Learning Theory: Skinner and Bandura

Unlike psychodynamic theory which emphasized the role of the unconscious, learning theories take a polar opposite view of personality structure, formation, growth, and change. Learning theories emphasize the role of the environment and the external world in shaping and guiding an individual’s personality.

Learning theories arose out of the behaviorism movement, the second force in psychology. Like its name implies, behaviorism focuses on observable behavior and minimizes the role of thoughts and emotions. A famous quote by John Watson, an early pioneer in behaviorism, highlights the importance of the environment:  “Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select- doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief, and, yes, even beggarman and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors." 

This week we are going to examine two key learning theories: Skinner’s operant conditioning theory and Bandura’s social cognitive theory.

B.F. Skinner

Skinner is one of the most influential psychologists of all time. His theories were proposed in direct contrast to the ideas of unconscious motivation and conflict supported by Freud; view the video "Interview with Skinner" (text version) for a discussion of the key differences between the perspectives of Skinner and Freud. His theory of operant conditioning extends across many areas of psychology and has become a prominent theory in a range of disciplines outside of the field. As pictured above, Skinner’s work is so influential that he was actually pictured on the cover of Time magazine. Skinner conducted and published hundreds of studies; the graph to the right illustrates Skinner’s productivity as a researcher. The application of operant conditioning theory covered topics ranging from personality to parenting to a utopian society. Skinner believed that all thoughts, emotions and behaviors could be taught, dictated, and controlled through environmental consequences. For an overview of operant conditioning theory, view the video "Operant Conditioning" (text version). 

Skinner's early research focused on the application of operant principles for animal behavior. He developed a "Skinner box" to control the rate of reinforcement (food pellets) on shaping rat behavior (bar pushing).

As his theory progressed, Skinner applied his conditioning theory to human behavior. Skinner was so convinced about the absolute role of environmental influences in shaping behavior, that he created an "air crib" to have complete control over the environment of infants. While Skinner did utilize the air crib in raising his own children, it did not find widespread commercial success. 

Operant conditioning emphasizes the role of reinforcement and punishment in either strengthening or weakening the probability that a specific behavior will occur in the future. The following table illustrates the role of operant consequences in shaping behavior.

Addition of environmental

stimulus

Removal of environmental

stimulus

Increases behavior

positive reinforcement

negative reinforcement

Decreases behavior

positive punishment

negative punishment

Reinforcement always increases behavior. Positive reinforcement increases behavior by adding a desirable stimulus; negative reinforcement increases behavior by removing an unwanted stimulus. In contrast to reinforcement, punishment always decreases behavior. Positive punishment decreases behavior by adding an undesirable stimulus; negative punishment decreases behavior by removing a desired stimulus.For example:

Consequence Example Explanation

positive reinforcement

Giving a child an allowance for cleaning his/her room.

The allowance is desired by the child and it increases the likelihood that the room will be cleaned in the future.

negative reinforcement

Taking an aspirin to relieve a headache.

Removal of the pain is desired by the person and it increases the likelihood that a person will take aspirin again in the future.

positive punishment

Spanking a child for biting their sibling.

Spanking is not desired by the child so the likelihood of future biting will decrease.

negative punishment

Giving a child a time out for throwing a temper tantrum.

The child desires freedom, so the time out removes the desired freedom and decreases the future likelihood of temper tantrums.

To test your understanding of reinforcement and punishment, go to the Negative Reinforcement University and complete the relevant activities (click "enter nru"). In addition, review the main points of operant conditioning by listening to the episode "Rewards and Punishments" at http://www.thepsychfiles.com/.

When determining whether a consequence is reinforcement or punishment, it is important to look at the rate of future behavior rather than the consequence itself. In addition, consequences are not universally effective; consequences are unique to each individual and may vary from time to time for the same individual.

Operant consequences may be applied on either a continuous schedule (reinforcing every behavior) or an intermittent schedule (reinforcing only certain behaviors). Continuous schedules produce very high rates of behavior but may be costly and inefficient. Intermittent schedules produce slower, but more consistent rates of behavior and are often a more efficient, realistic use of resources. View the following presentation for an overview of the four intermittent reinforcement schedules: fixed-ratio, variable-ratio, fixed-interval, and variable interval.