NEWSLETTER Building Better Trainers Through Education Nov/Dec 2001
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NEWSLETTER Building Better Trainers Through Education Nov/Dec 2001 The Science of Animal Training by Marian Breland Bailey, PhD, and Robert E. Bailey Editor’s note: We are pleased to dedicate this issue to an overview of operant conditioning—its grounding in science, its fundamental principles, and how behavior is analyzed by scientists. In two articles—this cover story and a second piece on the ABCs of behavior—behaviorists Marian and Bob Bailey summarize operant conditioning in a way that should be helpful to novice and experienced trainers alike. They whet our Joan Maxwell appetites for all there is to know, and all that is yet to be learned. Member Profile, p.13 We extend our deepest thanks to the Baileys for their contributions. Be sure to watch for INSIDE their articles in future issues, too, where they’ll talk about common myths and the application of operant conditioning in dog training. For a biographical sketch of the ABCs of Behavior ................................8 Baileys, please see “Meet the Baileys” on page 11. APDT Members in the News...............4 Editor’s Corner ..................................2 es, Virginia, there is a science animals could learn through imitation, trial and error, or observa- Executive Director’s Message............5 behind modern animal training. It’s called operant tion. By 1910 Thorndike had devel- Gimme Shelter ................................19 Y Y oped a law of psychology—the law conditioning (OC)—more precisely Meet the Baileys..............................11 referred to as behavior analysis— of effect—that attempted to explain Member Profile .................................13 and includes a method of behavior behavior in terms of stimulus- News from the UK.............................21 modification and therapy based on response and satisfaction/discom- OC Definitions at a Glance ................10 laboratory science. fort associations. The On Behavior ......................................15 Scientists who study law of effect stated that behaviors that Pick of the Letter...............................23 behavior have been “... the roots lead to satisfying President’s Message .........................3 undertaking extensive science- of this science outcomes were more Reviewer’s Corner ...........................12 based research and likely to be repeated, Upcoming Events............................23 gathering volumes of go back to while behaviors that Vital Signs.......................................17 data on behavior lead to undesired outcomes were less analysis since the the turn of likely to be repeated. The Association of early 1930s. Psychology profes- Pet Dog Trainers, Inc. Although B.F. the century.” 17000 Commerce Pkwy., sor and researcher Suite C Skinner is the John Broadus Mt. Laurel, nj 08054 acknowledged Watson basically bypassed voice: 800 -pet-dogs originator of operant conditioning, fax: 856-439-0525 Thorndike’s law of effect. Instead, the roots of this science go back to Watson seized the Russians’ (Pavlov e-mail: [email protected] the turn of the century. Early web site: www.apdt.com and Bekhterev) work on the classical researchers such as Edward conditioning paradigm as the Executive Director Thorndike, Ivan Pavlov, and John scientific cornerstone of his Lynn Becker Broadus Watson contributed to the “behaviorism.” (We are most President evolution of our present-day familiar with classical conditioning Allan Bauman understanding and application of as the type of learning made famous Vice President behavior analysis. Pia Silvani by Ivan Pavlov’s stimulus-response Secretary FROM THORNDIKE TO SKINNER (S-R) experiments with dogs.) With Teoti Anderson (1900 TO 1940) the 1919 publication of his major Treasurer book, Psychology from the Standpoint The experiments of psychologist Sue Pearson of a Behaviorist, Watson became the Edward Thorndike addressed the Founder founder of the American school of Ian Dunbar mechanical problem-solving ability behaviorism. of cats and dogs and whether or not continued on page 6 The Science of Animal Training continued from page 1 During the 1920s, Watson became more involved with practical applications of psychology (in advertising and marketing) and did not extend his early work on behav- iorism. However, the “behavioral genie” was out of its bottle and, during the 1930s, others pursued animal behavior and its conse- quences. Chief among psychologists studying animal behavior at this time were the neobehaviorists, the “new” behaviorists, who adopted Watson’s main principles of objectivity and the study of overt behavior while developing their own variations on Watson’s theme. Most also tried to (l-r) B.F. Skinner, Bob Bailey, Marian Bailey (circa 1987) adapt Watson’s model of classical or Pavlovian conditioning to the more important, everyday behavior of animals and humans. Behaviorism, and mostly Skinner’s species. This fact should be noted version—operant conditioning— by those who dismiss OC as merely While B.F. Skinner has become the dominated psychology until the stimulus-response or as a simple most famous and influential of the 1970s and ‘80s. In the 1980s, the so- extension of respondent neobehaviorists, others developed a called “cognitive revolution” began conditioning. following. Tolman, Hull, and others to color psychologists’ thinking and also studied animal behavior. For a OPERANT CONDITIONING teaching, but not their practical number of reasons, behaviorism, led ACCORDING TO SKINNER achievements. Today, practical by the neobehaviorists, gained applications of so-called “cognitive Let’s take a look at the original basic strength through the 1930s and psychology” look suspiciously like principles of operant conditioning 1940s, perhaps paralleling the operant conditioning with different as laid out by Skinner’s landmark general rise of science, and became wrappings. book, The Behavior of Organisms. the dominant “system” of Operant conditioning concerns the In 1938 B.F. Skinner published The psychology. Skinner’s view was changing of motor actions and Behavior of Organisms: An finally to prevail because he put action patterns. These are fancy Experimental Analysis of Behavior, aside the Pavlovian paradigm as the names for things that we do in our arguably the most influential work center of his system, developing his normal working day—our so-called own scientific description of how of the century on animal behavior. Skinner’s approach focused on voluntary movements. Keep in behavior changes. His system also mind that this focus on voluntary worked in the real world, a everyday behavior instead of involuntary physiological reflexes. movements is a big switch from significant contrast to most other earlier research that focused on “psychologies” of the time. Thus, he moved away dramatically from the behaviorism models of involuntary physiological reflexes. The point of all of this is that John Watson and Ivan Pavlov that Skinner shrewdly reasoned that behaviorism, and the neobehav- had emphasized the psychology of most everyday behavior—such as iorists’ view of behavior, is not stimulus-response, and embraced studying, mowing the lawn, or monolithic. Operant conditioning, the theory of natural selection of going shopping or to a movie—does which we are discussing here, is not successful responses through their not fit the Pavlovian S-R model. the only behavioral psychology. consequences to humans and other There is no single, outstanding 6 NOV/DEC 2001 stimulus to which one can point that strength or happen less often. The selectively shape just about any elicits, automatically, any of those process of reducing behavior due to behavior possible for a given behaviors. Rather, the responses that lack of reinforcement is called animal. Operant conditioning is a make up our everyday behavior extinction. science that has given us the tools to grow stronger and survive as the study and predict behavior and, Applying an aversive stimulus result of our operation on the ultimately, to influence, if not com- (punishment) when administered by environment—hence, the designa- pletely control, a given behavior. a human or another animal will also tion “operant” for these responses. decrease behavior. Actually, the very Applied behavior analysis is not In other words, reflexes may allow definition of whether a stimulus is exactly synonymous with applied us to control our blood pressure aversive or punishing rests on the operant conditioning, anymore than automatically, but learning operant decline of behavior. If applying the behavior analysis is not exactly the behaviors allows us to cope with stimulus results in the decline of a same as operant conditioning. our surroundings. behavior, that stimulus is classed as Operant conditioning, as a science BEHAVIORAL CONSEQUENCES an aversive, or a punisher. It is also or as a technology, is the study, Skinner recognized that an operant true that if a stimulus increases the prediction, and control of operant behavior could have three possible rate of behavior, that stimulus is a behavior. Respondent conditioning consequences: reinforcer. Thus, the nature of a has to do with respondent (largely stimulus, reinforcing or aversive, is reflex) behaviors, not operant • good (reinforcing) defined by the behavior of the behaviors. Behavior analysis • bad (aversive) animal and not by a decision of the includes both operant and trainer. respondent behaviors and their • neutral, or none (extinction) interactions. We, the Baileys, view This analysis of potential conse- behavior as more or less