Principles of condition in human goal behavior.

Abstract

It was our desire to arrange a situation which was "active" or "dynamic" rather than "passive"—a situation wherein the subject would have relatively few locomotor restrictions and could control his own movements in reference to the goal. There is in psychology no term which fits this type of behavior and we have, therefore, called it goal behavior. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if conditioning principles were operative in human goal behavior. The findings in this investigation support the thesis that Pavlovian conditioning principles are operative in human goal behavior. Generalization of inhibition, experimental extinction, and spontaneous recovery were found to occur and to display essentially the same characteristics as found by Pavlov. But differences as well as similarities were uncovered. For example, why is extinction longer in these studies, in respect to either responses or time, than in the traditional conditioned-reaction study? Our investigation also leads us to question the interpretation that extinction is the index of frustration.

The effect of effort on the attractiveness of rewarded and unrewarded stimuli.

“…appears to be contrary to inferences that might be drawn from the results of several experiments involving the concept of secondary reinforcement (Bugelski, 1938;Cowles, 1937;Melching, 1954;Mitrano, 1939;Mote & Finger, 1942;Saltzman, 1949;Skinner, 1938;Wolfe, 1936). Generally, in these experiments, animals learned to associate previously neutral stimuli with the attainment of a reward.…”

Extinction following partial and continuous primary and secondary reinforcement.

“…Extinction in children after secondary reinforcement has been the concern of at least two studies' (W. W. Lambert, E. G. Lambert, & Watson, 1953;Mitrano, 1939). Mitrano tested feebleminded children on two dispensers, one where they used a marble to get a poker chip, the other where they then used the chip to get a candy.…”

The history and present status of the law of effect.

“…A stimulus such as a buzzer or tone which has been regularly associated with shock also acquires reinforcing properties (67,69,74). The reinforcing power of token rewards, i.e., rewards which may subsequently be exchanged for a primary reward such as food may similarly be explained in terms of derived reinforcement (39,65,179,207,319). The effectiveness of social rewards and punishment calls for similar explanatory concepts: a practically unlimited chain of higher-order conditioning must be assumed (127,177).…”