Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The first major world view or theoretical perspective that were going to cover is behaviorism. Youll see that
this theory can apply to any age as well as to humans and animals. Well also look at social learning theory.
By the time we finish the topics in this module,
you will hopefully have attained the objectives
listed at the left.
Think of behaviorism as what people do and how
they act. This does not involve thinking or
emotions. Its as if were machines, which is why
its also referred to as a mechanistic perspective.
Things happen that stimulate us and we respond
to that stimulus, very much like the input-output
metaphor used when we talk about computers.
In behaviorism, people do things for a reason,
meaning that there is a rewarding goal.
Behaviorism is also called conditioning because
its a behavioral control that can be taught. One
can be conditioned to respond to something. Were going to cover the two types of conditioning: classical
conditioning, which deals with controlling involuntary responses, and operant conditioning, which deals with
controlling voluntary responses.
Before we go into the two types of conditioning,
lets look at the principle of cause and effect
behind behaviorism. If animals, and that does
include us humans, are like machines, then our
behavior is based upon cause and effect. That is,
a cause produces an effect, and individuals do
what they do because of some reward. In this
perspective, humans are believed to be
controllable and predictable. Once we know the
cause, we can predict the effect.
Behaviorism is a very reward-based theory.
There is not an interpretation of behavior that
involves intrinsic motivation; behaviorists think
anything we do is to obtain something. Thats
why its a goal-oriented theory, and to behaviorists, the goal is an external reward. In behaviorism, there is no
such thing as an intrinsic motivator.
Behaviorists believe that human behavior (as well as that of other animals) is controllable and predictable. Once
the cause is known, the effect (or behavior) can be predicted. In this theory, all behavior is due to cause and
effect; the cause is referred to as the stimulus, and the effect is referred to as the response. In behaviorism, a
living thing can be programmed to produce a response to a stimulus.
p. 1
p. 2
presented the meat and rang the bell for the dog. Of course, the dog salivated each time. Pavlov did this many,
many times. After a period of time, Pavlov just rang the bell, without presenting the meat, and the dog salivated.
At last, someone had programmed an involuntary response. The bell had become the conditioned stimulus.
So, why was this experiment important? Well, it was the first time anyone had found this kind of relationship,
and it became the basis for greater interest to other researchers who wanted to control peoples responses. It
was the subsequent work by John Watson, an American behaviorism researcher, whose work probably has
much more relevance to you as educators and counselors.
Lets briefly discuss Watsons famous Baby Albert experiment. Before we begin, keep in mind that this
happened early in the last century, before
ethical considerations were utilized in human
research. Watson would never have been able to
do this kind of work in modern times.
The story goes like this: Baby Albert was an
infant child of a woman who worked at Johns
Hopkins, where Watsons lab was located.
Somehow, Albert ended up being a target of
research in the laboratory, where he loved
playing with the little white mice that were also
in the lab. One day, a large book fell off the table
and made a very loud noise that scared little
Albert. He began to cry and didnt want to play
with the white mice. Watson and his lab
assistant, Rosalie (who was also his mistress),
then began to experiment. Watson would have
Albert play with the mice and then bang on a large, steel pipe, scaring Albert every time he played with the
white mice. After a little while, Baby Albert associated the white mice with the loud noise. He became frightened
of white mice, but his fear spread to anything else that was furry, including stuffed animals. What Watson had
done was to create an involuntary (remember the definition of classical conditioning?), emotional reaction (in
this case, fear) in little Albert. Baby Albert now had a phobiaan irrational and generalized fear of something (in
this case, furry things).
Now that Watson had created this phobia, he needed a treatment to get rid of it. What he planned to do,
according to his records, was to create a program
to eliminate this phobia.
Watsons plan was to make the pathology extinct
(eliminate it) by bringing Albert into in the lab
and keeping him far away from the white mice
and anything else that was small, furry, and
white. Watson would also make sure that there
were no loud noises that would scare Albert.
Over a period of time with no noises, Albert
would not be as scared of the mice. With each
subsequent visit to the lab, Watson would bring
the little white mice closer and closer to Albert,
again making sure there would be no loud noises.
Baby Albert would become comfortable with the
decreased distance between him and the mice,
and over a period of time and much repetition,
The University of Memphis
p. 3
Albert would be cured of his phobia. His fear would be made extinct.
Watson also developed another possible treatment: counter-conditioning, which would involve pairing the
stimulus with something pleasant. In Baby Alberts case, he would be introduced to the stimulus along with
something that would make him happy maybe a fun toy. Over time, Albert would replace his associations of
the loud noise and the furry animals with something more pleasant.
Watson used neither extinction nor counter-conditioning; what happened to Baby Albert after he was removed
from the hospital has been a mystery. However, there are a couple of recent accounts of what happened to
Baby Albert at http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/01/little-albert.aspx and
http:\chronicle.com\blogs\percolator\a-new-twist-in-the-sad-saga-of-little-albert\28423?sid=at&utm_source=at
&utm_medium=en.
This experiment, at the expense of poor little Baby Albert, has been important in psychology because Watson
was the first to discover a scientific basis for phobias and a treatment for them. As a matter of fact, Watson was
the first researcher to also draw attention to incentives, which are positive rewards, associated with correct
modes of conduct. He also highlighted the notion of stimulus generalization, which is when a phobia first starts,
and how, if left untreated, it begins to generalize to related areas.
Lets talk a little about phobias. (You can go to http://phobialist.com/ for a list of phobias.) Many times phobias
are created unintentionally. Are you math phobic? Lots of people are. We know that if a child is told to go to the
front of the room to work a math problem in front of the class and has no idea what to do, the child can become
embarrassed and often made to feel dumb. Sometimes the teacher berates the child in front of the rest of the
class; sometimes the child can be left standing without producing any math work on the board. This child can
develop a fear of going in front of the classroom as well as a fear of doing math. Over a period of time, this fear
becomes a very real phobia that could continue through adolescence and adulthood. The same thing can
happen when a student who is not a good reader is asked to read out loud to the class. This child could develop
a reading phobia.
Do you have a phobia? Can you remember what created it? If not, dont worry; we often forget the cause of the
original phobia, but we know we have it. Sometimes we pick up fears that adults in our lives share with us.
Ultimately, what you need to realize is how you can avoid planting the seeds for a phobia in people, especially
children. If left untreated, it can be very difficult to correct. Its much better to focus on incentiveslots of
them. This keeps things positive and positive is a reaction that needs to be associated with school work.
I get lots of questions from counseling and counseling psych students about using flooding to treat phobias. This
is the if you are afraid of water, we will throw you into the deep end type of therapy. Im not a big fan,
especially when there are so many other methods available which will be less traumatic. Why would you risk
further trauma when you can achieve the same goal another way?
Okay Its time to shift gears to operant conditioning.
The focus of operant conditioning is to control voluntary responses, or behavior, regardless of initial stimulus.
The main theorist here is B.F. Skinner. As youll see, operant conditioning is the major part of behaviorism and
the main representative of the mechanistic world view. What we see now is that the focus changes from what
the original stimulus was, to operating on the response with peoples responses linked to the outcome or what
happens after the response.
p. 4
p. 5
p. 6
p. 7
p. 8
It is generally better to take away a goodie (punishment II) than to add a baddie (punishment I). Well get to that
a little later.
One of the things you need to realize is that punishment only works to quell a bad response, so you never get to
the good response. In fact, even when you apply the worst punishment you can think of, youve only delayed
the bad response; you have not eliminated it. Its only through reinforcement that you shape a new response,
the good response.
One of the effects of punishment I is avoidance responses and these are not good! An example of an avoidance
response is when a child doesnt do his homework and the teacher, using punishment I, makes the child stay
after school. So the next time the child doesnt do homework, rather than turning nothing in, he resorts to
taking someone elses homework, or telling a lie (the dog ate it ), or cheating. What you see happening with
avoidance responses is that you now have more bad responses than you started out with.
Some of you may think that you cant function unless you use punishment. It could be that you were raised on
punishment and you turned out all right. While that may be true, in most cases, had reinforcement been used,
you would have turned out all right, too, and you wouldnt have had to go through such a negative experience.
Think about a time when you were growing up when an adult in your life used punishment.
1. Was there another alternative for the adult that would have worked without making you angry, scared,
or sad?
2. Did your behavior (whatever it was) really cease completely, or did you just work not to get caught or
not do that behavior in that adults presence?
If you use punishment, go for punishment II, not I, and always explain to the person being punished why youre
doing what youre doing. Tell that person the behavior that you want or expect and why the behavior that you
are punishing was wrong. Do try, however, to use reinforcement whenever possible. Remember, children will
look to you as a model of adulthood. We know that all behavior has consequences and children must
understand this. Positive consequences (reinforcement) make people want to repeat and strengthen the
response while negative consequences (punishment) make people angry or afraid, thus creating avoidance
responses.
Heres the bottom line:
Positive consequences (reinforcement) make people want to repeat the response.
Negative consequences (punishment) make people angry or afraid and can create avoidance behaviors.
Exactly how effective is punishment at changing behaviors?
This brings us to the controversy of using corporal punishment. We know from the research that there isnt a
firm conclusion as to the effectiveness of corporal punishment done by parents in the home. In many states,
corporal punishment is still allowed in the school systems. There are many parents who utilize this punishment
at home but who dont approve of someone else using it on their child. Some people argue that corporal
punishment is all that certain kids know, so its what should be used. These kids may also get slapped, cussed
out by the adults in their lives, or called stupid or useless. Does that mean that we can use those tactics as well?
Also, think about the messages that we are giving children: if we are bigger than you or in a position of power,
its okay for us to hit. However, its not okay for you to use violence.
Take a moment to read this research:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/09/16/spanking.children.parenting/index.html?test
The University of Memphis
p. 9
There are options to punishment (i.e., reinforcement) that will change the behavior, and there is a lot of
research to show that this is effective more effective than punishment. But its harder much harder to
reinforce good behavior than to react and punish bad behavior. So remember that if youre in a position to use
punishment, work hard to use punishment II (taking away a goodie).
Thinking about what we model when we use
corporal punishment is a good segue to our
discussion of social learning theory.
Social learning theory maintains that we are
influenced greatly by our social environment
and other people. Stimuli now have a social
context: the other people that present you
with contingencies, rewards, and
punishments. As an individual, you are in the
middle of the stimulus response chain. You, as
a human organism, are a link in the chain.
Your brain is like a giant computer. With it,
you learn about the contingencies that are
present in the environment as well as from
the rewards and punishments you receive.
Like behaviorism, there is a reaction for every action. But because you also remember the reactions to the
actions in your past, you can anticipate or build expectancy as to what will happen again if you repeat an action.
You can also learn vicariouslyby observing others and the rewards and punishments they receive.
The focus, as you see, has changed. In our previous discussion of behaviorism, you didnt play any part in the
stimulus-response connection. The rewards and punishments that you received were determined externally and
you reacted to them. On the other hand, with social learning theory, the change is internal, and you can learn to
self-regulate.
This is still a mechanistic world view but the brain serves as an information processing computer.
Lets start by looking at the work of Albert
Bandura. He is most noted for his research on
vicarious learning, the effects of modeling, social
contracts, self-regulation, and self-efficacy.
Take a look at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCETgT_Xfzg
to see the famous Bobo doll experiment. This
illustrates the theory of vicarious learning: that
we learn by watching what others experience.
We dont have to be the direct recipient of
reinforcement to change our behavior; people
can learn about rewards and punishments by
watching others.
People also learn by imitating someone they
identify with. For example, many teachers teach
the same way as their favorite teacher taught
The University of Memphis
p. 10
them, even though they may subsequently learn that the best teaching techniques were not utilized. Modeling
is related to vicarious learning, but the effectiveness of the model is dependent upon how much the observer
identifies with the model, and how long the contact is between the model and observer. Whether good or bad,
the actions that teachers and parents model have a direct and important impact on children. Again considering
corporal punishment, understand that often children learn at home that it is okay to hit someone else.
According to the theory of vicarious learning, it wont really matter if we teach that hitting is bad if we do it. Do
as I say, not as I do just doesnt cut it. So in your world, you have to answer the question: does hitting model
respect for authority or does it model violence? And is this the model that an adult should set?
In addition to studying modeling and vicarious learning, Banduras research also influenced the use of learning
(academic) and behavioral contracts.
The contract is a set of agreements, explicit in
nature, between the individual and someone
else. A rule of thumb is that the contract,
whether its behavioral or academic, should be
kept simple. The individual should have a voice in
what she is to do, so negotiating the contract is a
two-way exercise. The purpose of the contract is
to promote success; if it doesnt, then it was
probably too difficult for the individual. Any
contract should be designed so that its
promoting success rather than failure. The main
purpose for an academic contract is to help the
student become a more self-directed learner,
which is part of the students self-regulation.
Julian Rotter, another theorist in the social
learning area, was responsible for two important theories. He determined that people have histories of success
and failure that are dependent upon their experiences with rewards and punishments. Consequently, they have
built up an expectancy of what will happen in terms of success or failure. He also studied locus of control.
The basic tenet of expectancy theory is that if a
person has had success, perhaps in a specific
venture or possibly in several ventures, the
person will have an expectancy of success in new
ventures. If the person has experienced failure,
the expectancy for new ventures will be one of
failure. This is a fairly simple but important
theory. If people have had successful experiences
in their pasts, they are more likely to expect
success in new endeavors. So, if youve been
successful in your math courses in the past,
youre more likely to expect success in math in
the future. We make assumptions as educators
that when children start a new school year or
college students start a new course, they have
expectancy for success and are ready to begin.
Sometimes this assumption is false.
p. 11
p. 12