Operant Conditioning- 1

Operant Conditioning: Thorndike

By Andrew P. Johnson
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Andrew.johnson@mnsu.edu
www.OPDT-Johnson.com

This is an excerpt from my book: Education Psychology: Theories of Learning and

Human Development (2014). National Science Press: www.nsspress.com

Mini-Lectures Related to Operant Conditioning

Behaviorism - Operant Conditioning, Thorndike, and Cats
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qVTKegGI4Y

Behaviorism - Operant Conditioning, Skinner, and Mice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMwvC5GQOss

Behaviorism - Operant Conditioning -- Reinforcing and Punishing Behaviors

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPo7f8Rx_nY

Behaviorism - Operant Conditioning -- Shaping Behaviors

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQUPYJ0_u_g

Behaviorism - Operant Conditioning - Schedules of Reinforcement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71bNh1UwgMc

OPERANT CONDITIONING
Classical conditioning is different from operant conditioning. The former involves an
organism (human, rat, wombat, etc.) that is passive, simply responding to stimuli presented to it.
Operant conditioning however involves an organism that must first act upon (or operate on) the
environment in some way. As the organism acts, those acts (or behaviors) that are followed by
pleasurable outcomes (mouse pellets, praise, or money) are reinforced and tend to be repeated.
Those acts that are followed by punishing outcomes (electric shock, yelling, imprisonment, or
embarrassment) tend not to be repeated. Put another way, humans (and other organisms) learn
certain behaviors as they act and are rewarded or punished. Unlike classical conditioning,
operant conditioning is not concerned with simply pairing a stimulus and response (S-R); rather,
it focuses on A-B-C: The antecedent (the conditions before the behavior), the behavior, and the
consequences (what followed the behavior).
Edward Lee Thorndike
Edward Lee Thorndike’s (1874-1949) theories of learning are sometimes called
connectionism. Unlike Watson, Thorndike acknowledged the existence of thought, which he
called mental units. A mental unit was anything sensed or perceived or the sensing, perceiving
bit of consciousness. A physical unit was a stimulus or response (observable behavior).
Learning for Thorndike was a matter of making four kinds of connections: (a) mental and
physical units, (b) physical units with mental, (c) mental units with other mental units, and (d)

© Andrew P. Johnson, Ph.D.

 Operant Conditioning- 2

physical units with other physical units. His experiments looked for those things that
strengthened these connections.

Thorndike’s Hungry Cats

Thorndike’s learning theories came from his study of cats in a puzzle box (Lattal, 1998).
Here a hungry cat was put in a box. On the outside of the box was a fish that the cat could see
and smell. The box had a door that could be opened by pressing a lever inside the cage (see
Figure 11.1). To illustrate the relationship between the antecedent, behavior, and consequence:
the antecedent was the hungry cat, box, lever, and fish. Sensing the fish, the cat would engage in
a variety of behaviors in attempt to open the door and get the fish. Eventually one of these
behaviors (pressing the level) would result in the door opening and the cat getting the fish. The
consequence then was the open door and the fish (reward).

Figure 11.1. Thorndike’s puzzle box and cat

Learning for the hungry cat was a matter of making the connection between lever
pressing and door-opening/fish eating. This learning was incremental not insightful (see Figure
11.2). This means that the cat was not able to gain sudden insight or make a logical connection
between level pressing and door-opening/fish-eating. Instead, the cat made small incremental
gains toward the lever-open door connection. Each time the cat was put in the puzzle box, it
took successively fewer tries for it to make this connection between. Finally, after many times in
the puzzle box, the cat eventually would go directly to the lever. This is called trial and error
learning or selecting and connecting. A behavior was selected (lever-pressing) and a connection
was eventually made and strengthened with the door-opening consequence.

Figure 11.2. Incremental vs. insightful learning.

© Andrew P. Johnson, Ph.D.

 Operant Conditioning- 3

number of tries to earn reward number of tries to earn reward

Incremental Insightful
Learning Learning

time

time

Laws of Learning
Based on his experiments, Thorndike came up with three laws of learning.
• Law of effect – The strength of a connection is influenced by the consequences of a
response. In other words, an action followed by a pleasurable consequence is more likely to be
repeated. Inversely, an action followed by an annoying or painful consequence is less likely to
be repeated. Put simply, actions that are rewarded tend to be strengthened and repeated, those
that are punished tend to be weakened and not repeated.
As a human example, if little Billy tells a joke and is reward by laughter and attention
(something he enjoys), he will probably tell a joke at some point in the future. Learning is a
function of the consequences of behaviors rather than contiguity (two behaviors occur
simultaneously). If little Billy was to tell the same joke and instead of laughing, everybody
turned away in disgust, he would be less likely to tell a joke in the future. By the way,
Thorndike found that pleasure was more potent for stamping out response than pain. If you want
a negative behavior to go away, it is more effective to reward a conflicting positive behavior than
to simply punish the negative behavior. (Reward students for doing the positive things that
would make it impossible for them to do the negative things.)
• Law of exercise – The more a stimulus-induced response is repeated the longer it will
be retained. Another way of saying this is that connections between a stimulus and response
becomes strengthened with practice and weakened when practice is discontinued. The more
often the cat is put in the puzzle box to make the connection between lever and gate opening, the
longer this behavior will be retained. However, if the cat was only put in the puzzle box once
every other week, the learning it had gained would quickly recede. That is, the number of tries
and the amount of time it took to press the level would increase.
As a human example, if little Billy was in a situation were he was able to engage in joke-
telling behavior every day and got lots of laughter and positive attention, he would be well on his
way toward become a comedian. If he was in a situation where he was only able to tell an
occasional joke (a very restrictive or repressive environment) he might be well on his way
toward becoming an accountant.
•Law of readiness – When a human is ready to act, it is reinforcing for it to do so and
annoying for is not to do so. When human is not ready to act, forcing it to do so is annoying.

© Andrew P. Johnson, Ph.D.

 Operant Conditioning- 4

When Billy is in a jovial mood where he wants to tell a joke, joke telling is reinforcing in
and of itself. Not being able to tell a joke is painful. In the same vein, if Billy were forced to tell
jokes when he did not want to do so, joke telling would be painful or annoying. The same
behavior (joke telling) can be either reinforcing or annoying depending on the antecedent or
condition of little Billy.
The law of readiness has great implication for the holistic educators. One of the
important ideas that inform our practice is that learning should be natural. That is, we should, to
the greatest extent possible, create learning experiences that align with students’ natural ways of
interacting with the world. When students are curious and want to learn, to do so is reinforcing.
When they are not ready to learn, being made to do so is painful. What are the ramifications?
We should strive to include some open-ended experiences and choice in our curriculums so that
students can both discover and explore topics that are of interest to them (again, to the greatest
extent possible). Also, we should try to create personal connections to the curriculum; teaching
content and skills that have real life applications and implications.
When a child is ready to learn, being able to do so is reinforcing. This also suggests that
motivation is an important aspect of learning (described in Book II) and should be given more
consideration that is currently the case in most school settings. Learning that is based on
students’ intrinsic desire to learn and find out about themselves and the world in which they live
is more apt to create powerful learning experiences. What are your students curious about?
What do they want to learn? What concerns do they have in their lives? What would they like to
be able to do? How would they like to learn? Why not ask them? This could be the start of
some real learning. This does not mean; however, that you need to abandon your curriculum or
ignore the content standards that have been assigned to you (usually in the form of top-down
mandates). This instead is an invitation to adopt and adapt the curriculum to meet the needs and
interests of your students. This, by the way is what makes teaching exciting and interesting and
keeps so many excellent teachers coming back every year. Teaching is a creative, intellectual
endeavor when the teacher is allowed to make choices in regards to what and how to teach.
However, simply opening the teachers’ manual and replicating what it tells you is extremely
boring and not nearly as effective.
Summary of Key Ideas
• Operant conditioning involved an organism acting upon the environment and then being
reward or punished for that action.
• The law of effect states that an action followed by a pleasurable consequence is more likely to
be repeated and one followed by an annoying or painful consequence is less likely to be
repeated.
• The law of exercise states that the connections between a stimulus and response becomes
strengthened with practice and weakened when practice is discontinued.
• When a human is ready to act, it is reinforcing for it to do so and annoying for is not to do so.

References
Hergenhahn, B. R., & Olson, M. H. (2005). An introduction to theories of learning (7th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Lattal, K. (1998). A century of effect: Legacies of E. L. Thorndike’s animal intelligence

monograph. Journal Of The Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 70, 325–336.

© Andrew P. Johnson, Ph.D.

 Operant Conditioning- 5

Sheppard, L. (2001). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V.

Richardson’s (Ed.). Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American
Educational Research Association, 1066-1101.

Watson, J.B. & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 3, 1-14.

© Andrew P. Johnson, Ph.D.