Psychology of Learning

Module 07: Operant Conditioning 2

Summary

A Closer Look at Reinforcement

Reinforcement is more complex than simply adding rewards.

• Latent learning shows organisms can learn without reinforcement, but reinforcement is needed to motivate performance.
• Premack Principle: higher‑probability behaviors (preferred activities) can reinforce lower‑probability behaviors. For example, playground time reinforces desk cleaning.
• Response Deprivation Theory: even low‑probability behaviors can become reinforcers if restricted below baseline levels. Deprivation, not preference alone, determines reinforcing value.
• Need/Drive Reduction Theories: early ideas that reinforcers reduce biological needs or drives, but these fail to explain phenomena like saccharin or sexual arousal.
• Electrical Stimulation of the Brain (ESB): revealed reinforcement involves specific brain circuits, bypassing need or drive reduction. Together, these theories highlight that reinforcement depends on relative preference, deprivation, & neural mechanisms.

Behavioral Economics & Complex Behaviors

Operant conditioning intersects with economics in predicting choices.

• Behavioral economics applies optimization theory: organisms maximize utility, balancing diminishing marginal value & variety. Animals & humans approximate optimal choices (e.g., bluegill prey selection, dung fly mating).
• Elastic vs. inelastic demand: when substitutes exist, demand is elastic (responding decreases as “price” rises); when no substitutes exist, demand is inelastic (responding persists despite cost).
• Chaining: builds complex sequences of behaviors.
  • Forward chaining teaches step‑by‑step from the beginning.
  • Backward chaining teaches from the end backward, often easier for long sequences.
• Instinctive drift: learned behaviors revert to instinctual patterns (e.g., raccoons rubbing coins, pigs rooting tokens).
• Avoidance learning: organisms learn to avoid fear itself. Mowrer’s two‑factor theory explains avoidance as classical conditioning (fear of CS) plus operant conditioning (escape removes fear). Clinical examples include agoraphobia, where avoidance of places is reinforced by fear reduction.

Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Consequences

Consequences vary in effectiveness depending on several factors:

• Satiation: reinforcers lose power when needs are met.
• Immediacy: immediate consequences are stronger than delayed ones.
• Contingency: reliable, consistent consequences produce stronger learning.
• Cost‑benefit analysis: behaviors occur only when benefits outweigh costs.

Additional influences: reinforcer quality, rate, delay, response effort, amount, & motivation.

Punishment effectiveness depends on:

• Manner of introduction (intensity from the start),
• Immediacy,
• Consistency (schedule),
• Motivation level,
• Availability of alternatives,
• Punishment as discriminative stimulus.

Disadvantages of punishment: emotional side effects (fear, anger), general suppression of behavior, monitoring demands, aggression, & reinforcement of the punisher. Despite drawbacks, punishment can be effective if applied immediately, consistently, & with alternatives available.

Applications: These principles underpin behavior therapy, where reinforcement & punishment are used to shape or reduce behaviors, setting the stage for applied techniques in later modules.

Conclusion

Module 07 deepens operant conditioning by showing reinforcement is relative & context‑dependent, choices follow economic principles, complex behaviors require chaining, instincts can override learning, & consequence effectiveness depends on timing, reliability, & motivation. These insights prepare the ground for applied behavior analysis & therapeutic interventions.