What is the definition of operant conditioning

What is the definition of operant conditioning

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2941678/An-Insight-into-Behavior

Operant conditioning is defined as a type of learning in which the desirable or undesirable consequences of a behavior determine whether the behavior is repeated(Uba 184)

Related Questions Answered on Y!Answers

What words could I substitute for “punishment” in operant conditioning?

Q: In operant conditioning, they have positive/negative reinforcement and positive/negative punishment. I don’t like the word “punishment”, because in operant conditioning it has nothing to do with displeasure. “Punishment” in operant conditioning is defined as “a consequence that weakens a response”.An example, there was an experiment where they taught people patterns in punching holes in a game board. The subjects received an electric shock when they got it right, which “strengthened” (reinforced) the correct strategies. A lot of people mistake this for punishment, when instead it is by definition reinforcement, since it strengthened rather than weakened. Positive reinforcement by definition is an added consequence of a behavior that strengthens the likelihood it’ll happen again (negative reinforcement means a consequence taken away that strengthens a response).”Reinforcement” and “punishment” are operational definitions, just like a meter or a second is a circular definition but allowed in Science because these definitions are useful in allowing you to make testable hypotheses.So I’m looking for an antonym of “reinforcement”, to use as my own term for “punishment” so that I can be more independent minded. I know people will give me trouble for it, but I just hate the word “punishment” in operant conditioning because of the confusion it causes. I know the words “deinforcer” and “deinforcement” are not real words, but I almost want to make up my own word. However, I’m not sure if I want to be that independent minded. What some antonyms of the word reinforcer?Blasters,I took a behavioral analysis class and was even an assistant for a lab where students would train rats. I know what “reinforcement” is. It is a consequence that increases the likelihood that a behavior will happen again in the future. The shock experiment that I am talking about was a consequence that “increased” the likelihood that the subjects would then again punch the correct hole. Reinforce means to “strengthen”. This is why I hate the word “punishment”, because people confuse it. I hear people say “Well sometimes reinforcement doesn’t work”. Then psychologists have to point out that it is an operational definition, and if it doesn’t increase the likelihood, then it doesn’t fit the definition of the operational definition. Then people respond with, “That’s a circular definition and falsification is part of Science.” However, in physics they use a “degree” as an operational definition for temperature. You can’t prove or disprove one degree is a degree.They allow “circular” operational definitions in Science like “degrees” for temperature, “seconds” for time, and “meters” for distance, because once you can identify an operational definition, than you can make meaningful falsifiable hypotheses. I keep on hearing people say that behavioral analysis is only about “rewards and punishments”, while the higher ups say the definitions of “reinforcement” and “punishment” are not defined by pleasure/pain, but are rather operational definitions. I just feel that if they would get rid of the word “punishment” and substitute another term for it, there would be less of a gap between behavioral analysis and the rest of psychology/outside world.Blasters,I’m not sure if this experiment is the same one that I read about, but it may be the same one you read:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning#Criticisms”A different experiment, in humans, showed that “punishing” the correct behavior may actually cause it to be more frequently taken (i.e. stamp it in)[11]. Subjects are given a number of pairs of holes on a large board and required to learn which hole to poke a stylus through for each pair. If the subjects receive an electric shock for punching the correct hole, they learn which hole is correct more quickly than subjects who receive an electric shock for punching the incorrect hole. This cannot, however, be accurately described as punishment if it is increasing the probability of the behavior.”Do you see why I don’t like the word “punishment”? It confuses people. It was put in as a criticism for operant conditioning, when it never was a punishment in the first place, but rather a “reinforcer” of behavior.Blaster,As you already know, you don’t “reinforce someone”, but rather “reinforce a behavior”. I keep on hearing many psychology majors say “He did it because he was reinforced for it”. I hate it when people say things like that.The word “punishment” is too emotion-laden for my liking, while it was meant to be an operational definition.Blasters, you say “negative reinforcement”? Negative reinforcement is not “punishment”, but rather “reinforcement” of behavior (by increasing the likelihood). It also says, “If the subjects receive an electric shock for punching the correct hole”. That sounds like a consequence “added” to me. That would mean “positive reinforcer”?Blasters,For that study, Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning#Criticisms talks about how participants were given a shock when they would punch the correct hole and that it would increase the correct response. The reference Wikipedia gives is “Tolman EC. 1932. Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men. Meredith Publishing Company.” Then Wikipedia says, “If the subjects receive an electric shock for punching the correct hole, they learn which hole is correct more quickly than subjects who receive an electric shock for punching the incorrect hole. This cannot, however, be accurately described as punishment if it is increasing the probability of the behavior.”People also say that reinforcement can reduce interest in something. However, follow-up studies show the overjustification effect isn’t reinforcement, but rather bribes. The critics were putting the behavior on cue, then not giving the discriminative stimulus later on after there was reinforcementand because people in psychology just can’t catch on, they keep on saying that the overjustification effect is reinforcement decreasing interest behavior, when it’s really bribes, or putting a behavior on cue. Changing it to “reinforcement and deinforcement” may get rid of the “rewards and punishment” confusion.Studies have also found that the way something is worded affects verbal responses and how one reacts to a situation. That’s why I bring up the possibility for changing words.

A: When B.F. skinner started operant conditioning, he labeled it punishment, so you should stick with the correct reference….not make one up, I would say that is more confusing.

operant conditioning: positive/negative reinforcement/punishment?

Q: I remember that when I was taking a psychology class in high school and college, the concept of positive/negative reinforcement/punishment is as follows:positive=>adding/givingnegative=>removing/withdrawingreinforcement=>increasing behaviorpunishment=>decreasing behaviortherefore, for example, yelling at a kid to stop his crying is a positive punishment.But now I’m taking another psychology class and the textbook definitions are different:positive reinforcement=favorable stimulus, increasing behaviorNegative reinforcement=aversive stimulus, increasing behaviorpositive punishment=aversive stimulus, decreasing behaviorNegative punishment=favorable stimulus, decreasing behaviorso according to these new definitions, yelling to a kid will be a positive punishment.Which sets of definitions are correct?

A: reinforcements always increase a behavior.an applied stimulus that increases the frequency of a behavior is is called poitive, it is added into the scenario.an stimulus that is withdraw from the subject and increases the behavior is a a negative reinforcement.punishment reduces behavior.add a stimulus that reduces behavior and it is called punishmentWhen the stimulus is removed and decreases behavior it is called response cost.Whether yelling is reinforcment or punishment depends on the effect on behavior, does it increae or decrease it. For some kids getting yelled at, means they have the parents attetion and that’s good for them. Or the want the parent to yell (want to make the parent mad) so they are rewared when the parent yells.see table in the link provided below.