Tag Archives: operant conditioning

Parenting and Conditioning

While we were discussing conditioning in class, we mostly talked about animals and how with the use of repetition, rewards, and punishments, we can shape behavior. Animals aside, I began to wonder where else conditioning might show up in my life. I realized that as I was growing up, many of these techniques were actually used by my parents in order to prevent bad habits and encourage other behaviors.

Classical conditioning is a type of learning that happens when we connect involuntary responses to certain stimuli other than the original natural stimulus. Similar to Pavlov’s experiments with the dogs, I remember salivating and going downstairs automatically whenever I heard dishes being set on the table. I’m sure that my natural response to dishes being set on the table didn’t make me salivate and expect dinner. However, after years of conditioning to pair the neutral stimulus (dishes) to the unconditioned stimulus (salivating), I expected delicious home-cooked meals when I heard clanking downstairs.

My parents also liked to use operant conditioning when training me as a young child. Operant conditioning, contrary to classical conditioning, shaped my behavior with the use of positive and negative reinforcements and punishments to encourage voluntary behaviors. Learning in operant conditioning depends on the antecedent stimuli, or stimuli after the action, whereas classical conditioning depends on what comes before the response. For example, my parents liked to give me candy after a doctor’s visit so that I wouldn’t scream as loudly and actually get in the car to go. Other times, they would deprive me of television or tell me to go to my room in order to get me to behave myself in social situations. It was extremely effective. In order to avoid the negative punishment, or something pleasant being removed from my life, I was apt to obey my parents and stop hitting my brother.

I never realized the psychological theories behind my childhood, but I suppose it’s natural to know how people react to certain actions. Conditioning is definitely an effective means of getting a child to behave.

Moral Questions for Operant Conditioning in Animals

Have you ever wondered why we, as humans, measure the intelligence of other organisms by their ability to mimic the characteristics or behaviors that we exhibit? For example, consider a dog. If a dog listens well, does tricks, and obeys orders given by their owners then that dog is considered to be intelligent when compared to a dog that does not obey their owners. Now, if these two dogs are the same breed and the same age it is safe to assume that one has received training, most likely in the form of operant conditioning during their raising while the other dog did not. Does the fact that one dog was taught how to do tricks through positive reinforcement, most likely, make it more intelligent than the dog that was not given the same opportunity? I would venture to say that tricks and obeying orders does not explicitly illustrate the intelligence level of animals. I would argue that tricks and obeying orders is simply a medium which trainers and psychologists use to project the intelligence of animals into a tangible scale that most people are able to understand.

Now, the question arises: is it morally right and psychologically safe to use classical and operant conditioning methods to make animals perform tricks and obey orders that they would inherently never do in nature. Granted, domesticated animals such as service dogs serve a greater purpose than ‘rolling-over’, but take this idea and extrapolate it out from domesticated animals to organisms that truly have no place in captivity.

Consider the orca whale. For over 30 years these animals have been used as show animals for organizations like SeaWorld performing tricks for crowds of people of all ages. I would recommend watching the documentary ‘Blackfish’ in regards to the details of the orcas of SeaWorld, and for those of you who have seen it you might understand my stance a bit more clearly (Blackfish, Cowperthwaite). By nature, the orca is an extremely emotional driven animal. They live in families that live and die closer than most humans do to their families. Naturally, they are extremely intelligent and highly skilled in teamwork. A short video (hyperlink: http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/orca-juvenile-training-lex) shows how a family of orcas not only using teamwork to capture a seal, but using observational learning techniques with the children to try and show them how hunting works (Killer Whales). As we saw in class, the use of observational learning requires the use of mirror neurons which seem to only be found in organisms with high cognitive development such as primates and humans.

The heightened ability to learn through observation may have been a reason leading to making orcas show animals, but this has proven to have negative influences on the animals. In the film ‘Blackfish’, SeaWorld trainers explain how they used positive reinforcement to promote behavior and negative punishment to demote behaviors. On the surface this worked to train the animals to do tricks for their performances. However, just as Pavlov’s dog would do after conditioning if the trainers would make the orca do a trick and deny it a reward they would get frustrated. This frustration has led to violence and, in cases, the death of trainers.

Unfortunately, the moral questions continue. As stated before, orcas are very family based creatures. When taken from their homes and dumped into a cage with strange whales they can quickly begin to show signs of anxiety. There are cases where this anxiety has led to violence against other whales and to trainers. Over time, this anxiety has led to what seems to be similar to antisocial personality disorders and even depression. Once again I would highly recommend watching the documentary ‘Blackfish’ to get a sense of what I have talked about.

I hope this has sparked some thought into why we as humans find it necessary to psychologically shape other creatures when given the chance. In the case of orcas this forced conditioning has led to possible psychological disorders and in the case of domesticated animals it has led to the near complete dependence on humans for survival.

I encourage comments, thoughts, and criticisms.

 

Works Cited:

Blackfish. Dir. Gabriela Cowperthwaite. Dogwoof, 2013. Film.

“Killer Whales “Gang Up” to Capture Seal.” Killer Whales “Gang Up” to Capture Seal. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2014.

Animal training and conditioning

When a lot of animal trainers and pet owners begin to train their animals they immediately begin to implement operant conditioning. According to our textbook, the practice of operant conditioning includes the use of both positive and negative consequences after a voluntary response emitted by the organism. Furthermore, operant conditioning utilizes reinforcement and punishment. Reinforcement is anything that increases the chances of a response occurring, while punishment is anything that follows a behavior that reduces the possibility of that behavior occurring again in the future. My family recently got a Brittany Spaniel puppy and, as we begin to train him, our first intention was to use operant conditioning, rewarding him with food as soon as he sits, lays down, or comes when called (a source of positive reinforcement). However, after learning about operant and classical conditioning in class, I wondered why classical conditioning is not used more, or referred to as often when training animals. There are actually some negative aspects to operant conditioning when considering training an animal. One of the major issues I found is the inability of people to always supply an animal with something it likes in time for the consequence to have a relationship with the behavior. For example, sometimes when we let our dog outside without a leash and when we ask him to come we do not have any treats or desirable toys with us to give him as a reward. We end up running back inside to get him a treat, but is that delay between the behavior and the reward too long for the dog to form the association? There are some cases when operant conditioning is not ideal, and it is more successful to use classical conditioning.

Many individuals would not initially consider classical conditioning as a desirable way to train their animal, however, I think it is a lot more effective in some circumstances. Classical conditioning is often used by animal trainers for two reasons: One, to condition or train autonomic responses, such as the drooling (in Pavlov’s experiment), producing adrenaline, or reducing adrenaline (calming) without using the stimuli that would naturally create such a response; Second, to create an association between a stimulus that normally would not have any effect on the animal and a stimulus that would. Classical conditioning can be an extremely useful training method for an animal that you cannot easily supply with something it likes or dislikes. For example, if you were trying to train a Dolphin to jump while it is in the water, the chances that you could give the Dolphin a fish fast enough after it performs the behavior are pretty low, it is highly likely that the fish will start to sink. Additionally, some dog trainers utilize classical conditioning by repeatedly pairing the sound of a clicker with the taste of food and eventually the sound of the clicker alone will begin to produce the same response that the taste of food would. Also, classical conditioning can be useful to train your dog to respond to verbal cues or hand gestures. In fact, you can “teach” your dog to associate words with their actions relatively easily. If your dog is sitting and you say, “sit” whenever you observe him sitting he will begin to associate the word with the behavior. Overall, operant conditioning and classical conditioning have both proven to be useful ways to train an animal. In many situations, deciding which method to use depends on the type of animal, or the preference of the individual training the animal.

Behaviorism in Every day Life

Behaviorism in Every Day Life

            Behaviorism is a holistic theory of development that can be seen everywhere in our daily lives. It focuses on the concept that the environmental experiences can shape us and create the person that we are today.  Pavlov, Watson, and Skinner all focused on behaviorism and its effects.  However, in my case, I want to focus on Skinner’s learning theory, operant conditioning.

As a sophomore, living with three other roommates in an apartment can become very hectic. The trash fills up, the bathroom is gross, and someone “accidentally” eats your food. Our biggest problem, however, was the dirty kitchen. There was always a huge pile of dishes in the sink. While I always dutifully rinsed my dishes and put them in the dishwasher, it seemed that 2 of my other roommates liked to toss their dirty dishes into the sink and wait a week. Instead of someone doing the dishes, the pile would just get bigger and bigger. Every time I walked into the kitchen, I would grimace and clean the dishes myself. As an experiment, I stopped cleaning the dishes and waited for either one of them to do it themselves. When one of them finally did it, I made a huge show of it. I thanked them, and marveled at “how clean” the kitchen finally was.

It didn’t take long before my roommates got the point and started picking up their own slack. I was surprised at how easily I got them to clean up after themselves, without yelling or awkwardly pointing it out to them. Just by simply using positive reinforcement, I was able to have a clean kitchen and still maintain good relationships with my roommates. By reinforcing their good behaviors and ignoring the bad ones, I was increasing their good behaviors without any animosity. It’s a simple idea, but when put to practice can show a lot of information about the human brain and how it works.