Is Behavior Modification Ethical?

Learning Theory and Conditioning

Whether there are ethical objections to using learning theory to shape the behavior of oneself or others is a very interesting ethical question, which has no clear-cut answer. Learning theory is critical to teaching people, and, particularly with children, is a universal part of the behavior conditioning process. Moreover, many adults choose to use learning theory to help retrain themselves, eradicating bad habits and reinforcing good habits. The real ethical dilemma arises when one adult person is consciously using learning theory in a goal-directed manner to change the behavior of another adult person without that other person's permission.

Few people could argue that there are objections to using learning theory to shape behavior in children. Whether a person is an advocate of rewards-based behavior modification in children, whereby children are given rewards for participating in particular behaviors, or an advocate of punishment for children, whereby children are punished for engaging in particular behaviors, it is clear that both approaches rely upon learning theory to reinforce appropriate and inappropriate behaviors in children. Parents do not have to understand learning theory to employ these approaches, many of which are unconsciously incorporated from the parents' own experiences as children.

Moreover, there is little objection to people employing learning theory to change their own behavior. For example, people suffering from addiction issues are often told to avoid things that could trigger the desire to use. These things may include people, places, or things that have previously been associated with the use of drugs or alcohol. It seems ridiculous to suggest that it is unethical for people to avoid triggers while trying to conquer an addiction. Furthermore, when people are trying to engage in positive behaviors, many adults set up their own reward systems to reinforce positive behaviors and hopefully make them habits, which are reinforced by triggers in the environment.

The real question comes when a person is consciously using behavior modification techniques based on learning theory to modify the behavior of another adult person. The television show The Big Bang Theory once had an episode where one of the characters was engaging in behavior modification techniques on the other characters. Even though the characters were aware that the character was using this techniques on others, the choice of individualized reward made it impossible for the characters to see how their own behavior was being modified. This type of overt manipulation of another adult leaves many people feeling uncomfortable, because it seems to deprive the object of the conditioning of his or her free will. However, this discomfort is based in a lack of understanding of learning theory. After all, any behaviors that are being changed would have previously been acquired through the same type of conditioning in the past, whether overt or intentional.

Moreover, learning theory underlies some basic societal conventions. For example, taking flowers to a date relies on the date having a positive association with flowers. The bringer of the flowers hopes that this positive association will be translated to them via the gift of the flowers. Does this action then become sinister if a person understands the learning theory behind the seemingly random gift of flowers to a date? It seems silly that an action that would be deemed harmless if someone were ignorant of why it was being done would suddenly be considered unethical just because someone understood why it was considered a positive thing to do.