How does biology play a role in operant conditioning?

Biology plays a role in operant conditions because an animal’s natural predispositions constrain its capacity for operant conditioning. For example, pigeons easily learn to flap their wings to avoid being shocked and to peck to obtain food, because it is natural for them to flee with their wings and eat with their beaks. However, they have a hard time learning to peck in order to avoid a shock or to flap their wings to obtain food. Biological constraints predispose organisms to learn associations that are naturally adaptive. Thus, it was found that biological dispositions were more important than formerly supposed. Scientists found that even after an animal would learn a behavior, they would soon begin to drift back to their natural ways.

Research after Skinner:

Research after Skinner had a lot to do with operant conditioning. Scientists applied operant conditions in work, at school, and at home. Today we have seen operant conditioning principles used on problems ranging from high blood pressure to social withdrawal. Behavioral economists are applying operant conditions principles in their study of consumer behavior and drug use and abuse. Skinner believed in using operant conditioning at school to teach students of different abilities. Today, his idea has not completely played out, but we are closer to it than ever with new technology. Moreover, Skinner once said, “How much richer would the whole world be if the reinforcers in daily life were most effectively contingent on productive work?” Today, many companies enable their employees to share profits and to participate in company ownership. As well, motivation, morale, and cooperative spirit are commonly used to reinforce a job well done. Lastly, at home Skinners legacy has played out as energy costs are lowered with operant conditioning studies and parents find ways to disrupt the cycle of a child’s disruptive behavior with reinforcers.

Modeling: Modeling is the process of observing others and imitating a specific behavior. Humans learn all kinds of social behaviors from observing and imitating others.

Mirror neurons: Mirror neurons are recently discovered neurons that reside in the frontal lobe area adjacent to the to the brain’s motor cortex. They fire when performing certain actions or when observing another doing so. The brain’s mirroring of another’s actions may enable imitation of language learning, and empathy. Basically these neurons control the “monkey sees, monkey does” idea. PET scans reveal that these neurons definitely occur in humans.

Albert Bandura: Albert Bandura is the pioneering researcher of observational learning. One of Bandura’s famous experiments was when he studied how a preschool child mirrored adult behavior in a classroom. Bandura believes that part of the reason that a child would imitate this model is reinforcements and punishments. We look and we learn. By looking, we learn to anticipate a behavior’s consequences in situations like those we are observing. We are especially likely to imitate those who we perceive as similar to ourselves, as successful, or admirable.

Prosocial models: Prosocial models are models that are positive and helpful and can have prosocial effects. This means that people who exemplify nonviolent, helpful behavior can prompt similar behavior in others. Models are most effective when their actions and words are consistent.

The impact of television: Television, no matter where it is, is a form of observational learning. Yet, this learning is not always a benefit. In developed countries, most children spend more of their first 18 years watching television rather than in school. Two-thirds of homes have three or more sets, which helps explain why parents’ reports of what their children watch hardly correlate with children’s reports of what they watch. U.S. network programs have offered about 3 violent acts per hour during primetime and 18 per hour during children’s Saturday morning programs. During the late twentieth century, the average child viewed 8,000 TV murders and 100,000 other acts of violence before finishing elementary school. Half of television’s violent interactions don’t show the harm done to the victims and 6 in 10 don’t show the victims pain. To sum it all up, researchers have found that watching violence on television does lead to aggressive behavior in children and teenagers.

The good news about TV: The good news about television is that psychological research is not definite and there are many things that could have gone wrong with the experiments that researchers did on violence and TV. One thing they have to take in mind is that people who watch violent TV probably already have a history of violence and/or like violence. As well, they only experimented on a small sample. To really find cause and effect in an experiment it is better to use a large, randomized sample.

Desensitizing of youth: After a prolonged exposure to horrid violence on television, many viewers become desensitized. They become more indifferent to it when later viewing a brawl, whether on TV or in real life. While spending three evening watching sexually violent movies, male viewers in one experiment became progressively less bothered by the rapes and slashings. Three days later, they also expressed less sympathy for domestic violence victims than did research participants who ha not been exposed to the films, and they rated the victims’ injuries as less severe. It is evident that there has been a change because in 1903 when they first showing of a story film occurred and a cowboy fired a pistol at the camera, some audiences ran out screaming. Today, that would probably not bother anyone.

Provide one example of Observational Learning from your lifetime:

One example of Observational Learning from my lifetime is when I learned to yawn like my dad. This may sound really weird, but my dad has a really obnoxious and strange yawn. I never understood why he did it, but I eventually started to yawn like him, only subconsciously knowing it at first.

Megan Johnson, Pd. 7