Psychological Theories
Psychological Theories
Introduction
There are numerous psychological theories that explain the learning process in human beings. The acquisition of behavior can occur in different circumstances, conditions or environment. Neobehaviorism, operant conditioning and classical conditioning are the three most outstanding models for learning. The three models have different principles that provide an explanation for the learning process and acquisition of behavior. For instance, classical conditioning emphasizes on stimulus and responses (Sonia, 2008).
On the other hand, operant conditioning involves extensive modifications in order to yield a given behavioral attribute. Renowned theorists are behind these psychological models. Ivan Pavlov is among the most notable theorists in psychology. He was the driving force behind the development of the classical conditioning model. The three theories have extensive applications in learning environments. It is thus paramount to examine them while also analyzing their resemblances and distinguishing attributes.
Thesis: Human behavior has direct implications on the learning process.
-
CLASSICAL CONDITIONING
Principles
The classical conditioning theory provides a framework for the learning process using stimulus and responses. According to this theory, a conditional stimulus leads into an unconditional stimulus (Pearson, 2012). The unconditional stimulus encompasses a naturally occurring process such as pain, hunger or thirst. In contrast, the conditional stimulus mostly involves an artificial component such as food.
The main principle behind this theory is that the conditional component triggers an unconditional stimulus. In precise terms, an artificial process leads into a naturally occurring process. From another perspective, a conditional response can trigger an unconditional response. An example is when an individual sweats after continuous exposure to heat (O’Reilly, 2011).
Theorists
Ivan Pavlov is a recognizable physiologist who had extensive influence on the development on the classical conditioning theory. In his experiments, Ivan Pavlov used dogs to investigate different aspects of behavior. For instance, he rang a bell prior to offering food to his dogs. With time, the dogs could detect that it was time for food on hearing the bells (Pearson, 2012). Consequently, the dogs would salivate after Pavlov rang the bell. In this experiment, salivation was the unconditional stimulus. On the other hand, bells were the conditional stimuli.
Mental Processes
The classical conditioning theory presents an excellent basis for understanding the learning process. Based on this model, learning in human beings occurs after continuous exposure to certain conditions. In essence, the human brain provides the platform for unconditional stimulus. On the other hand, teaching and other artificial inputs are the basis for conditional stimulus. For instance, a student learns to solve problems after being taught in the classroom. In this instance, teaching is the conditional stimulus that seeks to enhance the student’s capacity to solve problems. Some natural processes such as intelligence are the direct result of conditional stimulus. Consequently, the classical conditioning theory is an essential platform for describing the mental processes (King, 2007).
Experience
In explaining how human beings learn, the classical conditioning theory employs prior experience. The application of this theory has been widespread since its development by Ivan Pavlov. For instance, past experiments by different physiologists show that the acquisition of new behavior occurs after continuous exposure. Such experiences are vital in determining the most effective approaches for streamlining an individual’s behavior (O’Reilly, 2011). Behavior is an essential component of the learning process, and this helps in conditioning the human brain.
Permanent Change
In human beings or other living organisms, previous experiences lead into permanent alteration of behavior. According to the classical conditioning theory, change in behavior is a continuous process. A systematic chain of events or circumstances result into permanent changes. After his experiments, Pavlov was assertive that continuous conditioning was responsible for changing the dogs’ behavior. Without the continuous exposure to bells, the dogs would not salivate. This also occurs with human beings (Pearson, 2012). They acquire certain behaviors through experience. For instance, a student becomes intelligent through extensive reading.
Application
The application of classical conditioning theory is extensive in the actual learning environment. Instructors stimulate the students’ capacity to excel using different forms of conditional stimuli. For instance, punishments help in correcting the student’s behavior. Apart from schools, the application of classical conditioning is evident in businesses. An example is when customers are used to certain products (O’Reilly, 2011). Such customers would purchase the product even after a hike in price. In the health care sector, physicians use the theory of classical conditioning in different ways. For instance, the theory is helpful in training a patient to walk using artificial limbs after undergoing an amputation.
-
OPERANT CONDITIONING
Principles
In addition to classical conditioning, operant conditioning is another outstanding psychology theory. The main principle behind this theory holds that change in behavior occurs through modifications. Such modifications might either seek to promote or discourage certain behaviors. In essence, rewards and punishments are the two critical components of operant conditioning theory.
Rewards are beneficial attributes that encourage a certain behavior (Hofmann, 2010). On the other hand, punishments are undesirable consequences for certain behavior. According to the theory of operant conditioning, rewards may occur either in the form of positive or negative reinforcements. Operant conditioning has an inherent capacity to cause permanent changes in an individual’s behavior (King, 2007).
Theorists
Renowned American researcher, B. Skinner, is the theorist behind the operant conditioning theory. Skinner’s experiments describe the correlation between punishments and rewards to the behavior of human beings. In his famous experiments at Harvard University, Skinner used rats as the specimen for investigating the theory of operant conditioning. In essence, Skinner’s investigations illustrate the divergent behavior of rats when put in different conditions. In his experiment chamber, Skinner would only offer food to the rats after dragging the lever. With time, these rats had the habit of dragging the lever in order to obtain food (Pearson, 2012). Consequently, food was a form of reward to the rats for heaving the lever. Apart from rats, pigeons were also notable components of Skinner’s experiments.
Mental Processes
The theory of operant conditioning presents an excellent framework for describing the different mental processes for learning. Through modifications, the human brain develops certain behaviors in order to avoid the punishments. Similarly, modifications shape the brain’s functioning because of the rewards of certain behaviors. Learning occurs rapidly when an individual undergoes continuous reinforcement. On the other hand, the lack of continuity might lead into the termination of the learning process. However, partial reinforcements help in enhancing the longevity of the learning process (O’Reilly, 2011).
Experience
As with the theory of classical conditioning, prior experience serves as an essential aspect in the operant conditioning model. Individuals develop a habit because they are aware about the consequence. Prior experience helps an individual to establish whether certain behavior will cause punishments or rewards. In essence, if a certain behavior has desirable consequences, it will be persistent (King, 2007). However, the situation is different for behaviors whose consequences are undesirable. Consequently, human beings are likely to avoid certain behaviors through experience. In Skinner’s experiment, rats would drag the lever because they were familiar with the consequences.
Permanent Change
There are various ways in which the theory of operant conditioning explains permanent change in behavior. Firstly, the theory stipulates that rewards are enough motivation for human beings to change their behavior. This mostly occurs through partial reinforcement (Sonia, 2008). As opposed to continuous reinforcement, partial reinforcement enhances the persistence of habits. This is explains why some individuals always behave in a given way. Modifications are vital components of streamlining behavior. This is because they familiarize an individual with the consequences of actions. This leads to the permanence of certain behaviors within an individual (O’Reilly, 2011).
Application
The theory of operant conditioning has numerous applications in real-world learning environment. Firstly, it provides an excellent framework for explaining the behavioral attributes of human beings. Some people appear to behave in a queer manner as compared to others. The theory of operant conditioning is helpful in explaining such attributes.
In the education sector, the theory of operant conditioning has numerous applications. It serves as a useful platform for promoting positive behavior among learners (King, 2007). For instance, a student attains the reward of good grades when he works hard. In schools, the theory of operant conditioning is also useful in enhancing the standards of discipline among learners. In the business environment, this theory would be helpful in understanding consumer behavior.
-
NEOBEHAVIORISM
Principles
In contrast to the operant and classical conditioning theories, neobehaviorism borrows heavily from behaviorism and positivism. In essence, this framework emphasizes on the role of scientific studies in developing psychological theories. Although this theory borrows heavily from behaviorism, it disputes the extensive use of descriptive models (Sonia, 2008).
According to this theory, nonhuman organisms must always be used while developing psychological experiments. Through such an approach, it is possible to obtain subjective and objective information. Additionally, such experiments would be helpful in averting potential bias. Behaviorists postulate that the behavior of human beings is subject to numerous environmental and biological perspectives. This justifies the use of scientific experiments in assessing human behavior (King, 2007).
Theorists
Different theorists are behind the psychological theory of neobehaviorism. Edward Tolman is among the most notable theorists for this model. According to his principles, every behavior has some goal. However, the behavior becomes extinct after the attainment of these goals. In explaining this phenomenon, Edward Tolman used the term purposive behavior. Clark Hull is another notable theorist in the field of neobehaviorism (O’Reilly, 2011).
According to Hull, reinforcements lead to the discouragement of certain behaviors. This is in contrast to the principle of operant conditioning. B. Skinner was also a contributor to the theory of neobehaviorism. Skinner disputes the postulations of Clark Hull by asserting that it is possible to modify the behavior of human beings using punishments and reinforcements (Pearson, 2012).
Mental Processes
The theory of neobehaviorism does not provide a comprehensive framework for explaining mental processes. This is because it disputes the fundamental principles of behaviorism as well as other psychological theories. However, the theory postulates that the mental process varies between human beings. This is because of genetic variations as well as environmental perspectives (King, 2007).
Experience
This model stipulates that behavior of human beings depends on the prevailing circumstances. This assertion is evident in Clark Hull’s explanation of human behavior. Consequently, prior experience has minimal influence on behavior. Additionally, prior experience does not count in neobehaviorism once an individual attains the initial goal or purpose (Sonia, 2008).
Permanent Change
According to the theory of this theory, permanent change in behavior occurs only when an individual does not have alternatives. In essence, most people are content with certain behavioral attributes. This makes it difficult to change their behavior except under unique scenarios. However, Skinner disputes this argument. He asserts that permanent change in behavior is possible through experience and modifications (Hofmann, 2010).
Application
The application of neobehaviorism to a learning environment is not as widespread as the other theories. This is mainly because of the lack of a concrete framework for distinguishing neobehaviorism from other theories (O’Reilly, 2011). However, its application is evident in academic circles more so in terms of experimentation.
Comparisons
Various attributes demonstrate the similarities between the three theories of neobehaviorism, operant and classical conditioning. Firstly, the three theories draw upon the importance of prior experience in an individual’s behavior. The various principles in the three theories are indicative of the critical role of prior experience in the acquisition of behavior. Secondly, all the theories provide some form of explanation for permanent change in behavior.
Aspects such as rewards, reflexes, and reinforcements are vital attributes that render changes in the behavior of an individual. The different theorists behind the three behavioral models made demonstrations using scientific experiments. Through scientific experimentation, Ivan Pavlov was able to develop a comprehensive framework for classical conditioning. On his part, B. Skinner used rats and pigeons in order to substantiate his assertions about the operant conditioning model. Clark Hull was also able to demonstrate different perspectives about neobehaviorism using scientific experiments (Hofmann, 2010).
Differences
Although the three theories show resemblance in different aspects, disparities are also evident. Whereas operant conditioning emphasizes on the role of modifications in behavior, classical conditioning accentuates the role of stimulus. On the other hand, both perspectives are not prominent components of the theory of neobehaviorism (O’Reilly, 2011). Another disparity between the three behavioral models pertains to the explanations for the learning process. Operant conditioning shows that learning occurs through practice. In contrast, classical conditioning shows that learning occurs through continuous exposure.
Conclusion
Human behavior has direct implications on the learning process. The different sections of the paper justify this statement. The analysis comprises of three psychological theories of behavior. Classical conditioning theory stipulates that a conditional stimulus leads into an unconditional stimulus. The unconditional stimulus encompasses a naturally occurring process such as pain, hunger or thirst. In contrast, the conditional stimulus mostly involves an artificial component such as food.
The main principle behind operant conditioning holds that change in behavior occurs through modifications. Such modifications might either seek to promote or discourage certain behaviors. In essence, rewards and punishments are the two critical components of operant conditioning theory. The psychological theory of neobehaviorism emphasizes on the role of scientific studies in developing psychological theories. Although this theory borrows heavily from behaviorism, it disputes the extensive use of descriptive models.
Prior experience serves as an essential aspect in the operant conditioning model. Individuals develop a habit because they are aware about the consequence. Prior experience helps an individual to establish whether certain behavior will cause punishments or rewards. All these perspectives indicate that human behavior has direct implications on the learning process.
References
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
