IS THIS RIGHT? I THINK ITS WRONG?

[Slumdawg]

if anyone here can justify why a response would occur in operant conditioning without a stimulus (nothing to prompt it) but the response cannot occur in classical conditioning without something to prompt it... no one see a flaw in this?

Well with the puzzle box the response of the cat pressing the lever occurred first, then the stimulus/ reinforcement of the door opening came after it. Hence, in OPERANT conditioning, response must occur first then the stimulus/reinforcement occurs after it.

[matt123]

if anyone here can justify why a response would occur in operant conditioning without a stimulus (nothing to prompt it) but the response cannot occur in classical conditioning without something to prompt it... no one see a flaw in this?

Responses dont have to be due to stimuli all the time.?

also
I think the thing is
"we are to assume that the stimulus = the reinforcer"

[Slumdawg]

Yes. The main thing you need to realise is that in operant conditioning stimulus is reinforcement.

Considering what you believe atm, what would you put for this question? As it kinda proves mine and matt's point.

[Spreadbury]

ok I will retype the ssame passage with examples from the skinner box which are given by the grivas textbook, see if you can deny them

"In operant conditioning the presentation of the reinforcer (a food pellet) depends on the response (lever pushing) occurring first. The response (pushing the lever) occurs in the presence of the stimulus (the lever). The reinforcement (food pellet) strengthens the stimulus-response association"

think of the stimulus as a prompt for the correct behaviour. also read your definitions for stimulus generalisation/ discrimination, they should also support what i'm telling you.

[Spreadbury]

In answering this question, I would like the full question please

my apologies, didn't notice it.

[matt123]

Yes. The main thing you need to realise is that in operant conditioning stimulus is reinforcement.

Considering what you believe atm, what would you put for this question? As it kinda proves mine and matt's point.

is the answer C?

[Slumdawg]

In answering this question, I would like the full question please

What? :S That is the full question.. I'll just copy and paste it below in case the picture didn't work or something..

Question 40
If you are using operant conditioning principles to train a dog, then any punishment you deliver should be administered ______ an unwanted response from the dog. Any reward you administer should be administered _______ a desired response from the dog. If you are using classical conditioning to train a dog, the conditioned stimulus should be administered _______ the dog's response.

A.   after; after; after
B.   after; before; after
C.   after; after; before
D.   before; before; after

[Spreadbury]

yes the answer is C

a conditioned stimulus elicits the dogs response, and consequences obviously come after in operant conditioning, but the dogs response will only occur in the presentation of a stimulus in operant conditioning as well as classical

[Slumdawg]

Yes. The main thing you need to realise is that in operant conditioning stimulus is reinforcement.

Considering what you believe atm, what would you put for this question? As it kinda proves mine and matt's point.

is the answer C?

Yup. See how in operant conditioning the stimulus is seen as the reinforcer, in this case it's punishment. It comes AFTER the response.

If you based your answer on your previous statement you'd get the wrong answer.

[Spreadbury]

*facepalm* you two are stubborn. the reinforcer is a stimulus that strengthens a behaviour, but explain where a behaviour will come from. nothing comes out of the blue. please justify your understandings of operant conditioning in a similar way to me (referencing a textbook)

[sillysmile]

if anyone here can justify why a response would occur in operant conditioning without a stimulus (nothing to prompt it) but the response cannot occur in classical conditioning without something to prompt it... no one see a flaw in this?

technically the prompt is another stimulus haha, but they call that the antecedent

[jinny1]

wow...my question started a wildfire!!

i think spreadbury is saying the stimulus is like the lever in the skinner box in which the rat pressed to get the reinforcement...

so any response requires some sort of stimulus/object for the learner to operate on..

[matt123]

if anyone here can justify why a response would occur in operant conditioning without a stimulus (nothing to prompt it) but the response cannot occur in classical conditioning without something to prompt it... no one see a flaw in this?

technically the prompt is another stimulus haha, but they call that the antecedent

This is the perfect answer.
He knows what hes on about.

[Spreadbury]

If you based your answer on your previous statement you'd get the wrong answer.

considering i'm using my understanding for it and got the right answer, I think i'm doing fine.

the reinforcer is not the stimulus that produces a response, it is ONE of the stimulI in operant conditioning.

[Slumdawg]

if anyone here can justify why a response would occur in operant conditioning without a stimulus (nothing to prompt it) but the response cannot occur in classical conditioning without something to prompt it... no one see a flaw in this?

technically the prompt is another stimulus haha, but they call that the antecedent

Yep that basically sums it up. Does that solve it?

Sorry I don't mean to be stubborn I'm just doing whatever I can to convince you.