Applications of operant conditioning techniques in behavioral modification

Operant Conditioning Techniques

How to Use Operant Conditioning Techniques

The behaviorist B.F. Skinner (1953) introduced the term "operant conditioning" (OC) to refer to a type of behavior modification technique using reinforcements and punishments. This form of conditioning technique is distinguished from classical conditioning because it aims at modifying voluntary behaviors rather than eliciting behaviors through a prior stimulus. The person has a choice whether or not to change. The environmental consequences OC uses become attached to the behavior and tend either to strengthen it or weaken it. With OC, the focus is on rewards and punishments as a way to increase and reinforce desirable behavior or to decrease and extinguish undesirable behavior, and less on mechanical habit development.

Operant conditioning works with several methods. To increase the frequency of a response, reinforcements are used. One is positive reinforcement, where the desired act, when it occurs, is followed with a reward (pleasure). Another is negative reinforcement, where the desired act, when it occurs, is followed with the removal of an unpleasant stimulus (thus gaining relief and avoidance learning). To decrease the frequency of a response, punishments are used. One is positive punishment, which inflicts pain (aversive stimulus). The other is negative punishment, which withdraws pleasure. Extinction occurs when a previously reinforced behavior is no longer reinforced. The actor realizes there is no more reason to pursue the behavior. Intermittent reinforcement is successful because the reinforcement is never predictable.

Mr. Byrne can't understand why scolding his seventh-grade students for disruptive classroom behaviors makes them more unruly. How can we explain Mr. Byrne's predicament in terms of these operant conditioning principles? How can we show how he could use operant conditioning techniques to (a) reduce disruptive behaviors and (b) increase cooperative behaviors?

Scolding the students is ineffective for Mr. Byrne because it is not a strong enough positive punishment. The class feels that there is not enough at stake in obeying the teacher. Nothing averse is withdrawn. The consequences are too weak for them to want to obey. He doesn't seem to combine scolding with other real consequences that could be more effective than just words. He never praises the children for good behavior, nor does he give out rewards. Further, if he scolds them so often, the children learn that the schedule of reinforcement is consistent, and thus ignore the scolding because it is predictable.

To reduce disruptive behavior in class, Mr. Byrne has two main options. He could use positive punishments that go beyond mere scolding -- things like adding extra homework for those who misbehave, increasing in-class work, making kids feel ashamed by singling them out or putting them out of the classroom, and even going as far as to do actual physical punishment (if the school allows mild striking). The kids will want to avoid these and will do so by not being disruptive. Mr. Byrne can also use negative punishments that withdraw pleasure -- things like taking away free time, separating the disruptive classmates from each other (move them to different desks) so that their capacity to interact is gone, giving detentions which remove fun time, and confiscating cell phones and video games or other items that bring the student joy. If they know they will lose something they want, they will be less likely to engage in acts that will lead to such consequences. Both of these methods may be effective in reducing disruptive behavior.