Sidney Slug: A Computer Simulation for Teaching Shaping without an Animal Laboratory

Abstract

Establishing or maintaining animal learning laboratory facilities for providing hands-on instructional experiences in behavior shaping is fraught with staffing, space, and other budgetary problems, as well as negative community attitudes concerning the use of laboratory animals. A microcomputer program was created to simulate the behavior of a computerized "animal" so that students could learn and practice the shaping of behavior. Mathematical algorithms were written to allow the "animal" to show gradual improvements in directional movements after appropriate shaping by the student. A graphic tutorial and a provision for online feedback and prompting during shaping were used for individualizing instruction for the students' changing skills. Students were able to shape successfully and rated the laboratory simulation highly.Shaping is the gradual training of new behavior by selectively reinforcing closer and closer approximations to the desired form. The skills involved in shaping-clear specification of the desired behavior, a willingness to raise or lower one's standards in line with changes in the shapee's performance, as well as alertness, persistence, and patience by the shaper-are relevant to all areas of education and remediation. These shaping skills are difficult to teach and assess without hands-on experience. Unfortunately, there are few opportunities for systematic training of shaping outside the university-or college+based animal laboratory. Moreover, the costs for equipping, housing, maintaining, and supervising an animal laboratory can create a budgetary strain. In addition, increasingly suspicious and unsympathetic public attitudes toward animal experimentation may further the reluctance of administrators to invest in animal laboratory resources. Fortunately, the growing availability of microcomputers and their interactive power may allow the student to get an experience with a computer simulation of a "lab animal." This procedure could provide a practical alternative to a live animal with the additional possibility of servicing hundreds of students in a single academic term with relatively few microcomputers (12 in this case). The program described here, which has served over 1,000 students, offers such an option.The program begins with a computer-based tutorial that systematically teaches students the principles underlying shaping. This is followed by an interactive shaping simulation that provides an opportunity to shape the behavior of a computer animal. The simulation was designed to produce an experience very much like that of shaping a live animal and to provide ongoing feedback to the students about their performance. In addition to its utility as a teaching tool, this program also has potential as a research vehicle for the systematic study of the behavior of shapers.

Rat Lab for Fun and Profit

“…: completed one of the computer-simulation shaping programs (Acker, Goldwater, & Agnew, 1990;Cunningham, 1990) before beginning work with the live rat.…”

SIDDS: Simulations in developmental disabilities

“…Correspondence should be addressed to M. N. Desrochers, Department of Psychology, College of Charleston, SC 29424-0001. ogy to establish new behavior by reinforcing or rewarding closer approximations to a target response (Martin & Pear, 1992). During this simulation (Acker, Goldwater, & Agnew, 1990), the student shapes the directional movement of a simulated animal ("Sidney Slug") by pressing a key, or delivering a reinforcer, when the animal moves toward a goal. A quiz evaluationof this program suggested that it was effective in teaching students how to employ a shaping procedure.…”

Avaliação de professores sobre a participação de animais em atividades didáticas de Análise Experimental do Comportamento

“…A simples ausência de opções em práticas alternativas para o ensino de Psicologia não é um argumento válido há bastante tempo (e.g., Gallup & Suarez, 1985). No âmbito do ensino de ciências comportamentais há proposições de diversas práticas alternativas, seja incluindo a participação de animais não criados especificamente para esse fim -como pombos livres (Cohen & Block, 1990), cachorros de abrigo (McConnell, 2016), ou mesmo de baratas (Proctor & Jones, 2020) -, seja com métodos de fato alternativos, como softwares (Acker et al, 1990;Cihon et al, 2018;Goodhue et al, 2019;Graf, 1995;Hyten, 1989;Mulick, 1992;Ray & Miraglia, 2011;Shimoff & Catania, 1995) ou práticas com humanos (Epting & Green, 2011;Hodge & Nelson, 2002). Entretanto, a ideia de que tais alternativas são mal fundamentadas e/ou ainda não permitem alcançar os objetivos pretendidos parece ter permanecido entre parte expressiva dos professores de ciências em geral e de ciências comportamentais especificamente (Zemanova, 2021).…”