Can Someone Explain The Difference Between

[lovemesideways]

Now I do vaguely know the definition and difference of both classical and operant conditioning, but if someone can simplify it for me with some examples, or has a link to a explanation I would be most grateful!!

[Aidan3]

What is your understanding so far?

From Burton, Westen, & Kowalski (2009) "In classical conditioning, an environmental stimulus leads to a learned response, through the pairing of an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) with a previously neutral conditioned stimulus (CS), or learned reflex. The result is a conditioned response, or learned reflex". So in the famous example, the UCS would be food and the CS would be the bell. Bell is paired with food and later dog learns to salivate in response to the bell alone.

Burton, Westen, & Kowalski (2009) again "Operant conditioning means learning to operate on the environment and produce a consequence. Operants are behaviours that are emitted rather than elicited by the environment" (emphasis mine). So a dog might learn to bark (an operant) because it produces attention from the owner (a consequence).

[lovemesideways]

My understanding is basically what you said. But I don't really understand it, I'm kind of just parroting what I hear or read.

Can you give me some examples of both?

Is using a clicker classical conditioning?

[Nekhbet]

OK Operant Conditioning

- You have 4 ways (positive/negative punishment and positive/negative reinforcement) in which to modify a voluntary or 'operant' behaviour. So basically as Aiden has regurgitated, the dog learns that by modifying its behaviour it can produce a different outcome for itself - either good or bad. So behaviours that elicit punishments will die out, those that elicit reinforcement will remain and ampify.

EG dog barks at other dogs. You give him a check chain correction every time he starts to bark (positive punishment ie the application of a punishment) and the dogs behaviour becomes changed (eg stops) due to consequence of the action (every time he starts to bark he gets corrected)

Conversely like the old forced retrieve. DOg has dumbell put near mouth and ear pinched until he holds it in his mouth (negative reinforcement, ie remove the bad as a reward) Dog eventually learns it is a good thing to hold dumbell in mouth through consequence

4 ways of modifying behaviour

Positive punishment - application of an aversive (unpleasant)

Negative punishment - removal of an appetitive (nice thing)

Positive reinforcement - application of an appetitive

Negative reinforcement - removal of an aversive

So actually when you read this there is no such thing as 'purely positive' training unless that means you only use positive punishment and positive reinforcement Even without the use of positive punishment there is still negative punishment unless you intend to reward your dog for every movement it does right or wrong.

Classical (Pavlovian) Conditioning

The dog associates a neutral stimulus (something that has no good or bad meaning to the dog at all, lets say like a whistle) with an unconditioned stumulus (this is a stimulus that automatically gets a response without having to be learned, like the smell of food) Now put the neutral stimulus together with the unconditioned stimulus often enough and soon the neutral becomes a conditioned stimulus (one that triggers a conditioned response)

so lets take an example. Dog grows up around gunfire from the day its born. Neither bad nor good to the dog, ignores it totally. Then one day owner takes him out, fires and a heap of ducks fly up from the grass and dog chases them. From then on every time the owner fires a heap of ducks fly up and dog chases. So now when the dog hears a gunshot he jumps up and goes off to chase any supposed ducks that might be around. The original gunfire (neutral stimulus) has been paired with flying ducks that arouse its prey drive (unconditioned stimulus) and dog through repetition, and fact that everytime gun goes off ducks fly about, now considers the gunshot an conditioned stimulus that triggers him to immediately switch into prey and look about for ducks to chase (conditioned response) even if there may not be any present for him to see. So its not the ducks that are the conditioned stimulus, its the gunfire.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Nekhbet

[bedazzledx2]

Here is a really good website that should help with your questions. Lots of good stuff here.

http://www.dogstardaily.com/training/classical-conditioning

Now I do vaguely know the definition and difference of both classical and operant conditioning, but if someone can simplify it for me with some examples, or has a link to a explanation I would be most grateful!!

Edited July 21, 2010 by bedazzledx2

[Aidan3]

It's worth thinking about what the difference between "emitted" and "elicited" is at this stage.

Early on it's hard to tell them apart, later you will think it becomes clear, and then if you go on to learn more it becomes difficult again! The definitions that I regurgitated were succinct and accurate, and worth learning because no example will cover the breadth and depth of operant and classical conditioning.

The clicker is exactly like the bell in the example I gave in that it is paired with food (and elicits the same response as food). However, we use it for operant conditioning, where it "bridges" the gap between response and consequence and is known as a "bridging stimulus". Stop following up with food and pretty soon it will do nothing much at all, as classical conditioning predicts. It will also cease to have effects on operants that are "emitted"

[Keshwar]

Some basic examples.

Classical conditioning:

1)Whenever I take my dog for a walk I follow a certain procedure - put jacket on, pick up lead and collar, put collar on dog, go out door for walk with dog. Eventually when the dog sees me put on my jacket he gets excited because he has come to associate this action with going for his walk.

2)Whenever feed my dog I again follow a set procedure - open drawer to get can opener, open cupboard to get dog food, open dog food, put dog food in bowl, give to dog. Now after a week or two of this whenever the dog hears me open the drawer he is there waiting to be fed.

Operant conditioning:

I want my dog to sit. I initially lure with food getting him to sit. I then add a cue - sit. I can then add a signal - a hand going up in a vertical motion. Each time my dog does the right thing - ie sits he is rewarded and praised. Eventually he will do a sit whenever I say sit and/or do the hand signal.

Does this help?

[4Kelpies]

I remember by thinking

In classical conditioning the dog makes associations between an action and a consequence e.g. bell and food. being rewarded when a strange dog comes near and so loses fear.

In operant conditioning the dog operates in order to bring about a consequence e.g. sits in anticipation of a reward, takes up heel position because it has learned that this is the way to be taken for a walk.

[Staranais]

I remember by thinking

In classical conditioning the dog makes associations between an action and a consequence e.g. bell and food. being rewarded when a strange dog comes near and so loses fear.

In operant conditioning the dog operates in order to bring about a consequence e.g. sits in anticipation of a reward, takes up heel position because it has learned that this is the way to be taken for a walk.

I like that.

Lovemesideways, when the dog is initially learning what the clicker means, I believe that is classical conditioning. The dog is forming an association between two things (in this case, between the sound and the reward). When you are using the clicker to teach behaviours, then that is operant conditioning. The dog is learning what to do to cause the click/reward.

[lovemesideways]

I think its finally making sense!!

[Spitzbabe]

I think its finally making sense!!

Are you doing the NDTF course by any chance?

[Aidan]

Some of the examples of classical conditioning given so far also include some operant conditioning. A hint (if you want to try and tease them apart for your own satisfaction), the operants are the stuff you can probably see, that aren't reflexes.

[lovemesideways]

I think its finally making sense!!

Are you doing the NDTF course by any chance?

Done it.

Trying to refresh my memory.