# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Discovered by Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov, classical conditioning is a type of unconscious or automatic learning. This learning process creates a conditioned response through associations between an unconditioned stimulus and a neutral stimulus. In simple terms, classical conditioning involves placing a neutral stimulus before a naturally occurring reflex.

One of the best-known examples of classical conditioning is Pavlov's classic experiments with dogs. In these experiments, the neutral signal was the sound of a tone and the naturally occurring reflex was salivating in response to food. By associating the neutral stimulus (sound) with the unconditioned stimulus (food), the sound of the tone alone could produce a salivation response.

Although classical conditioning was not discovered by a psychologist, it has had a tremendous influence over the school of thought in psychology known as behaviorism. Behaviorism assumes that all learning occurs through interactions with the environment and that environment shapes behavior.

Classical Conditioning Definitions

Classical conditioning-also sometimes referred to as Pavlovian conditioning-uses a few different terms to help explain the learning process. Knowing these basics will help you understand classical conditioning.

Unconditioned Stimulus

An unconditioned stimulus is a stimulus or trigger that leads to an automatic response. If a cold breeze makes you shiver, for instance, the cold breeze is an unconditioned stimulus; it produces an involuntary response (the shivering).

Neutral Stimulus

A neutral stimulus is a stimulus that doesn't initially trigger a response on its own. If you hear the sound of a fan but don't feel the breeze, for example, it wouldn't necessarily trigger a response. That would make it a neutral stimulus.

Conditioned Stimulus

A conditioned stimulus is a stimulus that was once neutral (didn't trigger a response) but now leads to a response. If you previously didn't pay attention to dogs, but then got bit by one, and now you feel fear every time you see a dog, the dog has become a conditioned stimulus.

Unconditioned Response

An unconditioned response is an automatic response or a response that occurs without thought when an unconditioned stimulus is present. If you smell your favorite food and your mouth starts watering, the watering is an unconditioned response.

Conditioned Response

A conditioned response is a learned response or a response that is created where no response existed before. Going back to the example of being bit by a dog, the fear you experience after the bite is a conditioned response.

How Classical Conditioning Works

Classical conditioning involves forming an association between two stimuli, resulting in a learned response. There are three basic phases of this process.

Phase 1: Before Conditioning

The first part of the classical conditioning process requires a naturally occurring stimulus that will automatically elicit a response. Salivating in response to the smell of food is a good example of a naturally occurring stimulus.

During this phase of the process, the unconditioned stimulus (UCS) results in an unconditioned response (UCR). Presenting food (the UCS) naturally and automatically triggers a salivation response (the UCR).

At this point, there is also a neutral stimulus that produces no effect-yet. It isn't until the neutral stimulus is paired with the UCS that it will come to evoke a response.

Let's take a closer look at the two critical components of this phase of classical conditioning:

The unconditioned stimulus is one that unconditionally, naturally, and automatically triggers a response. For example, when you smell one of your favorite foods, you may immediately feel hungry. In this example, the smell of the food is the unconditioned stimulus.

The unconditioned response is the unlearned response that occurs naturally in response to the unconditioned stimulus. In our example, the feeling of hunger in response to the smell of food is the unconditioned response.

Phase 2: During Conditioning

During the second phase of the classical conditioning process, the previously neutral stimulus is repeatedly paired with the unconditioned stimulus. As a result of this pairing, an association between the previously neutral stimulus and the UCS is formed.

At this point, the once neutral stimulus becomes known as the conditioned stimulus (CS). The subject has now been conditioned to respond to this stimulus. The conditioned stimulus is a previously neutral stimulus that, after becoming associated with the unconditioned stimulus, eventually comes to trigger a conditioned response.

In our earlier example, suppose that when you smelled your favorite food, you also heard the sound of a whistle. While the whistle is unrelated to the smell of the food, if the sound of the whistle was paired multiple times with the smell, the whistle sound would eventually trigger the conditioned response. In this case, the sound of the whistle is the conditioned stimulus.

Phase 3: After Conditioning

Once the association has been made between the UCS and the CS, presenting the conditioned stimulus alone will come to evoke a response-even without the unconditioned stimulus. The resulting response is known as the conditioned response (CR).

The conditioned response is the learned response to the previously neutral stimulus. In our example, the conditioned response would be feeling hungry when you heard the sound of the whistle.

Key Principles of Classical Conditioning in Psychology

Behaviorists have described a number of different phenomena associated with classical conditioning. Some of these elements involve the initial establishment of the response while others describe the disappearance of a response. Here is a closer look at five key principles of classical conditioning.

Acquisition

Acquisition is the initial stage of learning, when a response is first established and gradually strengthened. During the acquisition phase of classical conditioning, a neutral stimulus is repeatedly paired with an unconditioned stimulus.

As you may recall, an unconditioned stimulus is something that naturally and automatically triggers a response without any learning. After an association is made, the subject will begin to emit a behavior in response to the previously neutral stimulus, which is now known as a conditioned stimulus. It is at this point that we can say that the response has been acquired.

Once the response has been established, you can gradually reinforce the response to make sure the behavior is well learned.

Extinction

Extinction is when the occurrences of a conditioned response decrease or disappear. In classical conditioning, this happens when a conditioned stimulus is no longer paired with an unconditioned stimulus.

For example, if the smell of food (the unconditioned stimulus) had been paired with the sound of a whistle (the conditioned stimulus), the sound of the whistle would eventually come to evoke the conditioned response of hunger.

However, if the smell of food were no longer paired with the whistle, eventually the conditioned response (hunger) would disappear.

Spontaneous Recovery

Sometimes a learned response can suddenly reemerge, even after a period of extinction. This is called spontaneous recovery.

For example, imagine that after training a dog to salivate to the sound of a bell, you stop reinforcing the behavior and the response becomes extinct. After a rest period during which the conditioned stimulus is not presented, you ring the bell and the animal spontaneously recovers the previously learned response.

If the conditioned stimulus and unconditioned stimulus are no longer associated, extinction will return very rapidly after a spontaneous recovery.

Generalization

Stimulus generalization is the tendency for a conditioned stimulus to evoke similar responses after the response has been conditioned. For example, if a dog has been conditioned to salivate at the sound of a bell, the animal may also exhibit the same response to a sound that's similar to the bell.

In John B. Watson's famous Little Albert Experiment, for example, a small child was conditioned to fear a white rat. The child demonstrated stimulus generalization by also exhibiting fear in response to other fuzzy white objects, including stuffed toys and Watson's own hair.

Discrimination

Discrimination is the ability to differentiate between a conditioned stimulus and other stimuli that have not been paired with an unconditioned stimulus.﻿﻿

For example, if a bell tone were the conditioned stimulus, discrimination would involve being able to tell the difference between the bell tone and other similar sounds. Because the subject is able to distinguish between these stimuli, they will only respond when the conditioned stimulus is presented.

What Are Examples of Classical Conditioning?

It can be helpful to look at a few examples of how the classical conditioning process operates both in experimental and real-world settings.

Fear Response

John B. Watson's experiment with Little Albert is an example of the fear response. The child initially showed no fear of a white rat, but after the rat was paired repeatedly with loud, scary sounds, the child began to cry when the rat was present.

Prior to the conditioning, the white rat was a neutral stimulus. The unconditioned stimulus was the loud, clanging sounds, and the unconditioned response was the fear response created by the noise.

By repeatedly pairing the rat with the unconditioned stimulus, the white rat (now the conditioned stimulus) came to evoke the fear response (now the conditioned response).

This experiment illustrates how phobias can form through classical conditioning. In many cases, a single pairing of a neutral stimulus (a dog, for example) and a frightening experience (being bitten by the dog) can lead to a lasting phobia (being afraid of dogs).

Taste Aversions

Another example of classical conditioning is the development of conditioned taste aversions. Researchers John Garcia and Bob Koelling first noticed this phenomenon when they observed how rats that had been exposed to nausea-causing radiation developed an aversion to flavored water after the radiation and water were presented together.

In this example, the radiation represents the unconditioned stimulus and nausea represents the unconditioned response. After the pairing of the two, the flavored water is the conditioned stimulus, while nausea that formed when exposed to the water alone is the conditioned response.

Later research demonstrated that such classically conditioned aversions could be produced through a single pairing of the conditioned stimulus and the unconditioned stimulus.

Why do such associations develop so quickly? Forming such associations can have survival benefits. If an animal eats something that makes it ill, it needs to avoid eating the same food in the future to avoid sickness or even death.

This is an example of biological preparedness. Some associations form more readily because they aid in survival.

Organizational Behavior

Classical conditioning can also have applications in business and marketing. For example, it can be used to help people form favorable attitudes toward products, businesses, or brands.

While there may not be a direct link between the item and the consumer response, creating this association may help motivate people to purchase certain products because they have developed a favorable opinion of them due to classical conditioning.

What Is the Difference Between Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning?

Criticisms of Classical Conditioning

Some psychologists maintain that classical conditioning represents a reductive, mechanical explanation for some behaviors. Some other criticisms of classical conditioning center on the fact that:

Classical conditioning does not take human individuality and free will into account

It generally does not predict human behavior; people can form associations but still not act upon them

Many different factors can impact the associations and outcomes

People can choose to not act on the associations they have made through classical conditioning

However, the approach still holds great fascination for researchers and relevance in modern psychology.

In reality, people do not respond exactly like Pavlov's dogs. There are, however, numerous real-world applications for classical conditioning. For example, many dog trainers use classical conditioning techniques to help people train their pets.

These techniques are also useful for helping people cope with phobias or anxiety problems. Therapists might, for example, repeatedly pair something that provokes anxiety with relaxation techniques in order to create an association.

Teachers can apply classical conditioning in the class by creating a positive classroom environment to help students overcome anxiety or fear. Pairing an anxiety-provoking situation, such as performing in front of a group, with pleasant surroundings helps the student learn new associations. Instead of feeling anxious and tense in these situations, the child will learn to stay relaxed and calm.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who discovered classical conditioning?

Ivan Pavlov discovered classical conditioning. Pavlov was passionate about physiology, even earning gold medals for his work in this field. It was in his position as director of a physiological laboratory that he began to connect physiological research with reflex response and regulation.

Why is classical conditioning considered a form of implicit memory?

Implicit memory is a memory that you can recall effortlessly or without thought. Classical conditioning uses this automatic memory to create associations with a neutral stimulus. The association is learned without conscious awareness.

Which therapies are based on the principles of classical conditioning?

Behavioral therapies use the principles of classical conditioning to help people change negative behaviors. The thought behind these therapies is that we learn from our environment. Cognitive behavioral therapy and exposure therapy are two types of behavioral therapy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Classical Conditioning Works, With Examples

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Classical conditioning is a type of learning where an unconditional stimulus is paired with a neutral stimulus, leading to a conditioned response. Learn more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Social Learning Theory: Bandura’s Bobo Beatdown Experiments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Albert Bandura is an influential social cognitive psychologist who is perhaps best-known for his social learning theory, the concept of self-efficacy, and his famous Bobo doll experiments. He is a Professor Emeritus at Stanford University and is widely regarded as one of the greatest living psychologists.

One 2002 survey ranked him as the fourth most influential psychologist of the twentieth century, behind only B.F. Skinner, Sigmund Freud, and Jean Piaget.

Best Known For

Albert Bandura was born on December 4, 1925, in a small Canadian town located approximately 50 miles from Edmonton. The last of six children, Bandura's early education consisted of one small school with only two teachers. According to Bandura, because of this limited access to educational resources, "The students had to take charge of their own education."

He realized that while "the content of most textbooks is perishable...the tools of self-directedness serve one well over time." These early experiences may have contributed to his later emphasis on the importance of personal agency.

Bandura soon became fascinated by psychology after enrolling at the University of British Columbia. He had started out as a biological sciences major and his interest in psychology formed quite by accident. While working nights and commuting to school with a group of students, he found himself arriving at school earlier than his courses started. To pass the time, he began taking "filler classes" during these early morning hours, which led him to eventually stumble upon psychology.

Bandura explained, "One morning, I was wasting time in the library. Someone had forgotten to return a course catalog and I thumbed through it attempting to find a filler course to occupy the early time slot. I noticed a course in psychology that would serve as excellent filler. It sparked my interest and I found my career."

He earned his degree from the University of British Columbia in 1949 after just three years of study and then went on to graduate school at the University of Iowa. The school had been home to Clark Hull and other psychologists including Kenneth Spence and Kurt Lewin. While the program took an interest in social learning theory, Bandura felt that it was too focused on behaviorist explanations.

Bandura earned his MA degree in 1951 and his PhD in clinical psychology in 1952.

Career and Theories

After earning his Ph.D., he was offered a position at Stanford University. Bandura accepted the offer (even though it meant resigning from another position he had already accepted). He began working at Stanford in 1953 and has continued to work at the university to this day. It was during his studies on adolescent aggression that Bandura became increasing interested in vicarious learning, modeling, and imitation.

Albert Bandura's social learning theory stressed the importance of observational learning, imitation, and modeling. "Learning would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them what to do," Bandura explained in his 1977 book on the subject. His theory integrated a continuous interaction between behaviors, cognitions, and the environment.

His most famous experiment was the 1961 Bobo doll study. In the experiment, he made a film in which an adult model was shown beating up a Bobo doll and shouting aggressive words. The film was then shown to a group of children. Afterward, the children were allowed to play in a room that held a Bobo doll. Those who had seen the film with the violent model were more likely to beat the doll, imitating the actions and words of the adult in the film clip.

The study was significant because it departed from behaviorism's insistence that all behavior is directed by reinforcement or rewards. The children received no encouragement or incentives to beat up the doll; they were simply imitating the behavior they had observed. Bandura termed this phenomenon observational learning and characterized the elements of effective observational learning as attention, retention, reciprocation and motivation.

Bandura's work emphasizes the importance of social influences, but also a belief in personal control. "People with high assurance in their capabilities approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than as threats to be avoided," he has suggested.

Is Albert Bandura a Behaviorist?

While most psychology textbooks place Bandura's theory with those of the behaviorists, Bandura himself has noted that he "...never really fit the behavioral orthodoxy."

Even in his earliest work, Bandura argued that reducing behavior to a stimulus-response cycle was too simplistic. While his work used behavioral terminology such as 'conditioning' and 'reinforcement,' Bandura explained, "...I conceptualized these phenomena as operating through cognitive processes."

"Authors of psychological texts continue to mischaracterize my approach as rooted in behaviorism," Bandura has explained, describing his own perspective as 'social cognitivism.'

Selected Publications

Bandura has been a prolific author of books and journal articles over the last 60 years and is the most widely cited living psychologist.

Some of Bandura's best-known books and journal articles have become classics within psychology and continue to be widely cited today. His first professional publication was a 1953 paper titled "'Primary' and 'secondary' suggestibility" that appeared in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology.

In 1973, Bandura published Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis, which focused on the origins of aggression. His 1977 book Social Learning Theory presented the basics of his theory of how people learn though observation and modeling.

Contributions to Psychology

In 1974, Bandura was elected president of the American Psychological Association. The APA awarded him for his distinguished scientific contributions in 1980 and again in 2004 for his outstanding lifetime contributions to psychology.

Today, Bandura is often identified as the greatest living psychology as well as one of the most influential psychologists of all time. In 2015, Bandura was awarded the National Medal of Science by President Barack Obama.

Thanks for your feedback!

What are your concerns?

Other Inaccurate Hard to Understand

Article Sources

Bandura, A. Autobiography. M. G. Lindzey & W. M. Runyan (Eds.), A history of psychology in autobiography (Vol. IX). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association; 2006.

Lawson, RB, Graham, JE, & Baker, KM. A History of Psychology. New York: Routledge; 2015.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Albert Bandura is an influential social cognitive psychologist who is perhaps best-known for his social learning theory, the concept of self-efficacy, and his famous Bobo doll experiments. He is a Professor Emeritus at Stanford University and is widely regarded as one of the greatest living psychologists.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How Does ToM Develop?

We aren't born immediately knowing that others have unique beliefs and desires that are unique from our own. It turns out that there are several developmental precursors (or skills) that infants need to develop their theory of mind later on Westby & Robinson, 2014).

These skills include the ability to comprehend the concept of attention, understand the intentions of others, and the ability to imitate others are all rungs on the ladder you must climb before reaching the platform of theory of mind.

Other developmental precursors necessary of theory of mind to develop include (i) pretending to be someone else (like a doctor or a cashier); (ii) understanding the causes and consequences of emotions; and (iii) understanding ther people and have different likes/dislikes.

Paying Attention to Other People

According to psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen, attention is one of the first underlying precursors to the development of a fully-fledged theory of mind.

This involves recognizing that seeing is not merely looking, but rather we can selectively direct our attention to specific objects and people (Baron-Cohen, 1991). A key example of this attention is joint attention.

Joint attention occurs when two people direct their attention towards the same thing of interest - often doing via pointing so as to direct another's attention to the same source.

When infants understand this gesture, they are simultaneously processing another person's mental state, recognizing that this object is something that another person thinks is of interest (Baron-Cohen, 1991), thus illustrating the beginning phases of the theory of mind.

Intentionality (knowing that people act according to the things they want)

A second core component that contributes to the development of the theory of mind is that of intentionality, or the understanding that others' actions are goal-directed and arise out of unique beliefs and desires, as defined by philosopher Daniel Dennett (1983).

Toddlers as young as 2 years old exhibit an understanding of intentionality (Luchkina et al., 2018) as do chimpanzees and orangutans (Call & Tomasello, 1998).

To understand that people act in a way that is motivated by their desires (for example, I am hungry so I will reach for that apple) is to understand that other people have their own desires (she must be hungry), thus demonstrating a theory of mind, or attributing mental states to others.

Imitation (Copying Other People)

Imitating others is a third building block of theory of mind. The ability to imitate others is to recognize recognizing that others have their own beliefs and desires.

For example, bridging attention and intentionality, imitation can result when a child realizes that others direct their attention (to an object, etc.) and do so intentionally (motivated by goal-directed behavior).

Internalizing these two concepts, the child then engages in imitation and may direct his or her eyes towards that specific object or scene.

However, there is some pushback that imitation is not as much of a crucial precursor for theory of mind. A 2000 longitudinal study found that the infants' imitation scores were not associated with later theory of mind ability (Charman, 2000).

Stages of Theory of Mind

Between ages 4-5, children really start to think about others' thoughts and feelings, and this is when true theory of mind emerges. The actual development of the theory of mind generally follows an agreed-upon sequence of steps (Wellman, 2004; Wellman & Peterson, 2012):

Tasks Listed From Easiest to Most Difficult

Understanding "wanting" : The first step is the realization that others have diverse desires, and to get what they want, people act in different ways.

Understanding "thinking" : The second step is the runderstanding that others also have diverse beliefs about the same thing, and that people's actions are based on what they think is going to happen.

Understanding that "seeing leads to knowing" : The third stage is recognizing that others have different knowledge access, and if someone hasn't seen something, they will need extra information to understand.

Understanding "false-beliefs" : The forth stage is being aware of the fact that others may have false-beliefs that differ from reality.

Understanding "hidden feelings" : The final stage is being aware that other people can hide their emotions, and can feel a different emotion from the one they display.

Cultural Differences

While these developmental stages seem to be universal across demographic groups in laying the groundwork for the formation of theory of mind, different cultures place varying levels of emphasis on each of the five skills, causing some to be developed later than others.

In other words, cultural importance plays a role in determining the specific order in which these five milestones are cemented into the mind of a toddler.

That is, those that are more valued tend to be developed before those that are less so (and this makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, too).

For example, in individualistic cultures, such as the U.S., a greater emphasis is placed on the ability to recognize that others have different opinions and beliefs. However, in more collectivistic cultures such as China, this skill is not as valued and as a result might not develop until later (Shahaeian, 2011).

A study conducted by developmental psychologist Ameneh Shahaeian and colleagues found that for Iranian children, knowledge access was understood earlier than diverse beliefs, aligning with this collectivist culture's emphasis on filial respect and knowledge acquisition (Shahaeian, 2011).

Whereas with Australian participants, who come from a more individualist culture, knowledge access was understood after comprehending that others have diverse beliefs.

Notably, the researchers found that there was no significant cross-cultural difference in overall rates of theory of mind mastery (Shahaeian, 2011), indicating that individuals of all cultures are able to master this skill (Callaghan et al., 2005) despite following different developmental pathways to do so.

False-Belief Tasks

Most theory of mind studies are conducted with toddlers and infants. Because this is a developmental concept, researchers are concerned with the age at which individuals adopt a theory of mind.

Most studies that measure theory of mind rely on a false-belief task.

The traditional test for theory of mind is a false-belief task. A false-belief task is commonly used in child development research to assess a child's understanding that other people can have beliefs about the world which are not true.

The false-belief task allows researchers to distinguish unambiguously between the child's (true) belief and the child's awareness of someone else's different (false) belief (Dennett, 1978).

First-order false-belief tasks assess the realization that it is possible to hold false-beliefs about real events in the world. An example of a commonly used first-order false-belief task is the "Unexpected contents", or "Smarties" task.

Experimenters ask children to predict another child's perception about the contents of a box that looks as though it holds a candy called "Smarties" (that actually includes a pencil) (Gopnik & Astington, 1988).

First-order false-belief tasks involve attribution about other's false-belief with regard to real events.

In second-order false-belief tasks, the child is required to determine what one character in a pictured scenario thinks regarding another character's beliefs (Baron-Cohen, 1995).

Thus, can a child understand that another person's belief about a situation can be different from their own, and also from reality.

For example, a character leaves an object in one location and while he or she is outside the room the object is transferred to a new location.

Passing this task demonstrates the realization that it is possible to hold a false-belief about someone else's belief.

A commonly used second-order false-belief task is the Sally-Anne task, in which a character leaves an object in one location, and while he or she is outside the room the object is transferred to a new location.

The Sally-Anne Task

Simon Baron-Cohen (1985) used the Sally-Anne task to investigate whether autistic children could understand false-belief.

The child who is being tested sits at a table on which two dolls (Anne and Sally) are positioned facing lidded containers (a box and a basket). The experimenter enacts a scenario with the dolls.

In this task, Sally first places a marble into her basket and then leaves the scene. Anne then enters, takes the marble out of the basket, and places it into a closed box. The experimenter then asks the participant where Sally will look for the marble.

Three groups of children were tested (one at a time) - 20 children with autism (experimental group), 14 children with Down's syndrome (control group 1), and 27 typically developing children (control group 2).

If the child passes, he or she will point to the basket, understanding that, although this is no longer reality (as the marble is now in the basket), Sally possesses a false-belief that the marble is in the basket because she did not watch Anne move it (Baron-Cohen et al., 1985).

To point to the basket is to understand that Sally has her own set of beliefs about the world that differ from the child's (he or she knows where the marble actually is).

Findings

85% of the typically developing children and 86% of the children with Down's syndrome answered the false-belief question correctly.

80% of the autistic children fail the false-belief question.

Several studies indicate that children around four or five years of age are able to pass this false-belief task (Baron-Cohen et al., 1985; Gopnik & Astington, 1988; Nelson et al., 2008; Sung & Hsu, 2014).

However, other studies indicate otherwise - that toddlers as young as 15 months old have some understand of a theory of mind. A nonverbal version of the false belief task is employed for babies of this age, with their looking time serving as the dependent variable.

In other words, following the traditional false belief task in which a toy or object is hidden, instead of verbally asking the participant where Sally would look, she would come back and either look in the basket or box, and experimenters would measure the duration that participants looked at Sally performing this action.

If the toddlers looked longer when Sally reached for the box, this would indicate that they expected Sally to look in the basket.

And the results demonstrated this, revealing that, even from a very young age, children do have some understanding of the mental states of others (Onishi & Baillargeon, 2005; replicated by Träuble et al., 2010).

Problems With ToM

Theory of mind is an important underlying mechanism that allows for human social interaction to occur. Without it, we would greatly struggle to communicate with each other, understand each other's behavior, and we wouldn't be known as the unique social beings that make us so special.

Theory of mind problems can have a range of serious complications.

Although research demonstrates that humans have the capacity to understand theory of mind, some have a better ability to do so than others.

Children who are diagnosed with autism, a spectrum disorder marked by challenges with social skills, repetitive behaviors, and nonverbal communication (Speaks, 2011), exhibit a deficit in theory of mind capabilities.

Eighty percent of participants with autism failed a false belief task in an initial study conducted by Simon Baron-Cohen (1985).

And while more recent studies support this claim, they also reveal that children with autism can pass false belief tasks when explicitly asked to do so, as opposed to five-year-old children who can do so automatically.

The difference, however, is that outside of the lab setting, individuals with autism cannot do not show spontaneous false belief attribution (Senju, 2012). On the neurological side, children and adults with autism also show less activation in brain regions, such as the mPFC and TPJ, that are associated with theory of mind (Castelli et al., 2002).

Asperger's

For individuals with Asperger's, a disorder marked by similar, though less severe symptoms than in ASD, also exhibit a lessened ability to express theory of mind, illustrated by their impaired performance on various theory of mind-related tasks (Happe et al., 1996; Spek et al., 2010)

Schizophrenia

Some people with schizophrenia, a mental disorder characterized by a loss of touch with reality, also struggle with theory of mind.

A 2007 meta-analysis (an analysis that combines the results of multiple empirical studies) reveals a stable deficit of theory of mind in people with schizophrenia, as evidenced by their consistent, poor performance on false belief tasks (Sprong et al., 2007).

And similar to individuals with autism and Asperger's, schizophrenic people have reduced recruitment of the mPFC during false belief tasks (Dodell-Feder, 2014).

Depression and Anxiety

Likewise, individuals with depression struggle with theory of mind and experience deficits in integrating contextual informational about other people (Wolkenstein et al., 2011) as well as deficits in theory of mind decoding (Lee et al., 2005).

A 2008 study revealed that both nonpsychotic and psychotic depressed individuals were significantly impaired on tasks involving theory of mind social-perceptual and social-cognitive components (Wang et al., 2008).

Similarly, people with social anxiety disorder, which is marked by interpersonal impairment, are also significantly less accurate at decoding mental states than control groups (Washburn et al., 2016)

Together, these examples illustrate that, while humans do have a unique ability to detect mental states in others, for some, this ability is reduced or not present at all, thus making social interacting challenging and all the more stressful.

ToM in The Brain

Like all psychological concepts, our brain is activated when we rely on theory of mind. Countless neuroimaging studies have helped pinpoint the specific regions that are activated when we engage in theory of mind tasks, identifying a few key areas of our brain.

Administering false belief tasks while simultaneously scanning the brain and pinpointing which regions are active has led researchers to identify the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and temporo-parietal junction (TPJ), among a few other regions, as the main structures that are responsible for theory of mind.

To determine this, researchers have conducted various experimental designs.

A common paradigm relies on a false belief story and false photograph story. As discussed, a false belief test would involve a story similar to that of Sally and Anne, followed by asking the participant a question such as "Does Sally expect to find her doll in the basket or box?"

An example of the control condition, referred to as the false photograph story, is "A photograph was taken of an apple hanging on a tree branch. The film took half an hour to develop. In the meantime, a strong wind blew the apple to the ground," followed by asking the participant "Does this developed photograph show an apple on the ground or branch" (Callejas et al., 2011).

Here, there is no inference about another's mental state, but rather about the state of the apple in the photograph. Studies that utilize this method illustrate that the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) is active during the false belief story, but not in the brains of participants who are part of the control group (Saxe & Kanwisher, 2003; Saxe & Powell, 2006; Saxe, Schultz, & Jiang, 2006).

Additionally, when participants are asked to read stories that describe the thoughts and beliefs of a protagonist as opposed to a story that merely describes the protagonist's physical characteristics, the TPJ activates in the former condition (Saxe & Powell, 2006). These findings have allowed researchers to conclude that the TPJ, located where the temporal and parietal lobes meet.

Research studies also examine the role other brain regions play in theory of mind. The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), the area that covers part of the frontal lobe, is responsible for predicting behavioral and emotional consequences of mental states (Aichhorn et al., 2006).

And other studies reveal the role of the precuneus and amygdala (Gallagher & Frith, 2003; Stone, 2000), namely in patients with left amygdala damage (Fine et al., 2001). There are multiple regions responsible for the development of theory of mind, but what about in

References

Aichhorn, M., Perner, J., Kronbichler, M., Staffen, W., & Ladurner, G. (2006). Do visual perspective tasks need theory of mind? Neuroimage, 30 (3), 1059-1068.

Baron-Cohen, S. (1991). Precursors to a theory of mind: Understanding attention in others. Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development and simulation of everyday mindreading, 1, 233-251.

Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a "theory of mind". Cognition, 21 (1), 37-46.

Bernstein, D. M., Thornton, W. L., & Sommerville, J. A. (2011). Theory of mind through the ages: Older and middle-aged adults exhibit more errors than do younger adults on a continuous false belief task . Experimental Aging Research, 37 (5), 481-502.

Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (1998). Distinguishing intentional from accidental actions in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and human children (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 112 (2), 192.

Callaghan, T., Rochat, P., Lillard, A., Claux, M. L., Odden, H., Itakura, S., ... & Singh, S. (2005). Synchrony in the onset of mental-state reasoning: Evidence from five cultures . Psychological Science, 16 (5), 378-384.

Callejas, A., Shulman, G. L., & Corbetta, M. (2011). False belief vs. false photographs: a test of theory of mind or working memory?. Frontiers in psychology, 2, 316.

Castelli, F., Frith, C., Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2002). Autism, Asperger syndrome and brain mechanisms for the attribution of mental states to animated shapes. Brain, 125 (8), 1839-1849.

Charman, T., Baron-Cohen, S., Swettenham, J., Baird, G., Cox, A., & Drew, A. (2000). Testing joint attention, imitation, and play as infancy precursors to language and theory of mind. Cognitive development, 15 (4), 481-498.

Dennett, D. (1978). Brainstorms: Philosophical essay on mind and psychology. Montgomery, AL: Harvester Press. Dennett, D. C. (1983). Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The "Panglossian paradigm" defended. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6 (3), 343-90.

Dodell-Feder, D., Tully, L. M., Lincoln, S. H., & Hooker, C. I. (2014). The neural basis of theory of mind and its relationship to social functioning and social anhedonia in individuals with schizophrenia . NeuroImage: Clinical, 4, 154-163.

Fine, C., Lumsden, J., & Blair, R. J. R. (2001). Dissociation between theory of mind and executive functions in a patient with early left amygdala damage . Brain, 124 (2), 287-298.

Flombaum, J. I., & Santos, L. R. (2005). Rhesus monkeys attribute perceptions to others. Current Biology, 15 (5), 447-452.

Gallagher, H. L., & Frith, C. D. (2003). Functional imaging of 'theory of mind'. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7 (2), 77-83.

Gopnik, A., & Astington, J. W. (1988). Children's understanding of changes in their mental states. Child Development, 62, 98-110.

Gopnik, A., & Astington, J. W. (1988). Children's understanding of representational change and its relation to the understanding of false belief and the appearance-reality distinction . Child development, 26-37.

Hare, B., Call, J., Agnetta, B., & Tomasello, M. (2000). Chimpanzees know what conspecifics do and do not see. Animal Behavior, 59 (4), 771-785.

Happe, F., Ehlers, S., Fletcher, P., Frith, U., Johansson, M., Gillberg, C., ... & Frith, C. (1996). ' Theory of mind' in the brain. Evidence from a PET scan study of Asperger syndrome. Neuroreport, 8 (1), 197-201.

Hynes, C. A., Baird, A. A., & Grafton, S. T. (2006). Differential role of the orbital frontal lobe in emotional versus cognitive perspective-taking. Neuropsychologia, 44(3), 374-383.

Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89 (1), 25-41.

Krachun, C., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2010). A new change-of-contents false belief test: Children and chimpanzees compared. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 23 (2).

Luchkina, E., Sommerville, J. A., & Sobel, D. M. (2018). More than just making it go: Toddlers effectively integrate causal efficacy and intentionality in selecting an appropriate causal intervention . Cognitive Development, 45, 48-56.

Meltzoff, A. N. (2002). Imitation as a mechanism of social cognition: Origins of empathy, theory of mind, and the representation of action. Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development, 6-25.

Milligan, K., Astington, J. W., & Dack, L. A. (2007). Language and theory of mind: Meta‐analysis of the relation between language ability and false‐belief understanding. Child development, 78 (2), 622-646.

Moore, C., Pure, K., & Furrow, D. (1990). Children's understanding of the modal expression of speaker certainty and uncertainty and its relation to the development of a representational theory of mind. Child development, 61 (3), 722-730.

Moran, J. M. (2013). Lifespan development: The effects of typical aging on theory of mind. Behavioral brain research, 237, 32-40.

Nelson, P. B., Adamson, L. B., & Bakeman, R. (2008). Toddlers' joint engagement experience facilitates preschoolers' acquisition of theory of mind. Developmental science, 11 (6), 847-852.

Nickerson, R. S. (1999). How we know-and sometimes misjudge-what others know: Imputing one's own knowledge to others. Psychological Bulletin, 125 (6), 737.

O Connell, S., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2003). A test for comprehension of false belief in chimpanzees. Evolution and Cognition, 9(2), 131-140.

Onishi, K. H., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs?. science, 308 (5719), 255-258.

Perner, J. (1991). Understanding the representational mind. The MIT Press.

Premack, D., & Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and brain sciences, 1 (4), 515-526.

Ruffman, T., Slade, L., & Crowe, E. (2002). The relation between children's and mothers' mental state language and theory‐of‐mind understanding. Child development, 73 (3), 734-751.

Santos, L. R., Nissen, A. G., & Ferrugia, J. A. (2006). Rhesus monkeys, Macaca mulatta, know what others can and cannot hear. Animal Behaviour, 71 (5), 1175-1181.

Saxe, R., & Kanwisher, N. (2003). People thinking about thinking people: the role of the temporo-parietal junction in "theory of mind" . Neuroimage, 19 (4), 1835-1842.

Saxe, R., & Powell, L. J. (2006). It's the thought that counts: specific brain regions for one component of theory of mind. Psychological science, 17 (8), 692-699.

Saxe, R., Schulz, L. E., & Jiang, Y. V. (2006). Reading minds versus following rules: Dissociating theory of mind and executive control in the brain. Social neuroscience, 1 (3-4), 284-298.

Senju, A. (2012). Spontaneous theory of mind and its absence in autism spectrum disorders. The Neuroscientist, 18 (2), 108-113.

Shahaeian, A., Peterson, C. C., Slaughter, V., & Wellman, H. M. (2011). Culture and the sequence of steps in theory of mind development. Developmental psychology, 47 (5), 1239.

Slaughter, V., & Peterson, C. C. (2012). How conversational input shapes theory of mind development in infancy and early childhood. Access to language and cognitive development, 3-22.

Speaks, A. (2011). What is autism. Retrieved on November 17, 2011.

Spek, A. A., Scholte, E. M., & Van Berckelaer-Onnes, I. A. (2010). Theory of mind in adults with HFA and Asperger syndrome. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 40 (3), 280-289.

Sprong, M., Schothorst, P., Vos, E., Hox, J., & Van Engeland, H. (2007). Theory of mind in schizophrenia: meta-analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 191 (1), 5-13.

Stone, V. E. (2000). The role of the frontal lobes and the amygdala in theory of mind. Understanding other minds, 253-272.

Sung, J., & Hsu, H. C. (2014). Collaborative mother-toddler communication and theory of mind development at age 4. Journal of applied developmental psychology, 35 (5), 381-391.

Tauzin, T., & Gergely, G. (2018). Communicative mind-reading in preverbal infants. Scientific reports, 8 (1), 1-9.

Träuble, B., Marinović, V., & Pauen, S. (2010). Early theory of mind competencies: Do infants understand others' beliefs? Infancy, 15(4), 434-444.

Wang, Y. G., Wang, Y. Q., Chen, S. L., Zhu, C. Y., & Wang, K. (2008). Theory of mind disability in major depression with or without psychotic symptoms: a componential view. Psychiatry Research, 161 (2), 153-161.

Washburn, D., Wilson, G., Roes, M., Rnic, K., & Harkness, K. L. (2016). Theory of mind in social anxiety disorder, depression, and comorbid conditions. Journal of anxiety disorders, 37, 71-77.

Wellman, H. M. & Liu, D. (2004). Scaling theory of mind tasks. Child Development, 75, 759-763.

Wellman, H. M., Fang, F., & Peterson, C. C. (2011). Sequential progressions in a theory‐of‐mind scale: Longitudinal perspectives. Child development, 82 (3), 780-792.

Westby, C. & Robinson, L. (2014). A developmental perspective for promoting theory of mind. Topics in Language Disorders, 34 (4), 362-383.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Theory of Mind in Psychology: People Thinking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Theory of mind is the ability to attribute mental states - beliefs, intents, desires, emotions, and knowledge - to ourselves and others.

# data[].attributes.headline
Classical Conditioning Examples in the Real World

# data[].attributes.subject
Classical Conditioning Examples in the Real World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Classical conditioning refers to learned behaviors when a neutral stimulus is associated with a learned response. For example, when a dog sees a leash, it learns that it's time to go for a walk.
It's often contrasted with operant conditioning, where a behavior is encouraged or discouraged by a 'trainer' or 'teacher' through explicit rewards and punishments. In classical conditioning, there are no rewards or punishments involved - just learning through repetition.

Examples of classical conditioning include learning that a place is pleasurable because you've had good experiences there, learning to associate a pleasant smell with a person you love, and having an instant emotional reaction to the theme song to your favorite sit-com.

Definition of Classical Conditioning

A famous Russian physiologist was examining the gastric juices of saliva in dogs. His goal was to understand the digestive process, and since it starts in the mouth, this is where he started.

To get the dog to salivate he would show it some food. He had inserted some tubes in the dog's mouth to collect the fluids. However, it seems that the dog would often start to salivate before being shown the food. This was a point of irritation to Pavlov.

After a while, he noticed that the dog would salivate when it heard the sound of his assistant's footsteps. His assistant usually brought the food into the laboratory.
The scenario described above has a scientific name: it is called classical conditioning (CC). Simply put, classical conditioning is when a neutral object (footsteps) is associated with another object (food) that triggers a natural response (salivation), then the neutral object will also evoke the natural response.
This is how much of learning takes place. It is a process of learning by association. Of course, there are lots of other factors involved, but generally speaking, this is how learning works.

Although you may not have noticed it before, classical conditioning is one of the most fundamental processes of learning that affect all species.

It's sometimes also known as associative learning.

Examples of Classical Conditioning

1. A Dog Leans a Leash Means Going for a Walk

A lot of good examples of classical conditioning come from pets. We spend a lot of time with our pets and we can see their quirky behavior on a daily basis. Classical conditioning provides an explanation for that quirkiness.

For example, many dog owners will use a leash whenever they take their dog for a walk. After a short while, the dog has learned to going outside means wearing the leash. From the dog's perspective, leash equals going outside.

Now, every time the owner touches the leash, even if it is to move it somewhere or clean it, the dog gets excited. It has associated the leash with going outside; a classic case of learning by association.

2. Pleasant Classroom Environments

Teachers utilize the principles of classical conditioning in many ways. One of those ways is by creating a relaxing and positive classroom environment. Most teachers will spend a lot of time decorating the walls of their classroom.

This starts with choosing pleasant color schemes. One or two of the walls will have a bulletin board that can be decorated with something bright and cheery. Teachers might also put some plants and flowers on the window seals or even large transparent stickers of flora on the windows.

By creating a pleasant classroom environment, the teacher hopes that students will associate learning with a positive feeling. Beautiful images around the room is paired with the learning process.

3. Fond Memories with Musical Backgrounds

Music can be a very powerful stimulus. Sometimes in our lives we may have experiences that are very significant, such as meeting the love of our life for the first time. If that moment happens while a certain song is playing, then the two may become associated.

Then, whenever that song is heard it can trigger our memory of meeting that person. The association between the song and event of meeting can last a very long time, even decades.

Even after the relationship has terminated, the memory can still persist and be triggered by that particular song. It's unfortunate, but that is the way classical conditioning works.
See Also: Vicarious Conditioning
4. Taste Aversion

Imagine that one day you are walking in the forest. You are feeling a bit hungry but did not pack a lunch. You see some tasty-looking red small red berries on a bush nearby. So, you pluck a handful off and eat them.

About 20 minutes later you start to feel very ill and get sick. Really sick. From that day forward, whenever you see any kind of food that is small, round, and red, you avoid it like the plague. In fact, your reaction is almost like a reflex.

You might even develop a dislike for strawberries and tomatoes. Maybe even the sight of the inside of a watermelon makes you feel queasy.

5. The Grumpy Boss

Working with a boss that is usually grumpy and has a generally unpleasant demeanor can make for an uneasy work setting. As soon as he/she enters the room they begin to distribute various commands and complaints. They may point out flaws in previous assignments and constantly be nagging staff about approaching deadlines.

It won't take long for this kind of boss to create an unhappy office setting. In fact, just the very sight of them can generate a feeling of anxiety and avoidance. Even in settings outside of the office, such as social gatherings, people may still feel apprehensive about interacting with them.

From a classical conditioning perspective, this is perfectly understandable. The presence of the boss has been repeatedly associated with an unpleasant emotional state. Over and over again.

6. The Aroma of Food Cooking

The smell of cooking food can trigger the feeling of being hungry. For example, at an outdoor concert there may be several food vendors hoping to cash-in on attendance.

While most people are intently listening to the band on stage and enjoying the show, one of the vendors begins cooking hamburgers and onions on the grill. As the smell permeates the crowd, people start to feel hungry.

The smell of the hamburgers and onions being cooked on the grill is one that most people have experienced many times before. The aroma has been associated with delicious food on many occasions. After a while, the aroma will trigger a hunger response because of this association.

7. Favorite School Subjects

The personality and teaching style of a teacher can have a huge impact on students. Although the material is exactly the same, one teacher may have a fun and engaging style while another may be overly stern and critical.

It is easy to see how students may react to these two different scenarios. Students that learn from the fun teacher will begin to like the subject, maybe even look forward to each class. However, students taught by the critical teacher may develop an aversion to the subject. Soon it will become their least favorite class.

This is a perfect example of how CC works in education. Students associate the subject with the teacher that teaches it.

8. Game Management

Raising sheep and other livestock can be a very profitable business, unless predators such as coyotes and wolves eat your profits. Over that last 50 years there have been many attempts to devise methods of preventing predators from attacking livestock, without actually having to kill the predators.

One interesting technique involves lacing a carcass with a chemical that induces sickness when digested. So, when a coyote approaches an already dead sheep, consumes the meat, and later gets ill, it should prevent further attacks.

The principles of CC apply because the predator will associate getting sick with eating the animal. Therefore, they will not attack that kind of livestock in the future because it has been associated with illness.

9. Celebrities in Advertising

Many celebrities have a very specific public persona. This image could come from always playing a character on a TV show or starring in a particular genre of film. So, when people see a particular celebrity, the image and reputation of that character is activated in their mind.

Some celebrities have an image of being honest, some are considered humorous, while others may have an image of being strong and tough.

Advertising agencies often use celebrities in their ad campaigns. The idea is to get consumers to associate the feelings they have for the celebrity, to their product. For example, if you want to sell insurance, find a celebrity with an honest image to be a spokesperson for your brand.

10. Learned Phobias

A phobia is when we fear something. It could be a place, a sound, or any number of things. Understanding the development of a phobia is an exercise in identifying the components of CC.

For example, initially, a person may have no fear of heights. Then one day, while hiking along a high mountain trail, they slip. They tumble down the hill and get hurt badly.

From that day on, they may develop a strong aversion to hiking. Just the thought of hiking on a mountain may be enough to make them feel anxious. In fact, it is quite possible that they refuse to ever go hiking again.

In terms of CC, they have learned to associate falling and getting hurt with hiking. Even though they have been hiking many times before, that one instance of getting hurt was enough to make them permanently apprehensive.

Classical vs Operant Conditioning

The other type of conditioning is operant conditioning, which is far more popular in education these days. Whereas classical conditioning functions through unconditioned stimulus and response, operant conditioning is more explicit and intentional. Examples of operant conditioning include giving stickers for good behavior, treats for dogs, and even parking fines for not following city parking rules.

Conclusion

When Pavlov first discovered the principles of classical conditioning, no one knew it would have so many applications to so many facets of our everyday lives. Learning by association explains the process of learning for humans and animals.

The process is straightforward. A neutral object/situation ( conditioned stimulus) is associated with another object/situation ( unconditioned stimulus) that triggers a response ( unconditioned response). Over time, or even with just one pairing, the previously neutral stimulus will trigger the unconditioned response.

Advertisers recruit celebrities to endorse products, our preferences and dislikes of certain school subjects, and when we get hungry all involve CC. It also has implications for more serious matters such as the development of phobias and the control of livestock predators.
Related: 10 Conditioned Response Examples References
Till, Brian & Busler, Michael. (1998). Matching products with endorsers: Attractiveness versus expertise. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 15. 576-586. 10.1108/07363769810241445.

Pavlov, I.P. Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press; 1927.

Reynolds, J.C., & Tapper, S.C. (1996). Control of mammalian predators in game management and conservation. Mammal Review, 26, 127-155. Watson, John B., and Rosalie Rayner. "Conditioned emotional reactions." Journal of Experimental Psychology 3.1 (1920): 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Dave Cornell (PhD) and Peer Reviewed by Chris Drew (PhD)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Classical Conditioning Examples (2023)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Classical conditioning refers to learned behaviors when a neutral stimulus is associated with a learned response. For example, when a dog sees a leash, it learns that it's time to go for a walk. It's often contrasted with operant conditioning, where a behavior is encouraged or discouraged by a 'trainer' or 'teacher' through explicit rewards and punishments.

# data[].attributes.headline
Fear as a Conditioned Response (John Watson)

# data[].attributes.subject
Fear as a Conditioned Response (John Watson)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pavlov's Theory of Classical Conditioning Explained!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Operant conditioning, sometimes referred to as instrumental conditioning, is a method of learning that employs rewards and punishments for behavior. Through operant conditioning, an association is made between a behavior and a consequence (whether negative or positive) for that behavior.

For example, when lab rats press a lever when a green light is on, they receive a food pellet as a reward. When they press the lever when a red light is on, they receive a mild electric shock. As a result, they learn to press the lever when the green light is on and avoid the red light.

But operant conditioning is not just something that takes place in experimental settings while training lab animals. It also plays a powerful role in everyday learning. Reinforcement and punishment take place in natural settings all the time, as well as in more structured settings such as classrooms or therapy sessions.

The History of Operant Conditioning

Operant conditioning was first described by behaviorist B.F. Skinner, which is why you may occasionally hear it referred to as Skinnerian conditioning. As a behaviorist, Skinner believed that it was not really necessary to look at internal thoughts and motivations in order to explain behavior. Instead, he suggested, we should look only at the external, observable causes of human behavior.

Through the first part of the 20th century, behaviorism became a major force within psychology. The ideas of John B. Watson dominated this school of thought early on. Watson focused on the principles of classical conditioning, once famously suggesting that he could take any person regardless of their background and train them to be anything he chose.

Early behaviorists focused their interests on associative learning. Skinner was more interested in how the consequences of people's actions influenced their behavior.

Skinner used the term operant to refer to any "active behavior that operates upon the environment to generate consequences." Skinner's theory explained how we acquire the range of learned behaviors we exhibit every day.

His theory was heavily influenced by the work of psychologist Edward Thorndike, who had proposed what he called the law of effect.﻿﻿ According to this principle, actions that are followed by desirable outcomes are more likely to be repeated while those followed by undesirable outcomes are less likely to be repeated.

Operant conditioning relies on a fairly simple premise: Actions that are followed by reinforcement will be strengthened and more likely to occur again in the future. If you tell a funny story in class and everybody laughs, you will probably be more likely to tell that story again in the future.

If you raise your hand to ask a question and your teacher praises your polite behavior, you will be more likely to raise your hand the next time you have a question or comment. Because the behavior was followed by reinforcement, or a desirable outcome, the preceding action is strengthened.

Conversely, actions that result in punishment or undesirable consequences will be weakened and less likely to occur again in the future. If you tell the same story again in another class but nobody laughs this time, you will be less likely to repeat the story again in the future. If you shout out an answer in class and your teacher scolds you, then you might be less likely to interrupt the class again.

Types of Behaviors

Skinner distinguished between two different types of behaviors

Respondent behaviors are those that occur automatically and reflexively, such as pulling your hand back from a hot stove or jerking your leg when the doctor taps on your knee. You don't have to learn these behaviors. They simply occur automatically and involuntarily.

Operant behaviors, on the other hand, are those under our conscious control. Some may occur spontaneously and others purposely, but it is the consequences of these actions that then influence whether or not they occur again in the future. Our actions on the environment and the consequences of that action make up an important part of the learning process.

While classical conditioning could account for respondent behaviors, Skinner realized that it could not account for a great deal of learning. Instead, Skinner suggested that operant conditioning held far greater importance.

Skinner invented different devices during his boyhood and he put these skills to work during his studies on operant conditioning. He created a device known as an operant conditioning chamber, often referred to today as a Skinner box. The chamber could hold a small animal, such as a rat or pigeon. The box also contained a bar or key that the animal could press in order to receive a reward.

In order to track responses, Skinner also developed a device known as a cumulative recorder. The device recorded responses as an upward movement of a line so that response rates could be read by looking at the slope of the line.

Components of Operant Conditioning

There are several key concepts in operant conditioning. The type of reinforcement or punishment that is used can have an effect on how the individual responds and the effect of conditioning. There are four types of operant conditioning that can be utilized to change behavior: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment.

Reinforcement in Operant Conditioning

Reinforcement is any event that strengthens or increases the behavior it follows. There are two kinds of reinforcers. In both of these cases of reinforcement, the behavior increases.

1. Positive reinforcers are favorable events or outcomes that are presented after the behavior. In positive reinforcement situations, a response or behavior is strengthened by the addition of praise or a direct reward. If you do a good job at work and your manager gives you a bonus, that bonus is a positive reinforcer.

2. Negative reinforcers involve the removal of an unfavorable events or outcomes after the display of a behavior. In these situations, a response is strengthened by the removal of something considered unpleasant. For example, if your child starts to scream in the middle of a restaurant, but stops once you hand them a treat, your action led to the removal of the unpleasant condition, negatively reinforcing your behavior (not your child's).

Punishment in Operant Conditioning

Punishment is the presentation of an adverse event or outcome that causes a decrease in the behavior it follows. There are two kinds of punishment. In both of these cases, the behavior decreases.

1. Positive punishment, sometimes referred to as punishment by application, presents an unfavorable event or outcome in order to weaken the response it follows. Spanking for misbehavior is an example of punishment by application.

2. Negative punishment, also known as punishment by removal, occurs when a favorable event or outcome is removed after a behavior occurs. Taking away a child's video game following misbehavior is an example of negative punishment.

Recap

The five principles of operant conditioning are positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, negative punishment, and extinction. Extinction occurs when a response is no longer reinforced or punished, which can lead to the fading and disappearance of the behavior.

Operant Conditioning Reinforcement Schedules

Reinforcement is not necessarily a straightforward process, and there are a number of factors that can influence how quickly and how well new things are learned. Skinner found that when and how often behaviors were reinforced played a role in the speed and strength of acquisition. In other words, the timing and frequency of reinforcement influenced how new behaviors were learned and how old behaviors were modified.

Skinner identified several different schedules of reinforcement that impact the operant conditioning process:

1. Continuous reinforcement involves delivering a reinforcement every time a response occurs. Learning tends to occur relatively quickly, yet the response rate is quite low. Extinction also occurs very quickly once reinforcement is halted.

2. Fixed-ratio schedules are a type of partial reinforcement. Responses are reinforced only after a specific number of responses have occurred. This typically leads to a fairly steady response rate.

3. Fixed-interval schedules are another form of partial reinforcement. Reinforcement occurs only after a certain interval of time has elapsed. Response rates remain fairly steady and start to increase as the reinforcement time draws near, but slow immediately after the reinforcement has been delivered.

4. Variable-ratio schedules are also a type of partial reinforcement that involve reinforcing behavior after a varied number of responses. This leads to both a high response rate and slow extinction rates.

5. Variable-interval schedules are the final form of partial reinforcement Skinner described. This schedule involves delivering reinforcement after a variable amount of time has elapsed. This also tends to lead to a fast response rate and slow extinction rate.

Examples of Operant Conditioning

We can find examples of operant conditioning at work all around us. Consider the case of children completing homework to earn a reward from a parent or teacher, or employees finishing projects to receive praise or promotions. More examples of operant conditioning in action include:

After performing in a community theater play, you receive applause from the audience. This acts as a positive reinforcer, inspiring you to try out for more performance roles.

You train your dog to fetch by offering him praise and a pat on the head whenever he performs the behavior correctly. This is another positive reinforcer.

A professor tells students that if they have perfect attendance all semester, then they do not have to take the final comprehensive exam. By removing an unpleasant stimulus (the final test), students are negatively reinforced to attend class regularly.

If you fail to hand in a project on time, your boss becomes angry and berates your performance in front of your co-workers. This acts as a positive punisher, making it less likely that you will finish projects late in the future.

A teen girl does not clean up her room as she was asked, so her parents take away her phone for the rest of the day. This is an example of a negative punishment in which a positive stimulus is taken away.

In some of these examples, the promise or possibility of rewards causes an increase in behavior. Operant conditioning can also be used to decrease a behavior via the removal of a desirable outcome or the application of a negative outcome.

For example, a child may be told they will lose recess privileges if they talk out of turn in class. This potential for punishment may lead to a decrease in disruptive behaviors.

A Word From Verywell

While behaviorism may have lost much of the dominance it held during the early part of the 20th century, operant conditioning remains an important and often used tool in the learning and behavior modification process. Sometimes natural consequences lead to changes in our behavior. In other instances, rewards and punishments may be consciously doled out in order to create a change.

Operant conditioning is something you may immediately recognize in your own life, whether it is in your approach to teaching your children good behavior or in training the family dog. Remember that any type of learning takes time. Consider the type of reinforcement or punishment that may work best for your unique situation and assess which type of reinforcement schedule might lead to the best results.

Additional Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Operant conditioning is one of the most fundamental concepts in behavioral psychology. Learn more about the effects of rewards and punishments on behavior.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Skinner’s Operant Conditioning: Rewards & Punishments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Have you ever wondered, how did you learn to behave in a specific situation either to act good or bad? Of course, our parents and teachers have a great hand behind our behavioral aspects. But what are the tools that derive the behavior in our life?

Psychologist B.F. Skinner has defined Learning behavior through a called an operant conditioning theory. According to him, "The behavior of an individual is influenced by the consequences. It is the form of conditioning which explains the relationship between behavior and their consequences or rewards (Reinforcements and Punishments)".

Two principal terms influence operant conditioning:

a. Reinforcements (Positive or Negative): Increase the rate of behavior.

b. Punishments ( Positive or Negative): Decrease the rate of behavior.

Now, let's understand how operant conditioning operates our daily life activities:

Examples of Positive Reinforcement

In Positive reinforcement, one gets rewarded for a certain kind of behavior; with this, the probability of continuing good behavior increases. Let's have some relevant examples of positive reinforcement:

A student tends to complete his/her homework daily; because he/she knows that he/she will be rewarded with a candy (action) or praise (behavior).

A child may learn to clean his/her room regularly; because he/she will be rewarded with extra TV hours every time he/she cleans up.

3. Incentives and Bonuses

Workers are often offered with the incentives and bonus in return of completing their targets in time or for regular attendance. It makes the workers to perform better, so that, they can continuously get those incentives and bonus.

4. Discounts and Benefits

Sales Person often give Discounts and prizes to their customer in return for their assurance to shop with them again in the future. Similarly, most of the gyms also offer certain discounts to their customers, if they work out a certain number of times and use their diet products.

Examples of Negative Reinforcement

Negative reinforcement tends to take away something unpleasant, which is acceptable and helps in strengthening the behavior. Let's have some relevant examples for Negative reinforcements:

Students or children will follow rules strictly to avoid being nagged by the teachers or parents. So, to avoid nagging, the child might end up following the rules strictly. Similarly, army personnel also have to follow the strict routine to avoid disciplinary actions against them; it shapes them into a disciplined individual.

Class presentations are daily parts of student life. If a student is praised or complimented, he/she will be encouraged to do well, but if the student is laughed on or criticized in front of everyone, the presentation will be nothing more than just a formality in future.

A child throws a tantrum because he/she didn't get the candy bar. So, his/her father gets him one. He/She then stops the tantrum i.e. something unpleasant is avoided, and his/her father's behavior of getting candy will increase.

A man turns on the TV sound to prevent the irritating sounds coming from outside of his house, maybe of vehicle's honking or from an under-construction area. Turning on the TV or increasing the volume might decrease that unpleasant sound.

Examples of Positive Punishments

Positive Punishments is presenting something unpleasant after the behavior. It tends to decrease that behavior of the individual. Let's have some relevant examples of positive punishment:

A student who always comes late to the class gets insulted every time in front of everyone from the teacher. To prevent the insult or shouting from the teacher, he/she may avoid coming late to the class.

After hitting a classmate, a student is made to sit alone in the class, and no one is allowed to talk to him or sit with him. It may ensure that the child will never hit his classmates again in the future.

11. Neglecting Studies or Failing

A student who ignores his/her studies or regularly gets failed in his/her exams and does not care towards his/her studies is often scolded by his/her parents and teachers. Sometimes, his allowances (pocket money) may also be reduced or completely cut off, the student though reluctantly, may be forced to focus on his/her studies to avoid the failures again.

Examples of Negative Punishment

Negative Punishment is removing something pleasant after the behavior. It also tends to decrease that behavior.

An employee getting criticized in front of the whole office by his boss and having certain privileges taken away as a consequence to his bad behavior at work may motivate him to stay in line and be more sincere.

13. Fine and legal issues

For instance, a driver is fined to some amount, and his driving license is ceased for not following the traffic rules. Here, money and license are removed as his pleasant affair.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
13 Examples Of Operant Conditioning in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Have you ever wondered, how did you learn to behave in a specific situation either to act good or bad? Of course, our parents and teachers have a great hand behind our behavioral aspects. But what are the tools that derive the behavior in our life? Psychologist B.F.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The difference between classical and operant conditioning - Peggy Andover

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Operant Conditioning Schedule of Reinforcement Explained!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Schedules of Reinforcement

By Annabelle G.Y. Lim , published July 02, 2020

Key Takeaways: Reinforcement Schedules

A reinforcement schedule is a rule stating which instances of behavior, if any, will be reinforced.

Reinforcement schedules can be divided into two broad categories: continuous schedules and partial schedules (also called intermittent schedules).

In a continuous schedule every instance of a desired behavior is reinforced, whereas partial schedules only reinforce the desired behavior occasionally.

Partial reinforcement schedules are described as either fixed or variable, and as either interval or ratio.

Combinations of these four descriptors yield four kinds of partial reinforcement schedules: fixed-ratio, fixed-interval, variable-ratio and variable-interval.

In 1957, a revolutionary book for the field of behavioral science was published: Schedules of Reinforcement by C.B. Ferster and B.F. Skinner.

The book described that organisms could be reinforced on different schedules and that different schedules resulted in varied behavioral outcomes.

Ferster and Skinner's work established that how and when behaviors were reinforced carried significant effects on the strength and consistency of those behaviors.

Introduction

A schedule of reinforcement is a component of operant conditioning (also known as ininstrumental conditioning). It consists of an arrangement to determine when to reinforce behavior. For example, whether to reinforce in relation to time or number of responses.

Schedules of reinforcement can be divided into two broad categories: continuous reinforcement, which reinforces a response every time, and partial reinforcement, which reinforces a response occasionally.

Research into schedules of reinforcement has yielded important implications for the field of behavioral science, including choice behavior, behavioral pharmacology and behavioral economics.

Continuous Reinforcement

In continuous schedules, reinforcement is provided every single time after the desired behavior.

Due to the behavior reinforced every time, the association is easy to make and learning occurs quickly. However, this also means that extinction occurs quickly after reinforcement is no longer provided.

For Example

Candy machines are examples of continuous reinforcement because every time we put money in (behavior), we receive candy in return ( positive reinforcement).

However, if a candy machine were to fail to provide candy twice in a row, we would likely stop trying to put money in (Myers, 2011).

We have come to expect our behavior to be reinforced every time it is performed and quickly grow discouraged if it is not.

Partial (Intermittent) Reinforcement Schedules

Unlike continuous schedules, partial schedules only reinforce the desired behavior occasionally rather than all the time. This leads to slower learning since it is initially more difficult to make the association between behavior and reinforcement.

However, partial schedules also produce behavior that is more resistant to extinction. Organisms are tempted to persist in their behavior in hopes that they will eventually be rewarded.

For instance, slot machines at casinos operate on partial schedules. They provide money (positive reinforcement) after an unpredictable number of plays (behavior). Hence, slot players are likely to continuously play slots in the hopes that they will gain money the next round (Myers, 2011).

Partial reinforcement schedules occur the most frequently in everyday life, and vary according to the number of responses rewarded (fixed or variable) or the time gap (interval or ratio) between response.

Combinations of these four descriptors yield four kinds of partial reinforcement schedules: fixed-ratio, fixed-interval, variable-ratio and variable-interval.

Fixed Interval Schedule

In operant conditioning, a fixed interval schedule is when reinforcement is given to a desired response after specific (predictable) amount of time has passed.

Such a schedule results in a tendency for organisms to increase the frequency of responses closer to the anticipated time of reinforcement. However, immediately after being reinforced, the frequency of responses decreases.

The fluctuation in response rates means that a fixed-interval schedule will produce a scalloped pattern (refer to figure below) rather than steady rates of responding.

For Example

An example of a fixed-interval schedule would be a teacher giving students a weekly quiz every Monday.

Over the weekend, there is suddenly a flurry of studying for the quiz. On Monday, the students take the quiz and are reinforced for studying (positive reinforcement: receive a good grade; negative reinforcement: do not fail the quiz).

For the next few days, they are likely to relax after finishing the stressful experience until the next quiz date draws too near for them to ignore.

Variable Interval Schedule

In operant conditioning, a variable interval schedule is when the reinforcement is provided after a random (unpredictable) amount of time has passes and following a specific behavior being performed.

This schedule produces a low, steady responding rate since organisms are unaware of the next time they will receive reinforcers.

For Example

A pigeon in Skinner's box has to peck a bar in order to receive a food pellet. It is given a food pellet after varying time intervals ranging from 2-5 minutes.

It is given a pellet after 3 minutes, then 5 minutes, then 2 minutes, etc. It will respond steadily since it does not know when its behavior will be reinforced.

Fixed Ratio Schedule

In operant conditioning, a fixed-ratio schedule reinforces behavior after a specified number of correct responses.

This kind of schedule results in high, steady rates of responding. Organisms are persistent in responding because of the hope that the next response might be one needed to receive reinforcement. This schedule is utilized in lottery games.

For Example

Variable Ratio Schedule

A variable ratio schedule is a schedule of reinforcement where a behavior is reinforced after a random number of responses.

This kind of schedule results in high, steady rates of responding. Organisms are persistent in responding because of the hope that the next response might be one needed to receive reinforcement. This schedule is utilized in lottery games.

For Example

An example of a fixed-ratio schedule would be a child being given a candy for every 3-10 pages of a book they read. For example, they are given a candy after reading 5 pages, then 3 pages, then 7 pages, then 8 pages, etc.

The unpredictable reinforcement motivates them to keep reading, even if they are not immediately reinforced after reading one page.

Response Rates of Different Reinforcement Schedules

Ratio schedules - those linked to number of responses - produce higher response rates compared to interval schedules.

As well, variable schedules produce more consistent behavior than fixed schedules; unpredictability of reinforcement results in more consistent responses than predictable reinforcement (Myers, 2011).

Extinction of Responses Reinforced at Different Schedules

Resistance to extinction refers to how long a behavior continues to be displayed even after it is no longer being reinforced. A response high in resistance to extinction will take a longer time to become completely extinct.

Different schedules of reinforcement produce different levels of resistance to extinction. In general, schedules that reinforce unpredictably are more resistant to extinction.

In the fixed-ratio schedule, resistance to extinction increases as the ratio increases. In the fixed-interval schedule, resistance to extinction increases as the interval lengthens in time.

Out of the four types of partial reinforcement schedules, the variable-ratio is the schedule most resistant to extinction. This can help to explain addiction to gambling.

Even as gamblers may not receive reinforcers after a high number of responses, they remain hopeful that they will be reinforced soon.

Implications for Behavioral Psychology

In his article "Schedules of Reinforcement at 50: A Retroactive Appreciation," Morgan (2010) describes the ways in which schedules of reinforcement are being used to research important areas of behavioral science.

Choice Behavior

An important discovery has been the matching law, which states that an organism's response rates to a certain schedule will closely follow the ratio that reinforcement has been obtained.

For instance, say that Joe's father gave Joe money almost every time Joe asked for it but Joe's mother almost never gave Joe money when he asked for it. Since Joe's response of asking for money is reinforced more often when he asks his father, he is more likely to ask his father rather than his mother for money.

Research has found that individuals will try to choose behavior that will provide them with the largest reward. There are also further factors that impact an organism's behavioral choice: rate of reinforcement, quality of reinforcement, delay to reinforcement and response effort.

The blog Babble behavior summarizes the findings well: "Everyone prefers higher amounts, quality, and rates of reward. They prefer rewards that come sooner and requires less overall effort to receive."

Behavioral Pharmacology

Schedules of reinforcement are used to evaluate preference and abuse potential for drugs. One method used in behavioral pharmacological research to do so is through a progressive ratio schedule.

In a progressive ratio schedule, the response requirement is continuously heightened each time after reinforcement is attained. In the case of pharmacology, participants must demonstrate an increasing number of responses in order to attain an injection of a drug (reinforcement).

Under a progressive ratio schedule, a single injection may require up to thousands of responses. Participants are measured for the point where responding eventually stops, which is referred to as the "break point."

Gathering data about the break points of drugs allows for a categorization mirroring the abuse potential of different drugs. Using the progressive ratio schedule to evaluate drug preference and/or choice is now commonplace in behavioral pharmacology.

Behavioral Economics

Operant experiments offer an ideal way to study microeconomic behavior; participants can be viewed as consumers and reinforcers as commodities.

Through experimenting with different schedules of reinforcement, researchers can alter the availability or price of a commodity and track how response allocation changes as a result.

For example, changing the ratio schedule (increasing or decreasing the number of responses needed to receive the reinforcer) is a way to study elasticity.

Another example of the role reinforcement schedules play is in studying substitutability by making different commodities available at the same price (same schedule of reinforcement). By using the operant laboratory to study behavior, researchers have the benefit of being able to manipulate independent variables and measure the depending variables.

Mini Quiz

Below are examples of schedules of reinforcement at work in the real world. Read the examples and then determine which kind of reinforcement schedule is being used.

About the Author

Annabelle Lim is a second-year student majoring in psychology and minoring in educational studies at Harvard College. She is interested in the intersections between psychology and education, as well as psychology and the law.

How to reference this article:

Lim, A (2020, July 02). Schedules of reinforcement. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/schedules-of-reinforcement.html

APA Style References

Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Morgan, D. L. (2010). Schedules of Reinforcement at 50: A Retrospective Appreciation. The Psychological Record; Heidelberg, 60(1), 151-172.

Myers, David G. (2011). Psychology (10th ed.). Worth Publishers.

What Influences My Behavior? The Matching Law Explanation That Will Change How You Understand Your Actions. (2017, August 27). Behaviour Babble. https://www.behaviourbabble.com/what-influences-my-behavior/

How to reference this article:

Lim, A (2020, July 02). Schedules of reinforcement. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/schedules-of-reinforcement.html

report this ad

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Annabelle G.Y. Lim , published July 02, 2020 Key Takeaways: Reinforcement Schedules A reinforcement schedule is a rule stating which instances of behavior, if any, will be reinforced. Reinforcement schedules can be divided into two broad categories: continuous schedules and partial schedules (also called intermittent schedules).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In psychology, latent learning refers to knowledge that only becomes clear when a person has an incentive to display it. For example, a child might learn how to complete a math problem in class, but this learning is not immediately apparent. Only when the child is offered some form of reinforcement for completing the problem does this learning reveal itself.

Why Latent Learning Matters

Latent learning is important because in most cases the information we have learned is not always recognizable until the moment that we need to display it. While you might have learned how to cook a roast by watching your parents prepare dinner, this learning may not be apparent until you find yourself having to cook a meal on your own.

When we think about the learning process, we often focus only on learning that is immediately obvious. We teach a rat to run through a maze by offering rewards for correct responses. We train a student to raise his hand in the class by offering praise for the appropriate behaviors. But not all learning is immediately apparent.

Sometimes learning only becomes evident when we need to utilize it. According to psychologists, this "hidden" learning that only manifests itself when reinforcement is offered is known as latent learning.

Discovery of Latent Learning

The term latent learning was coined by psychologist Edward Tolman during his research with rats, although the first observations of this phenomenon were made earlier by researcher Hugh Blodgett. In experiments that involved having groups of rats run a maze, rats that initially received no reward still learned the course during the non-reward trials.﻿﻿

Once rewards were introduced, the rats were able to draw upon their "cognitive map" of the course. These observations demonstrated that learning could take place even when an organism does not display it right away.

Consider, for example, your knowledge of various routes in your hometown. Every day you travel a variety of routes and learn the locations of different businesses in your town.

However, this learning is latent because you are not using it most of the time. It is only when you need to find a specific location such as the nearest coffee shop or bus stop that you are required to draw on and demonstrate what you have learned.

Latent Learning Observations

In his book History of Psychology, author David Hothersall explained that while there was initially some controversy surrounding the phenomenon, numerous researchers also reported that lab rats did learn in the absence of rewards.﻿﻿

This notion challenged much of what the behaviorists believed, which was that learning could only occur with reinforcement. As a result, some of the more entrenched behaviorists suggested that there must have been some sort of reinforcement present during the non-reward trials, even if that reinforcement was not immediately obvious.

Research has demonstrated that the latent learning phenomenon is, as Hothersall explained, "reliable and robust."﻿﻿

Rats placed in a maze may learn the route they need to follow to obtain a food reward, but research has also demonstrated that the rats also learn the entire maze as well.﻿﻿

How do investigators demonstrate that this latent learning has taken place? When experimenters block the learned route, the rats will then use the next shortest path to get to the food. In order to do this, the animals learned the rest of the maze as well, even if such learning occurred without reinforcement.

These findings suggest that learning occurs as we go, often by accident, but not just because of incentives and rewards.﻿﻿ So how does such latent learning take place? Some experts suggest that simply satisfying our curiosity often serves to reward learning.

Latent learning correlates with many higher-level mental abilities, such as problem-solving and planning for the future.

If students learn something now, they may be rewarded in the future with good grades, a high GPA, and acceptance to the college of their choice. The rewards of this learning may not be apparent or immediate, but this learning may take place in anticipation of a reward later on down the road.

Additional Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Latent Learning Works (Even When It's Not Obviously Working)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In psychology, latent learning refers to knowledge that only becomes clear when a person has an incentive to display it. For example, a child might learn how to complete a math problem in class, but this learning is not immediately apparent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PSYCH: TOLMAN'S RATS, LATENT LEARNING, & COGNITIVE MAPS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Behaviorism, also known as behavioral learning theory, is a theoretical perspective in psychology that emphasizes the role of learning and observable behaviors in understanding human and animal actions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Insight learning: Chimpanzee Problem Solving

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tolman - Latent Learning

By Saul McLeod, updated 2018

Latent learning is a type of learning which is not apparent in the learner's behavior at the time of learning, but which manifests later when a suitable motivation and circumstances appear. The idea of latent learning was not original to Tolman, but he developed it further.

Edward Tolman argued that humans engage in this type of learning everyday as we drive or walk the same route daily and learn the locations of various buildings and objects. Only when we need to find a building or object does learning become obvious

Tolman conducted experiments with rats and mazes to examine the role that reinforcement plays in the way that rats learn their way through complex mazes. These experiments eventually led to the theory of latent learning

Cognitive maps as an example of latent learning in rats

Tolman coined the term cognitive map, which is an internal representation (or image) of external environmental feature or landmark. He thought that individuals acquire large numbers of cues (i.e. signals) from the environment and could use these to build a mental image of an environment (i.e. a cognitive map).

By using this internal representation of a physical space they could get to the goal by knowing where it is in a complex of environmental features. Short cuts and changeable routes are possible with this model.

In their famous experiments Tolman and Honzik (1930) built a maze to investigate latent learning in rats. The study also shows that rats actively process information rather than operating on a stimulus response relationship.

Aim

To demonstrate that rats could make navigational decisions based on knowledge of the envi-ronment, rather than their directional choices simply being dictated by the effects of rewards.

Procedure

In their study 3 groups of rats had to find their way around a complex maze. At the end of the maze there was a food box. Some groups of rats got to eat the food, some did not, and for some rats the food was only available after 10 days.

Group 1: Rewarded

Group 2: Delayed Reward

Group 3: No reward

Results

The delayed reward group learned the route on days 1 to 10 and formed a cognitive map of the maze. They took longer to reach the end of the maze because there was no motivation for them to perform.

From day 11 onwards they had a motivation to perform (i.e. food) and reached the end before the reward group.

This shows that between stimulus (the maze) and response (reaching the end of the maze) a mediational process was occurring the rats were actively processing information in their brains by mentally using their cognitive map (which they had latently learned).

Critical Evaluation

The behaviorists stated that psychology should study actual observable behavior, and that nothing happens between stimulus and response (i.e. no cognitive processes take place).

Edward Tolman (1948) challenged these assumptions by proposing that people and animals are active information processes and not passive learners as Behaviorism had suggested. Tolman developed a cognitive view of learning that has become popular in modern psychology.

Tolman believed individuals do more than merely respond to stimuli; they act on beliefs, attitudes, changing conditions, and they strive toward goals. Tolman is virtually the only behaviorists who found the stimulus-response theory unacceptable, because reinforcement was not necessary for learning to occur. He felt behavior was mainly cognitive.

APA Style References

Tolman, E. C., & Honzik, C. H. (1930). Introduction and removal of reward, and maze performance in rats. University of California Publications in Psychology.

Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological review, 55(4), 189.

How to reference this article:

McLeod, S. A. (2018, October, 31). Tolman - latent learning. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/tolman.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Saul McLeod, updated 2018 Latent learning is a type of learning which is not apparent in the learner's behavior at the time of learning, but which manifests later when a suitable motivation and circumstances appear. The idea of latent learning was not original to Tolman, but he developed it further.