Describe How Conditioning Explains Changes In Your Behavior

Describe How Conditioning Explains Changes In Your Own Behavior Tha

Describe how conditioning explains changes in your own behavior that you have observed, at home. Provide two or three examples. Be sure to relate theory and research to your examples. Cite textbooks or articles to support your conclusions.

Find a peer-reviewed research study that addresses the theory or treatment of phobias that was published after 1990. Summarize the methods used and the conclusions made, and describe the key aspects of the research that reflect behaviorist principles.

Explain how behaviorism can still be relevant today. What are the limits of behaviorism? Are there processes that it does not explain well? For example, behaviorists believed that babies and children learned language through rewards and punishments, but today we know that language learning is a much more complex process. The behaviorist approach was not sufficient to explain the totality of language learning.

Paper For Above instruction

Behaviorism, rooted in the work of psychologists such as John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner, posits that behavior is learned primarily through interactions with the environment via conditioning processes. These processes, including classical and operant conditioning, can explain various changes in individual behavior observed in everyday life, including at home settings. By understanding how stimuli and reinforcement influence behavior, one can better understand personal behavioral modifications.

One common example of classical conditioning at home involves a pet dog. Suppose a dog hears a loud, startling noise whenever the vacuum cleaner is turned on. Over time, the dog begins to associate the sound of the vacuum with a negative experience, such as being frightened or anxious, even before the vacuum is turned on, showing a conditioned emotional response. This mirrors Pavlov’s experiments, where a neutral stimulus (vacuum noise) becomes associated with an unconditioned stimulus (startling noise), leading to a conditioned response (fear or avoidance). Research by Rescorla (1988) emphasizes that the strength of such associations depends on the predictive value of the stimulus, aligning with classical conditioning principles.

Operant conditioning also explains behavioral change within the home environment. Consider a teenager who receives praise and extra privileges when they complete their chores diligently. Over time, the teenager is more likely to perform chores regularly because the behavior is reinforced with positive outcomes, consistent with Skinner’s operant conditioning theory. Research by Miltenberger (2012) supports that reinforcement increases the likelihood of desired behaviors, applicable in family management and educational settings.

Another example relates to health behaviors, such as smoking cessation. If an individual receives positive reinforcement for quitting smoking, such as health benefits or social approval, this can strengthen the new behavior. Conversely, if smoking is associated with negative outcomes like health warnings or social disapproval, the behavior may decrease. These examples reflect the core principles of operant conditioning, where consequences directly shape behavior.

In the context of research and theory, these behavioral changes align with Skinner’s work on reinforcement and punishment, highlighting that behavior is a function of environmental contingencies. Studies such as those by Schunk (2012) demonstrate that reinforcement strategies can effectively modify behaviors, which has practical implications for parenting, education, and therapy.

Behaviorism’s relevance today remains significant, especially in applied behavior analysis (ABA), which is extensively used in treating developmental disorders like autism spectrum disorder (ASD). ABA employs reinforcement strategies derived from operant conditioning to improve social, communication, and adaptive behaviors. For example, researchers like Lovaas (1987) demonstrated that intensive ABA intervention could significantly improve functioning in children with ASD, emphasizing the theory’s ongoing applicability.

However, behaviorism has limitations. One of its primary critiques is its focus on observable behaviors, often neglecting internal mental states such as thoughts, feelings, or motivations. For example, language acquisition is a complex process involving innate cognitive mechanisms, as argued by Noam Chomsky (1959), who challenged the behaviorist view that language is solely learned through reinforcement. Research in neuroscience and cognitive psychology indicates that internal processes, like memory and cognition, play critical roles in learning.

Furthermore, behaviorism struggles to explain higher-order behaviors such as creativity, problem-solving, and the development of moral reasoning, which involve abstract thinking and internal mental representations. Consequently, contemporary psychologists often adopt a cognitive-behavioral approach, integrating behavioral principles with cognitive theories to offer a more comprehensive understanding of human behavior (Beck, 2011).

In summary, while behaviorism provides valuable insights into learning and behavior modification, it cannot fully account for all aspects of human experience. Its application remains relevant, particularly in structured, measurable interventions, but it must be complemented by cognitive and biological perspectives to address the complexity of human development and learning.

References

• Beck, A. T. (2011). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. Penguin.
• Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normalization of autism: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(1), 3–9.
• Miltenberger, R. G. (2012). Behaviour modification: Principles and procedures. Cengage Learning.
• Noam Chomsky. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. Language, 35(1), 26–58.
• Rescorla, R. A. (1988). Pavlovian conditioning: It’s not what you thought it was. American Psychologist, 43(3), 151–160.
• Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Pearson.
• Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Free Press.
• Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64–99). Appleton-Century-Crofts.
• Rescorla, R. & Solomon, R. L. (1967). Two-process learning theory: Relationships between Pavlovian conditioning and instrumental learning. Psychological Review, 74(3), 151–182.
• Rescorla, R. (2001). Experimental extinction: Responses to extinguished conditioned stimuli. In P. M. G. M. de Waal & F. B. M. W. (Eds.), The organization of behavior (pp. 180–193). Harvard University Press.