Similarities And Differences Of Operant And Respondent Conditioning Learning Methods

Psychologists invest a lot of effort in varied settings to unravel the clues behind emotional, social, and cognitive progressions linked to learning. Results from diverse sceneries are crucial in improving the learning process. Several theories explicate the nature and reason behind various human behaviors. The education concepts center on environmental influences, including associations, punishments, reinforcements, and observation. This script aims to explain two types of learning: operant and respondent learning. Additionally, the paper seeks to expound on similarities and differences that exist between the two methods and provide real-world examples for the dual concepts.

Operant conditioning is a learning technique that ensues through recompenses and punishments for conduct. There is a direct relationship between manners and its consequences (Blackman, 2017). This system of knowledge is crucial in the reinforcement of desirable habits and weakening unwanted ones- giving rewards to encourage the repetition of action and instilling punishment to discourage reoccurrence of the ill- conduct. For instance, in 2016, Silverman et al. reported that giving employment is an effective therapeutic tool for controlling substance addiction.

In this initiative, adults with proven histories of drug addiction are employed and salaried to work. To enhance abstinence from the drugs, bosses mandate workers to bring urine samples that are free from abused drugs before gaining access to the workplace or maintain their salary. Additionally, to ensure that the employee adheres to addiction medication, they must take their respective prescriptions before entering the workplace. Consequently, the undesirable habit of drug addiction is discouraged by denial of access to work and salary reduction while the desired action of abstaining from the drugs and using the prescribed medication is encouraged by allowed access and maximized salary.

In 2019, Black et al. revealed another example of operant conditioning, which necessitates motivating employees to increase output. Globally, employers encourage recurrent of various profitable activities amongst their employers by giving them both monetary and non-monetary rewards-For instance, promotions at work for well-performing employees or salary increase. Also, awards for various titles (such as the best employee of the year) is a drive to enhance performance. Demotions or retaining the same work level can be applied to the lazy workers to trigger them to work hard to get some benefits.

Respondent conditioning is learning that results from an association between a formerly neutral inducement and a natural stimulus. Implying that one can only learn a new response if there is a link between two stimuli (Synchrony International, 2018). For example, this technique is used in classrooms worldwide to help students to cope with anxiety and phobia related problems. Teachers can link fear-provoking situations with a pleasant atmosphere like encouraging, smiling with positive facial affirmations, and clapping to enhance learning adoption of new associations and conduct in the student (Zajda, 2018). Another real-world example is the reactions of infants during immunization. According to Riddell et al. (2018), at first, actual injection produces pain; for subsequent injections, the sight of a doctor in a laboratory coat will elicit the reaction before the actual injection. Additionally, some babies will start crying just by hearing others cry because they have associated crying with injection pain.

In 2013, Hahn revealed some similarities and differences between operant and respondent conditioning. The similarities include: First, the removal of the habitual factor leads to the diminishing of the rejoinder. Second, a similar response will reoccur spontaneously with the reapplication of the conditioning factor. Moreover, the generalization of provocation occurs in both learning strategies. For instance, one develops a fear for all dogs after being bitten by one. The differences between classical and operant learning include: Respondent conditioning links two stimuli while operant involves a single action with an effect.

Also, operant conditioning occasions subjecting the learner directly to the aftermath; on the other hand, respondent conditioning involves passive learning. Respondent conditioning deals with an involuntary response and a stimulus; conversely, operant conditioning entails a voluntary behavior and an outcome.

In summary, the general behavior of humanity is triggered by factors in the surrounding. Some mannerism is learned and can also be imitated from the influential contacts during various interactions. Learning is unceasing; therefore, the results also keep changing respective to the changes in the stimulus in operation. Appropriate application of the above learning strategies is essential in improving the quality of life of all humanity in the entire universe.