an electric shock) unless an operant response is made; the response delays the onset of the shock. In this state of affairs, unlike discriminated avoidance, no prior stimulus signals the stupor. Two crucial time intervals decide the charge per unit of avoidance learning. This get-go is the S-S (shock-shock) interval. This is fourth dimension between successive shocks in the absence of a response. The 2d interval is the R-Southward (response-shock) interval. This specifies the fourth dimension by which an operant response delays the onset of the next stupor. Note that each time the bailiwick performs the operant response, the R-Southward interval without shock begins anew.

Two-procedure theory of avoidance [edit]

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

a) Classical workout of fear. Initially the organism experiences the pairing of a CS with an aversive U.s.. The theory assumes that this pairing creates an association between the CS and the The states through classical conditioning and, because of the aversive nature of the United states, the CS comes to elicit a conditioned emotional reaction (CER) – "fright." 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 cease the CS are reinforced past fear termination. Note that the theory does not say that the organism "avoids" the United states in the sense of anticipating it, merely rather that the organism "escapes" an aversive internal state that is caused by the CS. Several experimental findings seem to run counter to ii-gene theory. For example, avoidance beliefs often extinguishes very slowly even when the initial CS-United states of america pairing never occurs again, so the fear response might exist expected to extinguish (see Classical conditioning). Further, animals that accept learned to avoid ofttimes testify little evidence of fear, suggesting that escape from fear is not necessary to maintain avoidance behavior.^[23]

Operant or "one-factor" theory [edit]

Some theorists advise that avoidance behavior may simply be a special instance of operant behavior maintained by its consequences. In this view the idea of "consequences" is expanded to include sensitivity to a pattern of events. Thus, in avoidance, the consequence of a response is a reduction in the rate of aversive stimulation. Indeed, experimental prove suggests that a "missed shock" is detected equally a stimulus, and tin deed every bit a reinforcer. Cognitive theories of avoidance take this idea a step farther. For example, a rat comes to "expect" daze if it fails to press a lever and to "expect no stupor" if it presses it, and abstention behavior 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 allow food pellets to accumulate in a food tray instead of retrieving those pellets. In this procedure, retrieval of the pellets always instituted a one-minute flow of extinction during which no additional food pellets were available but those that had been accumulated earlier could be consumed. This finding appears to contradict the usual finding that rats behave impulsively in situations in which at that place is a choice betwixt a smaller food object correct 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 afterwards a conditioned stimulus, or later on a principal advantage if no conditioned stimulus exists. These neurons are equally active for positive and negative reinforcers, and have been shown to be related to neuroplasticity in many cortical regions.^[27] Evidence also exists that dopamine is activated at similar times. There is considerable evidence that dopamine participates in both reinforcement and aversive learning.^[28] Dopamine pathways project much more densely onto frontal cortex regions. Cholinergic projections, in contrast, are dumbo even in the posterior cortical regions like the primary visual cortex. A study of patients with Parkinson's illness, 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 case, positive reinforcement proving to exist the more effective form of learning when dopamine activity is high.

A neurochemical process involving dopamine has been suggested to underlie reinforcement. When an organism experiences a reinforcing stimulus, dopamine pathways in the encephalon are activated. This network of pathways "releases a short pulse of dopamine onto many dendrites, thus dissemination a global reinforcement signal to postsynaptic neurons."^[xxx] 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 about likely to take been the behavior responsible for successfully achieving reinforcement. But when the application of reinforcement is either less immediate or less contingent (less consistent), the power of dopamine to act upon the appropriate synapses is reduced.

Questions about the law of effect [edit]

A number of observations seem to testify that operant behavior can be established without reinforcement in the sense defined in a higher place. Most cited is the phenomenon of autoshaping (sometimes called "sign tracking"), in which a stimulus is repeatedly followed by reinforcement, and in issue the animal begins to answer to the stimulus. For example, a response key is lighted and then nutrient is presented. When this is repeated a few times a pigeon subject begins to peck the key even though nutrient comes whether the bird pecks or non. Similarly, rats begin 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 primal or pressing the lever leads to less food (omission preparation).^{[33] [34]} Another credible operant behavior that appears without reinforcement is contrafreeloading.

These observations and others announced to contradict the police of effect, and they accept prompted some researchers to suggest new conceptualizations of operant reinforcement (e.g.^{[35] [36] [37]}) A more general view is that autoshaping is an instance of classical conditioning; the autoshaping procedure has, in fact, become 1 of the most common means to measure classical workout. In this view, many behaviors tin can be influenced by both classical contingencies (stimulus-response) and operant contingencies (response-reinforcement), and the experimenter'southward chore is to work out how these interact.^[38]

Applications [edit]

Reinforcement and punishment are ubiquitous in human social interactions, and a great many applications of operant principles accept been suggested and implemented. The following are some examples.

Habit and dependence [edit]

Positive and negative reinforcement play cardinal roles in the development and maintenance of addiction and drug dependence. An addictive drug is intrinsically rewarding; that is, it functions as a primary positive reinforcer of drug utilize. The brain's reward organisation assigns information technology incentive salience (i.east., it is "wanted" or "desired"),^{[39] [40] [41]} and then as an addiction develops, deprivation of the drug leads to craving. In improver, stimuli associated with drug apply – due east.g., the sight of a syringe, and the location of utilize – become associated with the intense reinforcement induced by the drug.^{[39] [40] [41]} These previously neutral stimuli learn several properties: their advent can induce peckish, and they can become conditioned positive reinforcers of continued use.^{[39] [twoscore] [41]} Thus, if an addicted individual encounters one of these drug cues, a craving for the associated drug may reappear. For case, anti-drug agencies previously used posters with images of drug paraphernalia as an attempt to prove the dangers of drug employ. However, such posters are no longer used considering 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 lodge to alleviate or "escape" the symptoms of concrete dependence (eastward.grand., tremors and sweating) and/or psychological dependence (e.thousand., anhedonia, restlessness, irritability, and anxiety) that arise during the state of drug withdrawal.^[39]

Animate being preparation [edit]

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

Case of creature grooming from Seaworld related on Operant workout ^[43]

Beast training has effects on positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement. Schedules of reinforcements may play a big role on the animal training case.

Applied behavior analysis [edit]

Applied behavior analysis is the subject field initiated by B. F. Skinner that applies the principles of conditioning to the modification of socially significant human behavior. It uses the basic concepts of conditioning theory, including conditioned stimulus (South^C), discriminative stimulus (S^d), response (R), and reinforcing stimulus (S^rein or Southward^r for reinforcers, sometimes South^ave for aversive stimuli).^[23] A conditioned stimulus controls behaviors adult through respondent (classical) conditioning, such as emotional reactions. The other iii terms combine to class Skinner's "three-term contingency": a discriminative stimulus sets the occasion for responses that lead to reinforcement. Researchers have establish the following protocol to be effective when they use the tools of operant conditioning to change human behavior:^{[ commendation needed ]}

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

Practitioners of applied behavior analysis (ABA) bring these procedures, and many variations and developments of them, to touch on a variety of socially significant behaviors and issues. In many cases, practitioners utilise operant techniques to develop constructive, socially acceptable behaviors to replace aberrant behaviors. The techniques of ABA have been finer applied in to such things as early intensive behavioral interventions for children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD)^[44] research on the principles influencing criminal behavior, HIV prevention,^[45] conservation of natural resource,^[46] education,^[47] gerontology,^[48] health and exercise,^[49] industrial safety,^[50] language acquisition,^[51] littering,^[52] medical procedures,^[53] parenting,^[54] psychotherapy,^{[ citation needed ]} seatbelt use,^[55] severe mental disorders,^[56] sports,^[57] substance abuse, phobias, pediatric feeding disorders, and zoo 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 management training. Typically, parents larn to reward appropriate behavior through social rewards (such every bit praise, smiles, and hugs) every bit well as concrete rewards (such every bit stickers or points towards a larger advantage every bit part of an incentive arrangement created collaboratively with the child).^[59] In addition, parents learn to select simple behaviors as an initial focus and reward each of the small steps that their child achieves towards reaching a larger goal (this concept is called "successive approximations").^{[59] [60]}

Economics [edit]

Both psychologists and economists have become interested in applying operant concepts and findings to the behavior of humans in the marketplace. An example is the assay of consumer demand, as indexed by the amount of a article that is purchased. In economics, the caste to which price influences consumption is called "the price elasticity of need." Certain commodities are more than elastic than others; for example, a change in price of certain foods may have a large upshot on the amount bought, while gasoline and other everyday consumables may be less afflicted by price changes. In terms of operant analysis, such effects may be interpreted in terms of motivations of consumers and the relative value of the commodities as reinforcers.^[61]

Gambling – variable ratio scheduling [edit]

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

Military psychology [edit]

Man beings have an innate resistance to killing and are reluctant to deed 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 armed forces warfare.^[63]

This phenomenon was not understood until Southward.L.A. Marshall (Brigadier General and military historian) undertook interview studies of WWII infantry immediately following combat engagement. Marshall's well-known and controversial book, Men Against Burn, revealed that only 15% of soldiers fired their rifles with the purpose of killing in combat.^[64] Following acceptance of Marshall'due south research by the US Army in 1946, the Man Resource Research Function of the United states of america Army began implementing new training protocols which resemble operant workout 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 training included replacing traditional pop-up firing ranges with iii-dimensional, homo-shaped, pop-up targets which collapsed when hit. This provided immediate feedback and acted as positive reinforcement for a soldier's behavior.^[65] Other improvements to military training methods take included the timed firing course; more realistic training; loftier repetitions; praise from superiors; marksmanship rewards; and grouping recognition. Negative reinforcement includes peer accountability or the requirement to retake courses. Modern armed services preparation conditions mid-brain response to combat pressure past closely simulating bodily combat, using mainly Pavlovian classical workout and Skinnerian operant conditioning (both forms of behaviorism).^[63]

Modern marksmanship training is such an excellent instance of behaviorism that information technology has been used for years in the introductory psychology class taught to all cadets at the US Military Academy at W Point every bit a archetype case of operant conditioning. In the 1980s, during a visit to West Indicate, B.F. Skinner identified modern armed forces marksmanship training as a almost-perfect application of operant workout.^[65]

Lt. Col. Dave Grossman states about operant conditioning and U.s. War machine training that:

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

Nudge theory [edit]

Nudge theory (or nudge) is a concept in behavioural science, political theory and economics which argues that indirect suggestions to try to attain non-forced compliance can influence the motives, incentives and decision making of groups and individuals, at to the lowest degree as effectively – if not more finer – than direct instruction, 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 means of positive reinforcement, wherein an observed behavior is fabricated more likely to occur by contingently praising said beliefs.^[66] Hundreds of studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of praise in promoting positive behaviors, notably in the study of teacher and parent employ of praise on child in promoting improved behavior and academic performance,^{[67] [68]} but likewise in the study of work performance.^[69] Praise has also been demonstrated to reinforce positive behaviors in non-praised adjacent individuals (such equally a classmate of the praise recipient) through vicarious reinforcement.^[70] Praise may be more or less constructive in changing behavior depending on its form, content and delivery. In order for praise to effect positive behavior modify, it must be contingent on the positive behavior (i.e., only administered afterwards the targeted behavior is enacted), must specify the particulars of the beliefs that is to exist reinforced, and must be delivered sincerely and credibly.^[71]

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

Several studies accept been washed on the event cognitive-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 touch presented explained the general efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral therapy (CBT) and Operant-Behavioral therapy (OBT).

Psychological manipulation [edit]

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

• Positive reinforcement: includes praise, superficial amuse, superficial sympathy (crocodile tears), excessive apologizing, coin, approval, gifts, attention, facial expressions such as a forced laugh or smile, and public recognition.
• Negative reinforcement: may involve removing one from a negative situation
• Intermittent or partial reinforcement: Partial or intermittent negative reinforcement can create an constructive climate of fear and doubt. 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 more but nonetheless lose coin overall.
• Punishment: includes nagging, yelling, the silent treatment, intimidation, threats, swearing, emotional bribery, the guilt trip, sulking, crying, and playing the victim.
• Traumatic one-trial learning: using verbal abuse, explosive anger, or other intimidating beliefs to establish authorisation or superiority; fifty-fifty one incident of such behavior can condition or train victims to avoid upsetting, confronting or contradicting the manipulator.

Traumatic bonding [edit]

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

The other source indicated that ^[77] 'The necessary conditions for traumatic bonding are that ane person must 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 fifty-fifty appreciating behavior from the ascendant person, punctuated by intermittent episodes of intense abuse. To maintain the upper hand, the victimizer manipulates the behavior of the victim and limits the victim's options then as to perpetuate the power imbalance. Any threat to the balance of dominance and submission may exist met with an escalating cycle of punishment ranging from seething intimidation to intensely fierce outbursts. The victimizer also isolates the victim from other sources of support, which reduces the likelihood of detection and intervention, impairs the victim's ability to receive countervailing self-referent feedback, and strengthens the sense of unilateral dependency...The traumatic effects of these calumniating relationships may include the harm of the victim'southward capacity for accurate self-appraisement, leading to a sense of personal inadequacy and a subordinate sense of dependence upon the dominating person. Victims likewise may encounter a variety of unpleasant social and legal consequences of their emotional and behavioral affiliation with someone who perpetrated ambitious 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 coercion loop, adding a blazon of positive reinforcement through a variable rate schedule to go along the histrion playing. This can lead to the pathology of video game habit.^[78]

As part of a tendency in the monetization of video games during the 2010s, some games offered loot boxes as rewards or every bit items purchasable by real world funds. Boxes contains a random option of in-game items. The practice has been tied to the same methods that slot machines and other gambling devices dole out rewards, equally information technology follows a variable rate schedule. While the general perception that loot boxes are a grade of gambling, the practice is only classified as such in a few countries. However, methods to apply those items as virtual currency for online gambling or trading for real world money has created a skin gambling market that is under legal evaluation.^[79]

Workplace culture of fright [edit]

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

Individual differences in sensitivity to reward, punishment, and motivation have been studied under the premises of reinforcement sensitivity theory and have also been practical to workplace functioning.

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 two groups of neurosurgeons are classic operant beliefs. One group practice in a state with restrictions on medical lawsuits and the other group with no restrictions. The group of neurosurgeons were queried anonymously on their practice patterns. The physicians changed their practice in response to a negative feedback (fear from lawsuit) in the group that skillful in a land with no restrictions on medical lawsuits.^[82]

See as well [edit]

• Abusive ability and control
• Animal testing
• Behavioral contrast
• Behaviorism (branch of psychology referring to methodological and radical behaviorism)
• Behavior modification (old expression for ABA; modifies behavior either through consequences without incorporating stimulus command or involves the utilise 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 engineering
• Experimental analysis of beliefs (experimental research principles in operant and respondent conditioning)
• Exposure therapy (besides chosen desensitization)
• Graduated exposure therapy (also called systematic desensitization)
• Habituation
• Jerzy Konorski
• Learned industriousness
• Matching law
• Negative (positive) contrast outcome
• Radical behaviorism (conceptual theory of behavior analysis that expands behaviorism to also encompass private events (thoughts and feelings) equally forms of beliefs)
• Reinforcement
• Pavlovian-instrumental transfer
• Preference tests (animals)
• Premack principle
• Sensitization
• Social conditioning
• Society for Quantitative Assay 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 non-social learning". Nature Communications. viii (one): 817. Bibcode:2017NatCo...8..817T. doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00826-eight. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC5635122. PMID 29018195.
2. ^ Jenkins, H. Grand. "Animate being Learning and Beliefs Theory" Ch. v in Hearst, Due east. "The First Century of Experimental Psychology" Hillsdale N. J., Earlbaum, 1979
3. ^ ^{a b} Thorndike, E.L. (1901). "Creature intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals". Psychological Review Monograph Supplement. two: 1–109.
4. ^ Miltenberger, R. G. "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 workout. (pp. 509–531) Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118468135.ch20
6. ^ Skinner, B. F. "The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis", 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 50., Daniel T. Gilbert, and Daniel M. Wegner. "B. F. Skinner: The function of reinforcement and Punishment", subsection in: Psychology; Second Edition. New York: Worth, Incorporated, 2011, 278–288.
9. ^ ^{a b} Ferster, C. B. & Skinner, B. F. "Schedules of Reinforcement", 1957 New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
10. ^ Staddon, J. E. R; D. T Cerutti (Feb 2003). "Operant Conditioning". Annual Review of Psychology. 54 (1): 115–144. doi:x.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145124. PMC1473025. PMID 12415075.
11. ^ Mecca Chiesa (2004) Radical Behaviorism: The philosophy and the scientific discipline
12. ^ Skinner, B. F. "Science and Human Behavior", 1953. New York: MacMillan
13. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1948). Walden Two. Indianapolis: Hackett
14. ^ Skinner, B. F. "Verbal Behavior", 1957. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
15. ^ Neuringer, A (2002). "Operant variability: Bear witness, functions, and theory". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. ix (iv): 672–705. doi:10.3758/bf03196324. PMID 12613672.
16. ^ Skinner, B.F. (2014). Scientific discipline and Human Behavior (PDF). Cambridge, MA: The B.F. Skinner Foundation. p. 70. Retrieved 13 March 2019.
17. ^ Schultz W (2015). "Neuronal reward and decision signals: from theories to data". Physiological Reviews. 95 (3): 853–951. doi:10.1152/physrev.00023.2014. PMC4491543. PMID 26109341. Rewards in operant workout are positive reinforcers. ... Operant behavior gives a good definition for rewards. Anything that makes an private come up dorsum for more is a positive reinforcer and therefore a reward. Although it provides a adept definition, positive reinforcement is simply one of several reward functions. ... Rewards are attractive. They are motivating and make us exert an endeavor. ... Rewards induce arroyo behavior, too called appetitive or preparatory beliefs, and consummatory behavior. ... Thus whatever stimulus, object, event, action, or situation that has the potential to make us arroyo and consume it is past definition a advantage.
18. ^ Schacter et al.2011 Psychology 2nd ed. pg.280–284 Reference for entire section Principles version 130317
19. ^ ^{a b} Miltenberger, R. Thousand. "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). "Utilise of noncontingent reinforcement in the treatment of challenging beliefs". Behavior Modification. 22 (4): 529–547. doi:10.1177/01454455980224005. PMID 9755650. S2CID 21542125.
22. ^ Poling, A.; Normand, M. (1999). "Noncontingent reinforcement: an inappropriate description of fourth dimension-based schedules that reduce beliefs". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 32 (2): 237–238. doi:10.1901/jaba.1999.32-237. PMC1284187.
23. ^ ^{a b c} Pierce & Cheney (2004) Behavior Analysis and Learning
24. ^ Cole, Thousand.R. (1990). "Operant hoarding: A new image for the study of self-control". Periodical of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 53 (2): 247–262. doi:10.1901/jeab.1990.53-247. PMC1323010. PMID 2324665.
25. ^ "Activeness of pallidal neurons during movement", Chiliad.R. DeLong, J. Neurophysiol., 34:414–27, 1971
26. ^ ^{a b} Richardson RT, DeLong MR (1991): Electrophysiological studies of the role 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 thirteen, 2009
29. ^ Michael J. Frank, Lauren C. Seeberger, and Randall C. O'Reilly (2004) "By Carrot or by Stick: Cognitive Reinforcement Learning in Parkinsonism," Science 4, November 2004
30. ^ Schultz, Wolfram (1998). "Predictive Advantage Indicate of Dopamine Neurons". The Journal of Neurophysiology. 80 (1): 1–27. doi:10.1152/jn.1998.fourscore.1.ane. PMID 9658025.
31. ^ Timberlake, W (1983). "Rats' responses to a moving object related to food or h2o: A beliefs-systems analysis". Creature Learning & Behavior. 11 (3): 309–320. doi:x.3758/bf03199781.
32. ^ Neuringer, A.J. (1969). "Animals respond for food in the presence of gratis food". Scientific discipline. 166 (3903): 399–401. Bibcode:1969Sci...166..399N. doi:10.1126/science.166.3903.399. PMID 5812041. S2CID 35969740.
33. ^ Williams, D.R.; Williams, H. (1969). "Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 12 (4): 511–520. doi:ten.1901/jeab.1969.12-511. PMC1338642. PMID 16811370.
34. ^ Peden, B.F.; Chocolate-brown, M.P.; Hearst, Eastward. (1977). "Persistent approaches to a signal for food despite nutrient omission for budgeted". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Beast Behavior Processes. 3 (4): 377–399. doi:x.1037/0097-7403.3.4.377.
35. ^ Gardner, R.A.; Gardner, B.T. (1988). "Feedforward vs feedbackward: An ethological culling to the law of effect". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 11 (3): 429–447. doi:10.1017/s0140525x00058258.
36. ^ Gardner, R. A. & Gardner B.T. (1998) The structure of learning from sign stimuli to sign linguistic communication. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. ^ Baum, W. M. (2012). "Rethinking reinforcement: Allotment, induction and contingency". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 97 (one): 101–124. doi:10.1901/jeab.2012.97-101. PMC3266735. PMID 22287807.
38. ^ Locurto, C. M., Terrace, H. S., & Gibbon, J. (1981) Autoshaping and conditioning theory. New York: Academic Press.
39. ^ ^{a b c d} Edwards S (2016). "Reinforcement principles for addiction medicine; from recreational drug utilize 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:10.1016/bs.pbr.2015.07.005. ISBN9780444635457. PMID 26806771. Abused substances (ranging from alcohol to psychostimulants) are initially ingested at regular occasions according to their positive reinforcing properties. Importantly, repeated exposure to rewarding substances sets off a chain of secondary reinforcing events, whereby cues and contexts associated with drug employ may themselves go reinforcing and thereby contribute to the continued utilize and possible abuse of the substance(s) of choice. ...
    An important dimension of reinforcement highly relevant to the addiction process (and particularly relapse) is secondary reinforcement (Stewart, 1992). Secondary reinforcers (in many cases also considered conditioned reinforcers) likely drive the bulk of reinforcement processes in humans. In the specific case of drug [habit], cues and contexts that are intimately and repeatedly associated with drug use volition frequently themselves go reinforcing ... A cardinal piece of Robinson and Berridge'southward incentive-sensitization theory of addiction posits that the incentive value or attractive nature of such secondary reinforcement processes, in improver to the primary reinforcers themselves, may persist and even become sensitized over time in league with the development of drug habit (Robinson and Berridge, 1993). ...
    Negative reinforcement is a special condition associated with a strengthening of behavioral responses that terminate some ongoing (presumably aversive) stimulus. In this case we can define 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 abuse are cocky-administered to quench a motivational demand in the state of withdrawal (Wikler, 1952).
40. ^ ^{a b c} Berridge KC (Apr 2012). "From prediction error to incentive salience: mesolimbic computation of reward motivation". Eur. J. Neurosci. 35 (7): 1124–1143. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.07990.x. PMC3325516. PMID 22487042. When a Pavlovian CS+ is attributed with incentive salience it non only triggers 'wanting' for its UCS, only often the cue itself becomes highly attractive – even to an irrational caste. This cue attraction is another signature feature of incentive salience. The CS becomes hard not 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 often elicits behavioral motivated approach, and sometimes an individual may even effort to 'consume' the CS somewhat equally its UCS (e.g., eat, drink, fume, accept sexual practice with, have as drug). 'Wanting' of a CS tin can turn also turn the formerly neutral stimulus into an instrumental conditioned reinforcer, so that an private volition work to obtain the cue (withal, there exist alternative psychological mechanisms for conditioned reinforcement too).
41. ^ ^{a b c} Berridge KC, Kringelbach ML (May 2015). "Pleasure systems in the brain". Neuron. 86 (3): 646–664. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.02.018. PMC4425246. PMID 25950633. An important goal in futurity for habit neuroscience is to understand how intense motivation becomes narrowly focused on a detail target. Addiction has been suggested to be partly due to excessive incentive salience produced past sensitized or hyper-reactive dopamine systems that produce intense 'wanting' (Robinson and Berridge, 1993). But why ane 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 item compulsions. In Pavlovian reward situations, some cues for reward become more 'wanted' more than others as powerful motivational magnets, in means that differ across individuals (Robinson et al., 2014b; Saunders and Robinson, 2013). ... However, hedonic effects might well modify over fourth dimension. As a drug was taken repeatedly, mesolimbic dopaminergic sensitization could consequently occur in susceptible individuals to dilate 'wanting' (Leyton and Vezina, 2013; Social club and Grace, 2011; Wolf and Ferrario, 2010), even if opioid hedonic mechanisms underwent down-regulation due to continual drug stimulation, producing 'liking' tolerance. Incentive-sensitization would produce addiction, by selectively magnifying cue-triggered 'wanting' to take the drug again, and so 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 Fauna Training".(Sydney: "Sydney Academy Press"., 2011)
43. ^ "All Near Animal Preparation - Nuts | SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment". Animal training basics. Seaworld parks.
44. ^ Dillenburger, K.; Keenan, K. (2009). "None of the As in ABA stand for autism: dispelling the myths". J Intellect Dev Disabil. 34 (ii): 193–95. doi:x.1080/13668250902845244. PMID 19404840. S2CID 1818966.
45. ^ DeVries, J.E.; Burnette, M.M.; Redmon, W.G. (1991). "AIDS prevention: Improving nurses' compliance with glove wearing through performance feedback". Journal of Applied Behavior Assay. 24 (iv): 705–eleven. doi:x.1901/jaba.1991.24-705. PMC1279627. PMID 1797773.
46. ^ Brothers, K.J.; Krantz, P.J.; McClannahan, L.Due east. (1994). "Office paper recycling: A function of container proximity". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 27 (1): 153–60. doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-153. PMC1297784. PMID 16795821.
47. ^ Dardig, Jill C.; Heward, William L.; Heron, Timothy E.; 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. ISBN978-0-13-111339-8.
48. ^ Gallagher, Southward.Thousand.; Keenan M. (2000). "Independent employ of activeness materials past the elderly in a residential setting". Journal of Practical Beliefs Assay. 33 (3): 325–28. doi:10.1901/jaba.2000.33-325. PMC1284256. PMID 11051575.
49. ^ De Luca, R.V.; Holborn, South.West. (1992). "Effects of a variable-ratio reinforcement schedule with irresolute criteria on exercise in obese and nonobese boys". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 25 (3): 671–79. doi:ten.1901/jaba.1992.25-671. PMC1279749. PMID 1429319.
50. ^ Fox, D.Thousand.; Hopkins, B.L.; Anger, W.One thousand. (1987). "The long-term effects of a token economic system on safety performance in open-pit mining". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. xx (3): 215–24. doi:x.1901/jaba.1987.20-215. PMC1286011. PMID 3667473.
51. ^ Drasgow, E.; Halle, J.W.; Ostrosky, M.Yard. (1998). "Furnishings of differential reinforcement on the generalization of a replacement mand in three children with severe language delays". Periodical of Applied Beliefs Analysis. 31 (iii): 357–74. doi:10.1901/jaba.1998.31-357. PMC1284128. PMID 9757580.
52. ^ Powers, R.B.; Osborne, J.Yard.; Anderson, E.G. (1973). "Positive reinforcement of litter removal in the natural environment". Journal of Practical Behavior Analysis. 6 (4): 579–86. doi:x.1901/jaba.1973.6-579. PMC1310876. PMID 16795442.
53. ^ Hagopian, L.P.; Thompson, R.H. (1999). "Reinforcement of compliance with respiratory treatment in a kid with cystic fibrosis". Periodical of Applied Behavior Analysis. 32 (two): 233–36. doi:10.1901/jaba.1999.32-233. PMC1284184. PMID 10396778.
54. ^ Kuhn, S.A.C.; Lerman, D.C.; Vorndran, C.1000. (2003). "Pyramidal training for families of children with problem behavior". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 36 (1): 77–88. doi:10.1901/jaba.2003.36-77. PMC1284418. PMID 12723868.
55. ^ Van Houten, R.; Malenfant, J.East.L.; Austin, J.; Lebbon, A. (2005). Vollmer, Timothy (ed.). "The effects of a seatbelt-gearshift filibuster prompt on the seatbelt employ of motorists who practice not regularly wear seatbelts". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 38 (2): 195–203. doi:x.1901/jaba.2005.48-04. PMC1226155. PMID 16033166.
56. ^ Wong, S.E.; Martinez-Diaz, J.A.; Massel, H.Yard.; Edelstein, B.A.; Wiegand, Westward.; Bowen, Fifty.; Liberman, R.P. (1993). "Conversational skills training with schizophrenic inpatients: A report of generalization across settings and conversants". Behavior Therapy. 24 (2): 285–304. doi:ten.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 person soccer players". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 35 (3): 247–57. doi:10.1901/jaba.2002.35-247. PMC1284383. PMID 12365738.
58. ^ Forthman, D.L.; Ogden, J.J. (1992). "The function of applied beliefs analysis in zoo direction: Today and tomorrow". Journal of Applied Beliefs 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 direction preparation for oppositional defiant disorder and acquit disorder. Bear witness-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (second ed.), 211–226. New York: Guilford Press.
60. ^ Forgatch MS, Patterson GR (2010). Parent management training — Oregon model: An intervention for antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. Prove-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (2nd ed.), 159–78. New York: Guilford Printing.
61. ^ Domjan, 1000. (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. three (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 Kill in State of war and Social club. Boston: Niggling Brown. ISBN978-0316040938.
64. ^ Marshall, South.L.A. (1947). Men Against Fire: the Problem of Battle Control in Future War. Washington: Infantry Journal. ISBN978-0-8061-3280-8.
65. ^ ^{a b} Murray, Chiliad.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 research . Baltimore: Academy Park Press. ISBN9780839112051.
67. ^ Strain, Phillip S.; Lambert, Deborah L.; Kerr, Mary Margaret; Stagg, Vaughan; Lenkner, Donna A. (1983). "Naturalistic assessment of children's compliance to teachers' requests and consequences for compliance". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. sixteen (2): 243–249. doi:x.1901/jaba.1983.xvi-243. PMC1307879. PMID 16795665.
68. ^ ^{a b} Garland, Ann F.; Hawley, Kristin Chiliad.; Brookman-Frazee, Lauren; Hurlburt, Michael Due south. (May 2008). "Identifying Common Elements of Evidence-Based Psychosocial Treatments for Children'south Disruptive Beliefs Problems". Journal of the American University of Kid & Adolescent Psychiatry. 47 (5): 505–514. doi:x.1097/CHI.0b013e31816765c2. PMID 18356768.
69. ^ Crowell, Charles R.; Anderson, D. Chris; Abel, Dawn M.; Sergio, Joseph P. (1988). "Chore clarification, performance feedback, and social praise: Procedures for improving the customer service of bank tellers". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 21 (1): 65–71. doi:10.1901/jaba.1988.21-65. PMC1286094. PMID 16795713.
70. ^ Kazdin, Alan East. (1973). "The upshot of vicarious reinforcement on attentive behavior in the classroom". Periodical of Applied Behavior Assay. 6 (1): 71–78. doi:x.1901/jaba.1973.6-71. PMC1310808. PMID 16795397.
71. ^ Brophy, Jere (1981). "On praising effectively". The Elementary Schoolhouse Journal. 81 (5): 269–278. doi:10.1086/461229. JSTOR 1001606. S2CID 144444174.
72. ^ ^{a b} Simonsen, Brandi; Fairbanks, Sarah; Briesch, Amy; Myers, Diane; Sugai, George (2008). "Bear witness-based Practices in Classroom Management: Considerations for Enquiry to Practice". Education and Treatment of Children. 31 (1): 351–380. doi:x.1353/etc.0.0007. S2CID 145087451.
73. ^ Weisz, John R.; Kazdin, Alan Due east. (2010). Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents. Guilford Press.
74. ^ ^{a b} Braiker, Harriet B. (2004). Who'southward Pulling Your Strings ? How to Suspension The Bicycle of Manipulation. ISBN978-0-07-144672-iii.
75. ^ Dutton; Painter (1981). "Traumatic Bonding: The evolution of emotional attachments in battered women and other relationships of intermittent abuse". Victimology: An International Journal (7).
76. ^ Chrissie Sanderson. Counselling Survivors of Domestic Abuse. Jessica Kingsley Publishers; 15 June 2008. ISBN 978-one-84642-811-ane. p. 84.
77. ^ "Traumatic Bonding | Encyclopedia.com". www.encyclopedia.com.
78. ^ John Hopson: Behavioral Game Blueprint, Gamasutra, 27 April 2001
79. ^ Hood, Vic (12 Oct 2017). "Are loot boxes gambling?". Eurogamer . Retrieved 12 October 2017.
80. ^ Footling tyranny in organizations, Ashforth, Blake, Homo Relations, Vol. 47, No. vii, 755–778 (1994)
81. ^ Helge H, Sheehan MJ, Cooper CL, Einarsen Southward "Organisational Furnishings of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Inquiry, and Practice (2010)
82. ^ Operant Workout and the Practice of Defensive Medicine. Vikram C. Prabhu World Neurosurgery, 2016-07-01, Book 91, Pages 603–605

External links [edit]

Look up operant in Wiktionary, the free lexicon.

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

nielsonlited1940.blogspot.com

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

Share this post