<h3><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PRdCowYEtAg" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen=""></iframe><br><b><br></b></h3><h3><b>Operant Conditioning vs. Classical Conditioning</b></h3><p>
    </p><p>We learn many of our psychophysiological responses through the unconscious processes of perceptual learning, classical conditioning, and operant conditioning, and the conscious process of relational learning.&nbsp;Thus, through neurofeedback and biofeedback
        one can learn physiological self-regulation.</p>

    <p><b>Operant conditioning, sometimes called
instrumental learning,</b> is the use of a behavior's antecedent and/or its consequence to influence the occurrence and form of behavior. Operant conditioning is distinguished from&nbsp; classical (also called “Pavlovian conditioning”) in that operant
        conditioning deals with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavior_modification">modification of
"voluntary behavior"</a> or operant behavior. Operant behavior "operates" based on the rules of an environment and is maintained by the consequences of following or breaking those rules.&nbsp;</p>
    <p><span style="font-size: 1rem;">Classical conditioning deals with the conditioning of reflexive</span><span style="font-size: 1rem;">&nbsp;behaviors. Reflexive behaviors are involuntary and nearly instantaneous movements in response to a stimulus.</span>
        <span style="font-size: 10.5px;"> </span><span style="font-size: 1rem;">A reflex is made possible by pathways in the brain called reflex arcs,</span><span style="font-size: 1rem;">&nbsp;which can act on an impulse before that impulse reaches the brain. The reflex is then an automatic response to a stimulus that does not receive or need conscious thought which are elicited by antecedent</span>
            <span style="font-size: 1rem;">&nbsp;conditions. <b><span><span style=""><i style="">Behaviors conditioned via a classical
conditioning procedure are not maintained by consequences.</i></span></span></b></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 1rem;"><b>
        </b>
        </span>
    </p>

    <p>Reinforcement and punishment are the main building blocks of operant conditioning. Although it is confusing, positive and negative rewards have nothing to do with good or bad. With <u>positive reinforcement,</u>&nbsp;the reinforcement is delivered
        following a response. With&nbsp;<u>&nbsp;negative reinforcement</u>&nbsp;the reinforcement is withdrawn following a response. For instance, lets say I want my two-year old to eat his vegetables for dinner. There is a chocolate cake sitting on
        the table for dessert once he's eaten his dinner. In a scenario of positive reinforcement, I would reward him with dessert after he's eaten his vegetables. In a scenario of negative reinforcement, I would remove the chocolate cake from the table,
        denying it to him upon his failure to eat his vegetables.<br></p><p><img src="@@PLUGINFILE@@/Operant%20Conditioning.png" alt="Operant Conditioning" width="544" height="424" class="img-responsive atto_image_button_left"></p><p><span style="font-size: 1rem;">This creates a total of four basic consequences, with the addition of a fifth procedure known as </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_%28psychology%29" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: 1rem;">extinction</a><span style="font-size: 1rem;"> (i.e. no change in consequences following a response).</span></p><p></p><p><b>Extinction</b> occurs if, over time, if actors interaction with the stimulus
object does not provide sufficient reward or punishment. This concept
means that the individual disengages from the behavior that resulted from
constant reinforcement.&nbsp;</p><p>In classical conditioning, extinction results from the unconditioned stimulus (the involuntary drooling) NOT occurring after the conditioned stimulus (bell ringing) is presented over time. In operant
conditioning it results from some response by the organism no longer being
reinforced (for example, you keep getting your dog to sit on command, but you
stop giving it a treat or any other type of reinforcement. Over time, the dog
may not sit every time you give the command).<br></p><p><br></p><p>This pattern has led some to be concerned that the
change in EEG patterns learned from neurofeedback would extinguish over time.
However, the case is not so simple. Extinction varies with the type of behavior
learned. Just as learning to ride a bicycle does not extinguish over time,
learning the new EEG pattern does not extinguish. Lubar (1995) and Peniston
(1999) found that the new EEG patterns still remained after ten or more years.&nbsp;</p><p></p>

    <p>It's important to note that actors are not spoken of as being reinforced, punished, or extinguished; it is the actions that are reinforced, punished, or extinguished. Additionally, reinforcement, punishment, and extinction are not terms whose use
        is restricted to the laboratory. Naturally occurring consequences can also be said to reinforce, punish, or extinguish behavior and are not always delivered by people.</p><h4><b>History of Operant Conditioning</b></h4>

    <div>
        <!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><p><img src="@@PLUGINFILE@@/Edward%20Thorndike.jpg" alt="Thorndike" width="283" height="178" class="img-responsive atto_image_button_left">Operant
conditioning was first extensively studied by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_L._Thorndike">Edward L. Thorndike</a> (1874–1949), who observed
the behavior of cats trying to escape from home-made puzzle boxes.<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]--></a>
When first constrained in the boxes, the cats took a long time to escape. With
experience, ineffective responses occurred less frequently and successful
responses occurred more frequently, enabling the cats to escape in less time
over successive trials.&nbsp;</p><p><span style="font-size: 1rem;">In his </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_effect" style="font-size: 1rem; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">law of effect</a><span style="font-size: 1rem;">, Thorndike theorized that successful responses,
those producing </span><i style="font-size: 1rem;">satisfying</i><span style="font-size: 1rem;">
consequences, were "stamped in" by the experience and thus occurred
more frequently. Unsuccessful responses, those producing </span><i style="font-size: 1rem;">annoying</i><span style="font-size: 1rem;"> consequences, were </span><i style="font-size: 1rem;">stamped
out</i><span style="font-size: 1rem;"> and subsequently occurred less frequently. In short, some consequences </span><i style="font-size: 1rem;">strengthened</i><span style="font-size: 1rem;"> behavior and some
consequences </span><i style="font-size: 1rem;">weakened</i><span style="font-size: 1rem;"> behavior.
Thorndike produced the first known learning curves through this procedure. </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B.F._Skinner" style="font-size: 1rem; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">B.F. Skinner</a><span style="font-size: 1rem;"> (1904–1990) formulated a more detailed
analysis of operant conditioning based on reinforcement, punishment, and
extinction.&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p>"Operant
conditioning" was coined by behaviorist&nbsp;<a href="https://www.verywell.com/b-f-skinner-biography-1904-1990-2795543">B.F. Skinner</a>, which is
why you may occasionally hear it referred to as Skinnerian conditioning. As a behaviorist,
Skinner believed that it was not really necessary to look at internal thoughts
and motivations in order to explain behavior. Instead, he suggested, we should
look only at the external, observable causes of human behavior. Skinner was more interested in how the&nbsp;<strong>consequences</strong>&nbsp;of people's actions influenced their behavior.&nbsp;<span>Skinner used the term&nbsp;</span><em>operant</em><span>&nbsp;to refer to any "active behavior that operates upon the environment to generate consequences" (1953). In other words, Skinner's theory explained how we acquire the range of learned behaviors we exhibit each and every day.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 1rem;">Through the
first part of the 20th-century, behaviorism had become a major force within
psychology. The ideas of&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.verywell.com/john-b-watson-biography-1878-1958-2795550" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: 1rem;">John B.
Watson</a><span style="font-size: 1rem;">&nbsp;dominated
this school of thought early on.&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.simplypsychology.org/behaviorism.html" style="font-size: 1rem; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Behaviorism</a><span style="font-size: 1rem;">&nbsp;as a movement in psychology appeared in 1913 when Watson published the classic article&nbsp;</span><a href="http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/views.htm" target="_blank" style="font-size: 1rem; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><i>psychology as the behaviorist views it</i></a><span style="font-size: 1rem;">.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-size: 1rem;">John Watson proposed that the process of classical conditioning (based on&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.simplypsychology.org/pavlov.html" style="font-size: 1rem; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Pavlov’s</a><span style="font-size: 1rem;">&nbsp;observations) was able to explain all aspects of human psychology. He thought that e</span><span style="font-size: 1rem;">verything from speech to emotional responses were simply patterns of stimulus and response. Watson denied completely the existence of the mind or consciousness. Watson believed that all individual differences in behavior were due to different experiences of learning. He famously said:&nbsp;</span></p><p></p></div><div class="editor-indent" style="margin-left: 30px;"><div><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 1rem;"></span></p><div><p>"Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select - doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations and the race of his ancestors” (Watson, 1924, p. 104).</p></div><p></p><p></p></div></div><div>

<p>The first
scientific studies identifying <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuron">neurons</a> that responded in ways that suggested they encode
for conditioned stimuli came from work by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahlon_deLong&amp;action=edit&amp;redlink=1">Mahlon deLong</a><a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]--></a>&nbsp; &nbsp;and by R.T. "Rusty" Richardson.<a href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[4]<!--[endif]--></a>
They showed that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleus_basalis">nucleus basalis</a> neurons, which release <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetylcholine#Neuromodulatory_Effects">acetylcholine</a> broadly throughout the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_cortex">cerebral cortex</a>, are activated shortly
after a conditioned stimulus, or after a primary reward if no conditioned
stimulus exists.</p><p><img src="@@PLUGINFILE@@/Nucleus%20Basilis.jpg" alt="Nucleus Basilis" width="800" height="506" class="img-responsive atto_image_button_left"><br></p><p>These neurons are equally active for positive and negative
reinforcers, and have been demonstrated to cause <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity">plasticity</a> in many <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_cortex">cortical</a> regions.<a href="#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[5]<!--[endif]--></a>
Evidence also exists that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine#Functions_in_the_brain">dopamine</a> is activated at similar
times. There is considerable evidence that dopamine participates in both
reinforcement and aversive learning.<a href="#_ftn6" name="_ftnref6" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[6]<!--[endif]--></a>
Dopamine pathways project much more densely onto <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontal_cortex">frontal cortex</a> regions. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholinergic">Cholinergic</a> projections, in contrast, are dense even in the
posterior cortical regions like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_visual_cortex">primary visual cortex</a>. A study of patients with
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_disease">Parkinson's disease</a>, a condition attributed
to the insufficient action of dopamine, further illustrates the role of
dopamine in positive reinforcement.<a href="#_ftn7" name="_ftnref7" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[7]<!--[endif]--></a>
It showed that while off their medication, patients learned more readily with
aversive consequences than with positive reinforcement. Patients who were on
their medication showed the opposite to be the case, positive reinforcement
proving to be the more effective form of learning when the action of dopamine
is high.</p></div><h3><b><br></b></h3><h3><b><br></b></h3><h3><b>Generalization</b></h3><div><p></p><p><a href="http://www.simplypsychology.org/pavlov.html">Ivan Pavlov</a>&nbsp;showed that classical conditioning
applied to animals.&nbsp; Did it also apply to humans? In a famous (though
ethically dubious) experiment, Watson and Rayner (1920) showed that it did. This is the story of Albert, classical conditioning, and "generalization."</p>

<p>Little Albert was a 9-month-old infant
who was tested on his reactions to various stimuli. He was shown a white rat, a
rabbit, a monkey and various masks. Albert described as "on the whole
stolid and unemotional" showed no fear of any of these stimuli. However,
what did startle him and cause him to be afraid was if a hammer was struck
against a steel bar behind his head. The sudden loud noise would cause
"little Albert to burst into tears.</p>

<p>When Little Albert was just over 11
months old the white rat was presented and seconds later the hammer was struck
against the steel bar.&nbsp; This was done 7 times over the next 7 weeks and
each time Little Albert burst into tears. By now little Albert only had to see
the rat and he immediately showed every sign of fear. He would cry (whether or
not the hammer was hit against the steel bar) and he would attempt to crawl
away.&nbsp;<span style="font-size: 1rem;">In addition, the Watson and
Rayner found that Albert developed phobias of objects which shared
characteristics with the rat; including the family dog, a fur coat, some cotton
wool and a Santa Claus mask. This process is know as </span><b style="font-size: 1rem;">generalization.</b></p>

<p>Watson and Rayner had shown
that classical conditioning could be used to create a phobia. A phobia is an
irrational fear, i.e. a fear that is out of proportion to the danger. Over the
next few weeks and months Little Albert was observed and 10 days after
conditioning his fear of the rat was much less marked. This dying out of a
learned response is called extinction. However, even after a full month it was
still evident, and the association could be renewed by repeating the original
procedure a few times.</p><p><b>

</b></p><h3><b><a name="_Toc58156758"><b>Components of Operant Conditioning: Reinforcement</b></a></b></h3><b>

<p><a href="https://www.verywell.com/what-is-reinforcement-2795414"><b>Reinforcement</b></a>&nbsp;is any event that strengthens or increases the
behavior it follows. There are two kinds of reinforcers:</p>

<ol start="1" type="1">
 <li><a href="https://www.verywell.com/what-is-positive-reinforcement-2795412"><b>Positive reinforcers</b></a>&nbsp;are
     favorable events or outcomes that are presented after the behavior. In
     situations that reflect positive reinforcement, a response or behavior is
     strengthened by the addition of something, such as praise or a direct
     reward.</li>
 <li><a href="https://www.verywell.com/what-is-negative-reinforcement-2795410"><b>Negative reinforcers</b></a>&nbsp;involve
     the removal of an unfavorable events or outcomes after the display of a
     behavior. In these situations, a response is strengthened by the removal
     of something considered unpleasant.</li>
</ol>

<p>In both of
these cases of reinforcement, the behavior&nbsp;<strong>increases.</strong></p>

<h3><a name="_Toc58156759"><b>Punishment</b></a></h3>

<p><a href="https://www.verywell.com/what-is-punishment-2795413"><b>Punishment</b></a><strong>&nbsp;</strong>is the
presentation of an adverse event or outcome that causes a decrease in the
behavior it follows. There are two kinds of punishment:</p>

<ol start="1" type="1">
 <li><a href="https://www.verywell.com/what-is-positive-punishment-2795411"><b>Positive punishment</b></a>, sometimes referred to as punishment by application,
     presents an unfavorable event or outcome in order to weaken the response
     it follows.</li>
 <li><a href="https://www.verywell.com/what-is-negative-punishment-2795409"><b>Negative punishment</b></a>, also known as punishment by removal, occurs when a
     favorable event or outcome is removed after a behavior occurs.</li>
</ol>

<p>In both of these
cases of punishment, the behavior&nbsp;<strong>decreases.</strong></p>

<h3><a name="_Toc58156760"><b>Reinforcement
Schedules</b></a></h3>

<p>Skinner also
found that when and how often behaviors were reinforced played a role in the
speed and strength of acquisition. He identified several different&nbsp;<a href="https://www.verywell.com/what-is-a-schedule-of-reinforcement-2794864">schedules of
reinforcement</a>:</p>

<ol start="1" type="1">
 <li><strong><u>Continuous reinforcement</u></strong>&nbsp;involves
     delivery a reinforcement every time a response occurs. Learning tends to
     occur relatively quickly, yet the response rate is quite low. Extinction
     also occurs very quickly once reinforcement is halted.</li>
 <li><strong><u>F</u><u>ixed-ratio schedules</u></strong><u>&nbsp;</u>are
     a type of partial reinforcement. Responses are reinforced only after a
     specific number of responses have occurred. This typically leads to a
     fairly steady response rate.</li>
 <li><strong><u>Fixed-interval schedules</u></strong>&nbsp;are
     another form of partial reinforcement. Reinforcement occurs only after a
     certain interval of time has elapsed. Response rates remain fairly steady
     and start to increase as the reinforcement time draws near, but slow
     immediately after the reinforcement has been delivered.</li>
 <li><strong><u>Variable-ratio schedules</u></strong>&nbsp;are
     also a type of partial reinforcement that involve reinforcing behavior
     after a varied number of responses. This leads to both a high response
     rate and slow extinction rates.</li>
 <li><strong><u>Variable-interval schedules</u></strong><b>&nbsp;</b>are
     the final form of partial reinforcement Skinner described. This schedule
     involves delivering reinforcement after a variable amount of time has
     elapsed. This also tends to lead to a fast response rate and slow
     extinction rate.</li></ol></b><div>

<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%">

<!--[endif]-->

<div id="ftn1">

<p><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]--></a>
Thorndike, E.L. (1901). Animal intelligence: An
experimental study of the associative processes in animals. Psychological
Review Monograph Supplement, 2, 1–109.</p>

</div>

<div id="ftn2">

<p><a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]--></a> Mecca Chiesa (2004) Radical Behaviorism: the
philosophy and the science</p>

</div>

<div id="ftn3">

<p><a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]--></a> "Activity of pallidal neurons during
movement", M.R. DeLong, <i>J. Neurophysiol.</i>, 34:414–27, 1971</p>

</div>

<div id="ftn4">

<p><a href="#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[4]<!--[endif]--></a> Richardson RT, DeLong MR (1991): Electrophysiological
studies of the function of the nucleus basalis in primates. In Napier TC,
Kalivas P, Hamin I (eds), <i>The Basal Forebrain: Anatomy to Function</i> (<i>Advances
in Experimental Medicine and Biology</i>, vol. 295. New York, Plenum, pp.
232–252</p>

</div>

<div id="ftn5">

<p><a href="#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[5]<!--[endif]--></a> PNAS 93:11219-24 1996, Science 279:1714–8 1998</p>

</div>

<div id="ftn6">

<p><a href="#_ftnref6" name="_ftn6" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[6]<!--[endif]--></a> Neuron 63:244–253, 2009, Frontiers in Behavioral
Neuroscience, 3: Article 13, 2009</p>

</div>

<div id="ftn7">

<p><a href="#_ftnref7" name="_ftn7" title=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[7]<!--[endif]--></a> Michael J. Frank, Lauren C. Seeberger, and Randall C.
O'Reilly (2004) "By Carrot or by Stick: Cognitive Reinforcement Learning
in Parkinsonism," Science 4, November 2004</p></div></div></div><br><p></p>