Behaviorism In Psychology

Behaviourism is concerned with observable and measurable behaviour.

For behavioural psychologists, learning is the modification of behaviour brought
about by experience.
Behavioural psychologists observed the way animals learned and believed that this
provided insight into how humans learn.
They explained learning in terms of changes in the subject’s behaviour.
The prominent Psychologists who developed the behaviourist approaches to
learning were Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936), Edward Thorndike (1874-1949), John
Broadus Watson (1878-1958) and Burrhus Frederic Skinner (1904-1990).
These behavioural psychologists focused on conducting controlled laboratory
experiments and objectively recording observations.

Behaviorism, also known as behavioral learning theory, is a theoretical

perspective in psychology that emphasizes the role of learning and
observable behaviors in understanding human and animal actions.

Behaviorism is a theory of learning that states all behaviors are learned

through conditioned interaction with the environment. Thus, behavior is
simply a response to environmental stimuli.

The behaviorist theory is only concerned with observable stimulus-

response behaviors, as they can be studied in a systematic and
observable manner.

Some of the key figures of the behaviorist approach include B.F. Skinner,
known for his work on operant conditioning, and John B. Watson, who
established the psychological school of behaviorism.

History of Behaviorism
Behaviorism was formally established with the 1913 publication of John B.
Watson's classic paper, "Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It."3 It is best
summed up by the following quote from Watson, who is often considered the
father of behaviorism:

"Give me a dozen healthy infants, and my own specified world to bring them
up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become
any type of specialist I might select—doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief
and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants,
tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors."4

Simply put, strict behaviorists believe that all behaviors are the result of
experience. Any person, regardless of their background, can be trained to
act in a particular manner given the right conditioning.

From about 1920 through the mid-1950s, behaviorism became the

dominant school of thought in psychology. Some suggest that the popularity
of behavioral psychology grew out of the desire to establish psychology as
an objective and measurable science.

During that time, researchers were interested in creating theories that could
be clearly described and empirically measured.

Types of Behaviorism
There are two main types of behaviorism used to describe how behavior is
formed: methodological behaviorism and radical behaviorism. The two
approach differ in their underlying assumptions about the causes of
behavior.

John B. Watson: Methodological Behaviorism (1913)

Proposed by John B. Watson in 1913, methodological

behaviorism focuses exclusively on observable, measurable behaviors
and rejects the study of internal mental processes such as thoughts,
feelings, and desires.

Watson argued that since internal experiences cannot be directly

observed, they have no place in scientific psychology.

He believed all behaviors—whether in animals or humans—are learned

through interaction with the environment.

In his influential 1913 article “Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It”,

often referred to as the behaviorist manifesto, Watson wrote:

He saw no fundamental distinction between human and animal

behavior, believing both could be studied in the same way.
This laid the foundation for the rise of experimental psychology and
behavioral research.

Focus
Only observable behavior should be studied.
Internal thoughts, feelings, and cognitions = not useful for scientific analysis.

Daily-life Example
A parent notices that every time the doorbell rings, their toddler runs to the door excitedly.
The parent does not assume:

 “maybe the child is thinking…”

 “maybe the child feels…”

Instead, they only study the visible pattern:

Doorbell (stimulus) → Running to door (response).

They try to modify behavior by repeatedly telling the child to wait instead of running.

➡️ The focus remains only on what can be seen, not what the child “thinks.”

B.F. Skinner: Radical Behaviorism (1938)

In 1938, B.F. Skinner introduced radical behaviorism in his book The

Behavior of Organisms.

Building on Watson’s work, Skinner acknowledged internal events (such

as thoughts and emotions) but insisted they must be explained through
environmental influences and behavioral laws.

He introduced operant conditioning, the idea that behavior is shaped

and maintained by its consequences – rewards and punishments.

Unlike Watson, Skinner recognized the role of genetics and innate

behavior.

Radical behaviorism marked a shift from a strict blank slate view to a

more nuanced understanding of the interaction between biology and
environment.
 Focus:
Behavior is shaped completely by environment + past reinforcement history.
Thoughts and emotions exist but are also seen as behaviors shaped by reinforcement.

Daily-life Example
A person checks their phone constantly.
Radical behaviorism explains this through reinforcement history:

 messages → rewarding
 likes → rewarding
 notifications → variable rewards

The environment has repeatedly reinforced phone-checking, so the behavior increases.

➡️ The cause is not “habit” or “interest”—it is history of reinforcement.

Stimulus response is the process where an organism or cell reacts to a change in its
environment, known as a stimulus. A stimulus is an external or internal signal that
causes a reaction, while a response is the resulting action or change in behavior. This
concept is fundamental to various fields, including biology, psychology, and even
chemistry, explaining everything from a plant turning toward the sun to learned
behaviors and cellular processes.

In biology
 Definition: A stimulus is any signal that an organism receives, and the response is the
organism's reaction to that signal.

 Examples:

o A rabbit's response to a predator's scent (stimulus) is to run away (response).

o A Venus flytrap's response to an insect landing on it (stimulus) is to close its leaves

(response).

o A sunflower's response to light (stimulus) is to turn its head to follow the sun (response).

o Internal stimuli include feelings like hunger, while external stimuli include things like
feeling cold.
 In psychology
 Definition: Stimulus-response theory proposes that learning is the result of associations
between stimuli and responses, a concept central to behaviorism.

 Types of conditioning:

o Classical Conditioning: An association is made between a neutral stimulus and an

existing unconditioned stimulus. For example, Ivan Pavlov's dogs learned to salivate at
the sound of a bell (stimulus) because it was repeatedly paired with food (unconditioned
stimulus).

o Operant Conditioning: Behavior is modified through reinforcement or punishment. A

behavior followed by a reward is more likely to be repeated (e.g., a child gets praise for
cleaning their room), while a behavior followed by punishment is less likely to be
repeated.

 Other examples:

o Feeling the urge to sneeze when dust (stimulus) enters your nose (response).

o Learning to answer the phone when it rings.

Behaviorism as an objective measure means that psychology should be a purely

natural science focused strictly on the study of observable and measurable
behaviors and environmental stimuli, rather than internal, unobservable mental
processes like thoughts, emotions, or consciousness. This approach emphasizes
empirical evidence and experimental methods, similar to the natural sciences.

In discussing operant conditioning, we use several everyday words—positive,

negative, reinforcement, and punishment—in a specialized manner. In
operant conditioning, positive and negative do not mean good and bad.
Instead, positive means you are adding something, and negative means you
are taking something away. Reinforcement means you are increasing a
behavior, and punishment means you are decreasing a behavior.
Reinforcement can be positive or negative, and punishment can also be
positive or negative. All reinforcers (positive or negative) increase the
likelihood of a behavioral response. All punishers (positive or
negative) decrease the likelihood of a behavioral response. Now let’s combine
these four terms: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive
punishment, and negative punishment (Table 1).

Table 1. Positive and Negative Reinforcement and Punishment

Reinforcement Punishment

Something is added to increase the likelihood of a Something is added to decrease the likel
Positive
behavior. behavior.

Something is removed to increase the likelihood of a Something is removed to decrease the li

Negative
behavior. behavior.

Reinforcement
The most effective way to teach a person or animal a new behavior is with positive
reinforcement. In positive reinforcement, a desirable stimulus is added to increase a behavior.

 For example, you tell your five-year-old son, Jerome, that if he cleans his room, he will
get a toy. Jerome quickly cleans his room because he wants a new art set. Let’s pause for
a moment. Some people might say, “Why should I reward my child for doing what is
expected?” But in fact we are constantly and consistently rewarded in our lives. Our
paychecks are rewards, as are high grades and acceptance into our preferred school.
Being praised for doing a good job and for passing a driver’s test is also a reward.
Positive reinforcement as a learning tool is extremely effective. It has been found that one
of the most effective ways to increase achievement in school districts with below-average
reading scores was to pay the children to read. Specifically, second-grade students in
Dallas were paid $2 each time they read a book and passed a short quiz about the book.
The result was a significant increase in reading comprehension (Fryer, 2010). What do
you think about this program? If Skinner were alive today, he would probably think this
was a great idea. He was a strong proponent of using operant conditioning principles to
influence students’ behavior at school. In fact, in addition to the Skinner box, he also
invented what he called a teaching machine that was designed to reward small steps in
learning (Skinner, 1961)—an early forerunner of computer-assisted learning. His
teaching machine tested students’ knowledge as they worked through various school
subjects. If students answered questions correctly, they received immediate positive
reinforcement and could continue; if they answered incorrectly, they did not receive any
reinforcement. The idea was that students would spend additional time studying the
material to increase their chance of being reinforced the next time (Skinner, 1961).
 In negative reinforcement, an undesirable stimulus is removed to increase a behavior.
For example, car manufacturers use the principles of negative reinforcement in their
 seatbelt systems, which go “beep, beep, beep” until you fasten your seatbelt. The
annoying sound stops when you exhibit the desired behavior, increasing the likelihood
that you will buckle up in the future. Negative reinforcement is also used frequently in
horse training. Riders apply pressure—by pulling the reins or squeezing their legs—and
then remove the pressure when the horse performs the desired behavior, such as turning
or speeding up. The pressure is the negative stimulus that the horse wants to remove.

Punishment
Many people confuse negative reinforcement with punishment in operant
conditioning, but they are two very different mechanisms. Remember that
reinforcement, even when it is negative, always increases a behavior. In
contrast, punishment always decreases a behavior. In positive punishment,
you add an undesirable stimulus to decrease a behavior. An example
of positive punishment is scolding a student to get the student to stop texting
in class. In this case, a stimulus (the reprimand) is added in order to decrease
the behavior (texting in class). In negative punishment, you remove a pleasant
stimulus to decrease a behavior. For example, when a child misbehaves, a
parent can take away a favorite toy. In this case, a stimulus (the toy) is
removed in order to decrease the behavior.

Punishment, especially when it is immediate, is one way to decrease

undesirable behavior. For example, imagine your four year-old son, Brandon,
hit his younger brother. You have Brandon write 50 times “I will not hit my
brother” (positive punishment). Chances are he won’t repeat this behavior.
While strategies like this are common today, in the past children were often
subject to physical punishment, such as spanking. It’s important to be aware
of some of the drawbacks in using physical punishment on children. First,
punishment may teach fear. Brandon may become fearful of the hitting, but he
also may become fearful of the person who delivered the punishment—you,
his parent. Similarly, children who are punished by teachers may come to fear
the teacher and try to avoid school (Gershoff et al., 2010). Consequently--,
most schools in the United States have banned corporal punishment. Second,
punishment may cause children to become more aggressive and prone to
antisocial behavior and delinquency (Gershoff, 2002). They see their pare..nts
resort to spanking when they become angry and frustrated, so, in turn, they
may act out this same behavior when they become angry and frustrated. For
example, because you spank Margot when you are angry with her for her
misbehavior, she might start hitting her friends when they won’t share their
toys.
While positive punishment can be effective in some cases, Skinner suggested
that the use of punishment should be weighed against the possible negative
effects. Today’s psychologists and parenting experts favor reinforcement over
punishment—they recommend that you catch your child doing something
good and reward her for it.

The behaviouristic learning theories can be broadly classified into the followings
two categories.
i) Stimulus-Response (S-R) theories without reinforcement: These include
Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning Theory of Learning, and Watson’s and Guthrie’s
Learning Theories.
ii) Stimulus-Response theories with reinforcement: These include Thorndike’s,
Hull’s and Skinner’s learning theories.

Core Principles
The behaviorist movement began in 1913 when John B. Watson wrote

an article entitled Psychology as the behaviorist views it, which set out
several underlying assumptions regarding methodology and behavioral
analysis:

All behavior is learned from the environment:

One assumption of the learning approach is that all behaviors are

learned from the environment.

According to this view, people are not born with pre-set traits or instincts
that drive behavior.

Instead, behavior is acquired through two main types of

learning: classical conditioning (learning by association)
and operant conditioning (learning through consequences).

Behaviorism emphasizes how environmental factors shape behavior. It

largely excludes innate or inherited factors
From this perspective, the human mind at birth is considered a tabula
rasa – a Latin phrase meaning blank slate – ready to be written on by
experience.

In classical conditioning, learning occurs when a natural, automatic

response becomes associated with a new stimulus.

This type of learning helps explain how reflexive behaviors – like fear or
salivation – can be triggered by previously neutral cues.

Pavlov’s Experiment

Ivan Pavlov showed that dogs could be classically conditioned to salivate

at the sound of a bell if that sound was repeatedly presented while they
were given food.

Classical conditioning is a type of associative learning where an automatic, involuntary

response to a natural stimulus becomes associated with a new, previously neutral
stimulus. Through repeated pairing, the neutral stimulus eventually elicits the same
response on its own. A famous example is Ivan Pavlov's experiment where dogs
learned to salivate at the sound of a bell, because the bell was repeatedly paired with
the presentation of food.

Key terms
 Unconditioned Stimulus (US): A stimulus that naturally and automatically triggers a
response without any learning.

 Unconditioned Response (UR): The natural, unlearned response to the unconditioned

stimulus.

 Neutral Stimulus (NS): A stimulus that initially does not elicit a specific response.

 Conditioned Stimulus (CS): The previously neutral stimulus that, after being
repeatedly paired with the unconditioned stimulus, now triggers a conditioned response.

 Conditioned Response (CR): The learned response to the conditioned stimulus.

Pavlov and Classical Conditioning

Simple observations of animals led to several different theories of learning. Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936), a
Russian physiologist and psychologist, using simple experimental techniques, demonstrated how to
teach an animal to give natural responses to neutral stimuli. A neutral stimulus is a stimulus that
produces no automatic response other than catching attention. The method of associating or pairing a
potent stimulus with a neutral stimulus is called classical conditioning. Pavlov demonstrated the simple
relationship between stimulus and response in instructing (conditioning) an organism to modify its
behaviour. Pavlov used certain technical terms to explain the process of conditioning. These are:

• CS - Conditioned stimulus,
• US - Unconditioned stimulus,
• UR - Unconditional response, and
• CR - Conditional response.

How it works (Pavlov's dogs)

1. Before conditioning: The sound of a bell (neutral stimulus) elicits no salivation. Food
(unconditioned stimulus) naturally causes the dogs to salivate (unconditioned
response).

2. During conditioning: The bell is repeatedly rung just before the food is presented. The
dogs begin to associate the two stimuli.

3. After conditioning: The sound of the bell alone (now the conditioned stimulus) causes
the dogs to salivate (the conditioned response), even when no food is present.
I) How does learning occur according to classical conditioning?

Pavlov carried out an experiment on a dog in his laboratory. Pavlov conditioned a dog to salivate by
linking a neutral stimulus namely the sound of a bell to an unconditioned stimulus i.e. food. Therefore,
the response salivation to the ringing of the bell is called conditioned response (CR). So, by the process

of conditioning an association is formed between conditioned stimulus (CS) and conditioned response
(CR).

A new stimulus is presented in association with the original stimulus. After a time when the original
stimulus is withdrawn, it is found that new stimulus now elicits the original response. The response has
been conditioned to the new stimulus.

For example, given the sight of food, a hungry dog will naturally salivate. In this case food is the
stimulus, and salivating is the response. Normally, a ‘neutral’ stimulus, like the sound of a bell ringing,
will have no such effect on the animal. However, if, on a number of occasions the bell is rung just before
food is presented to an animal, the sound alone will eventually make the dog produce saliva, or, in the
language of behaviourism, to ‘evoke the salivation response’. In other words, any stimulus that readily
leads to response can be paired with a neutral stimulus in order to bring about the type of learning
described. It is important to note that the learner is typically unaware of this growing association. The
conditioned stimulus should precede the unconditioned stimulus. Conditioning depends on the
intensity of the stimulus.

This process can be illustrated as below:

US (Food) UR (Saliva)
CS (Bell)+US(Food) UR (Saliva)
CS (Bell) CR (Saliva)

II)Principles of Conditioning

To explain his theory, Pavlov has stated the principles of conditioning, which are as follows:

• Principle of Reinforcement
The term reinforcement refers to the following of the conditioned stimulus by the unconditioned
stimulus. i.e. food following the bell. Without reinforcing the bell with food, no conditioning could
be developed. Food was reinforcement. This is applicable to a student’s learning where the learning
becomes effective when the students are rewarded immediately. Quite often unconditioned
stimulus reduces a drive or tension. So, the term reinforcement also refers to a reduction in drives
or tensions.

• Principle of Sequence and Time Intervals

There is an optimal time between the presentation of the conditioned stimuli and the
unconditioned stimuli. If there is any variation, i.e., an increase or a decrease in the optimal time,
then there is no conditioning and a bond or a association cannot be formed.

• Principle of Stimulus Generalization

If we are conditioned to one thing, say a bell, then we would be conditioned to all sorts of bells.
When we learn to respond to one specific stimulus, we may also start responding to other similar
stimuli without being trained for them. The closer something is to the original stimulus, the
stronger our response will be. As things become less similar, our response becomes weaker.

Example:
If a dog is trained to salivate when it hears a particular bell, it may also salivate when it hears
other bells that sound similar. A bell with the same tone will produce a strong response, while a
bell with a slightly different tone will produce a weaker response.

• Principle of Differentiation
When two stimuli are different enough from each other, the organism can learn to respond
only to the correct one. This happens when one stimulus is consistently rewarded
(reinforced) and the other is not. Over time, the organism figures out which one leads to a
reward and responds only to that one.

Example
If a dog hears two bells — one high-pitched and one low-pitched — and the owner gives
food only after the high-pitched bell, the dog will eventually learn to salivate only to the
high-pitched bell. Since the low-pitched bell is never followed by food, the dog stops
responding to it.

• Principle of Extinction
 If the sound of the bell is not followed by food, it implies that there is no reinforcement. A stage is
reached when the dog stops to secrete saliva. This stage is called extinction.

• Principle of Spontaneous Recovery

This means that even after a learned response seems to disappear, it is not completely gone.
Instead, it is temporarily suppressed. When some time passes and the animal is brought
back into the same situation, the old conditioned response suddenly appears again. This
return of the response after a break is called spontaneous recovery.
• Example:
If a dog stops salivating to a bell because the bell was repeatedly presented without food,
the response looks “extinct.” But after some time away from the experiment, when the dog
is brought back and hears the bell again, it may suddenly start salivating. This brief return
of the response is spontaneous recovery.
• Principle of Inhibition
Pavlov found that sometimes a conditioned response (CR) does not appear, not because the
learning is gone, but because something is blocking or interfering with it. He identified two types
of inhibition:
Pavlov mentions two types of inhibition:

I) External Inhibition: Once the dog was conditioned, it was found not to give a
Conditional response, in the presence of some stranger. This happens when
something new or distracting from the outside environment stops the conditioned
response.

Simple Example:
A dog has learned to salivate when it hears a bell. But one day, when a stranger enters the room
at the same moment, the dog becomes alert and stops salivating.
The response didn’t disappear — it was just interrupted by the external distraction.

Internal Inhibition: This happens inside the organism, usually during extinction. When the
conditioned stimulus (like a bell) is repeatedly given without food, the dog stops responding. But
this doesn’t mean the learning is gone. After some rest (like 24 hours), the dog suddenly
responds again. This return is spontaneous recovery.

What it means:
The response wasn’t destroyed. It was temporarily blocked by an internal inhibitory process
during extinction.

Simple Example:
A dog stops salivating to the bell when food is no longer given.
After a day’s break, the dog salivates again when it hears the bell.
This shows the response was inhibited, not erased.
 • Principle of Higher Order Conditioning

Higher-order conditioning happens when a new stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus

because it is paired with an already learned (previous) conditioned stimulus, not with the
original unconditioned stimulus.
In other words, learning is built on top of a previous learning.

Example:

A dog is first trained to salivate when it hears a bell (the bell becomes the conditioned stimulus,
CS1).

Now, you pair a light with the bell — but you never give food with the light.
After some trials, the dog starts salivating to the light alone.

Here, the light (CS2) becomes a conditioned stimulus because of its association with the bell,
not because of food.

This is higher-order conditioning.

• Principle of Age and Conditioning

The process of conditioning is valuable at all ages, especially in early childhood. From these
observations several learning theories grew, which include classical and operant conditioning. We
have discussed them in the subsequent sections.

Examples in real life

 Advertising: 99A commercial shows attractive people using a product, making viewers
associate the product with feelings of attractiveness or happiness.

 Phobias: A person may develop a fear of dentists after experiencing a painful

procedure. The sound of the dental drill (a once neutral stimulus) becomes a
conditioned stimulus that triggers fear (the conditioned response).

 Drug tolerance: A user's body may become accustomed to the effects of a drug in a
specific environment. The environmental cues become conditioned stimuli that trigger a
compensatory response that helps the body tolerate the drug.
 Examples of classical conditioning applied to real life include:

 taste aversion – using derivations of classical conditioning, it is

possible to explain how people develop aversions to particular foods

 learned emotions – such as love for parents, were explained as

paired associations with the stimulation they provide

 advertising – we readily associate attractive images with the products

they are selling

 phobias – classical conditioning is seen as the mechanism by which –

we acquire many of these irrational fears.

Guthrie’s Theory of Association by Contiguity

Guthrie’s Theory of Association by Contiguity says that learning happens when a stimulus and
a response occur together in time, even if it is only once.

He believed animals and humans learn a behavior simply because they did something at the same
moment a certain situation was happening.

For example, if a student accidentally whispers to a friend right when the teacher enters the class,
and nothing negative happens, the student may “learn” that whispering at that moment is
acceptable — the stimulus (teacher entering) and response (whispering) occurred together.

Guthrie also argued that reward does not strengthen learning, it just changes the situation so
the behavior stops; for instance, giving a child a candy after cleaning their room doesn’t make
the cleaning habit stronger — it simply ends the “messy room situation,” preserving the
connection between “messy room” and “cleaning.”

In contrast, punishment works by forcing a new response to replace the old one; if a child runs
in the hallway and the teacher scolds them, they may stop running not because punishment
erased the old habit, but because it triggered new behaviors like slowing down or freezing, which
then become linked with the hallway.

Finally, Guthrie said learning happens in one trial, but practice just exposes the learner to
different parts of the situation; for example, a person can learn to ride a bicycle in one successful
attempt, but practice helps them master different details such as balancing, turning, and braking
because each practice trial links new small actions to the same situation.
 Little Albert Experiment
(Watson & Rayner)
By

Saul McLeod, PhD

Updated on

September 9, 2025

Reviewed by

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

The Little Albert Experiment by Watson and Rayner tested whether an

infant could be classically conditioned to fear a neutral stimulus.

By pairing a white rat with a loud noise, they induced fear that later
generalized to similar furry objects, demonstrating learned emotional
responses – but raising major ethical concerns by today’s standards.

Key Takeaways

 Aim: A 1920 study by John B. Watson and Rosalie Rayner aimed to

test whether a human infant could learn fear through classical
conditioning.

 Method: A white rat was paired several times with a loud, startling
noise until 9-month-old Little Albert showed fear of the rat even
without the noise.

 Findings: The fear extended to other furry objects – such as a rabbit,

a dog, a fur coat, and a Santa Claus mask – demonstrating stimulus
generalization.

 Applications: The experiment became a classic teaching example for

understanding how phobias might develop and for illustrating
principles of classical conditioning.
 Criticism: Later reviews noted methodological weaknesses and raised
ethical concerns, including the lack of informed consent and failure to
reverse the induced fear.

Little Albert Experiment

Watson and Rayner (1920) conducted the Little Albert Experiment
to answer 3 questions:
1. Can an infant be conditioned to fear an animal that appears simultaneously
with a loud, fear-arousing sound?
2. Would such fear transfer to other animals or inanimate objects?
3. How long would such fears persist?
Ivan Pavlov showed that classical conditioning applied to animals. Did it
also apply to humans? In a famous (though ethically dubious)
experiment, John B. Watson and Rosalie Rayner showed it did.

Conducted at Johns Hopkins University between 1919 and 1920, the

experiment aimed to provide experimental evidence for the conditioning
of emotional responses in infants.

At the outset, Watson and Rayner worked with a healthy, fearless nine-
month-old boy they nicknamed Little Albert.

His exact identity remains uncertain, with researchers debating whether

he was Albert Barger or Douglas Merritte.

The researchers obtained permission from Albert’s mother to observe

and test him, designing a procedure to see if they could condition a fear
response to a previously neutral object.

Participant

Little Albert had been raised from birth in a hospital environment, as his
mother worked as a wet nurse at the Harriet Lane Home for Invalid
Children.
At nine months old, he was healthy, weighing twenty-one pounds, and
was described by Watson and Rayner as “stolid and unemotional.”( The
phrase “stolid and unemotional” describes someone who is calm, serious, and shows little or
no emotion, even in situations where others might react strongly.

 Stolid = not easily excited or moved; showing little emotion

 Unemotional = not displaying feelings; calm and detached)

This unusually calm temperament, along with his robust health, was one
of the main reasons he was chosen as the subject for the study.

Baseline Session

When Albert was approximately nine months old, the researchers tested
his reactions to various neutral stimuli.

He showed no fear of a white rat, a rabbit, a dog, a monkey, masks (with

and without hair), cotton wool, or burning newspapers.

Instead, he typically tried to reach out and manipulate the objects —

curious rather than afraid.

The only thing that startled him was the sudden striking of a steel bar
behind his head, which caused him to startle and briefly hold his breath.

On the second strike, his lips trembled, and on the third, he cried
suddenly. This was the first time a laboratory situation had produced
fear in him.

Observations from his mother and hospital staff confirmed that Albert
rarely cried and had never shown fear or rage before.

Conditioning Sessions

Two months later, when Albert was just over 11 months old, Watson and
Rayner began the conditioning procedure.

Their aim was to see if they could make him fear a white rat by pairing it
with the loud noise that had previously startled him.
First session (11 months, 3 days):

When the rat was placed near Albert, he reached for it with interest. Just
as his hand touched the animal, the steel bar was struck behind his head.

He jumped violently, buried his face in the mattress, but did not cry.

On the second pairing, he again reached for the rat, but when the noise
sounded he started violently and whimpered. The researchers stopped
after these two trials so as not to upset him too much.

Second session (11 months, 10 days):

A week later, Albert was tested again. At first, when shown the rat alone,
he fixated on it but hesitated to touch.

When it brushed his hand, he pulled away sharply. After several more
pairings of rat and noise (five in total), his reaction escalated: when the
rat was presented without any sound, he puckered his face, whimpered,
turned away, and eventually began to cry.

On one occasion, he crawled away so rapidly he nearly fell from the table.

By the end of the second conditioning session, when Albert was shown the rat, he
reportedly cried and “began to crawl away so rapidly that he was caught with
difficulty before reaching the edge of the table” (p. 5). Watson and Rayner
interpreted these reactions as evidence of fear conditioning.
 Between trials, Watson and Rayner gave him his wooden blocks to play
with. This was an important control: it showed that his fear was specific
to the rat, not a generalized anxiety.

With the blocks, Albert played happily, smiling and gurgling, which
helped him calm down between the stressful pairings.

By the end of the second session, Watson and Rayner concluded that
Albert had developed a conditioned emotional reaction: the once-neutral
rat now triggered fear responses even without the loud noise.

Transfer Sessions

After Albert’s fear of the rat had been established, Watson and Rayner
tested whether it would extend to other animals and objects.

This was an important question: could a conditioned fear generalize to

stimuli that were similar in appearance or texture?

Reactions to animals

 Rabbit: Albert leaned away, whimpered, and eventually burst into

tears when it touched him.

 Dog: Initially a milder reaction — shrinking back without crying — but

when the dog approached his face, Albert turned away, whimpered,
and began to cry.

Reactions to objects

 Fur coat: He withdrew sharply to the side, cried, and tried to crawl
away.

 Cotton wool: He kicked it away and refused to touch it with his

hands, though he eventually played with the paper wrapper while
avoiding direct contact.
 Santa Claus mask and human hair: The mask with white hair
made him cry and attempt to turn away. Similarly, Watson’s own hair
and that of two observers provoked negative reactions.

Conflicting responses

In some cases, he displayed a “conflicting tendency to manipulate” the

objects — reaching out to touch but quickly withdrawing.

1. “Conflicting tendency to manipulate” — reaching out to touch but quickly

withdrawing
o Sometimes, Albert wanted to touch or explore an object (like a white rat), but
hesitated or pulled back quickly because part of him was scared.
o In simple terms: He felt both curiosity and fear at the same time, so his
actions were inconsistent.
2. “Played more vigorously with his wooden blocks after a frightening trial, almost as
if compensating for the fear by slamming them down harder than before”
o After experiencing something scary (like the loud noise paired with the rat),
Albert sometimes hit or played with his blocks more aggressively than usual.
o This was likely his way of coping with fear, like trying to feel in control or
“make up” for the scary experience.

Testing in a new environment

The researchers also tested Albert in a new environment — a large, well-

lit lecture hall instead of the small dark room where previous trials had
taken place.

In this setting, some of his reactions were weaker.

For example, his response to the rabbit and rat was less intense, but
when a previously quiet dog suddenly barked near his face, Albert fell
over and cried loudly, startling even the adult observers.

These tests showed that Albert’s conditioned fear could generalize widely to other
furry objects, though his reactions varied in strength depending on the stimulus
and setting.
Albert’s reactions to the rat during the baseline session (first still) and
transfer session (remaining stills; stills are ordered sequentially by row
from top left to lower right). These images are available for use in the
public domain.

Experimental Procedure

Session Age Stimuli Shown

8 months Baseline: rat, rabbit, dog, monkey, masks, cotton wool, burning newspapers (no
1
& 26 days fear). Loud noise test: startle → lip tremble → crying.

11 months Conditioning: Rat + loud noise (2 pairings). Startle/whimper. Wooden blocks given
2
& 3 days between trials to maintain a neutral emotional state.
 Session Age Stimuli Shown

11 months Conditioning: Test with rat alone (elicited mild fear). Rat paired with loud noise (5
3
& 10 days pairings). Test with rat alone (elicited strong fear).

11 months Transfer: Rat, rabbit, dog, fur coat, cotton wool, hair, Santa mask. Fear to most
4
& 15 days stimuli; some manipulation attempts.

Transfer: In original room: tests with rat, rabbit, and dog; extra rat conditioning;
11 months and first direct conditioning of rabbit and dog with noise. In new room: tests with
5
& 20 days same animals; extra rat conditioning; barking dog incident startled both Albert and
adult observers.

Transfer (one-month follow-up): Santa mask, fur coat, rat, rabbit, and dog. Some
12
weaker reactions (partial extinction), but avoidance persisted. New behaviors
6 months,
included head nodding, shuddering, and thumb-sucking (blocked fear until
21 days
removed). Albert discharged after this session — no deconditioning attempted.

Description of Each Session in the Little Albert Experiment Along With

Albert’s Age as Reported by Watson and Rayner (1920). Source: Powell,
R. A., & Schmaltz, R. M. (2021). Did Little Albert actually acquire a
conditioned fear of furry animals? What the film evidence tells
us. History of psychology, 24(2), 164.

Classical Conditioning

1. Neutral Stimulus (NS): This is a stimulus that, before conditioning,

does not naturally bring about the response of interest. In this case, the
Neutral Stimulus was the white laboratory rat. Initially, Little Albert
had no fear of the rat, he was interested in the rat and wanted to play
with it.

2. Unconditioned Stimulus (US): A stimulus that naturally and

automatically triggers a response without learning. In the experiment,
 the unconditioned stimulus was the loud, frightening noise, made by
striking a steel bar with a hammer behind Albert’s head.

3. Unconditioned Response (UR): The unlearned, natural reaction to

the unconditioned stimulus. In this case, the Unconditioned Response
was Albert’s fear response to the loud noise – crying and showing
distress.

4. Conditioning Process: Watson and Rayner paired the rat (NS) with
the loud noise (US). Each time Albert reached for or looked at the rat,
the steel bar was struck. After several pairings, Albert began to
associate the rat with the frightening noise.

5. Conditioned Stimulus (CS): After several pairings, the previously

Neutral Stimulus (the rat) becomes the conditioned stimulus, as it now
elicits the fear response even without the presence of the loud noise.

6. Conditioned Response (CR): The learned reaction to the

conditioned stimulus. The Conditioned Response was Albert’s fear of
the rat. Even without the loud noise, he became upset and showed
signs of fear whenever he saw the rat.
The Little Albert Experiment demonstrated that classical conditioning
 could be used to create a phobia. A phobia is an irrational fear, that is out
of proportion to the danger.

One-Month Follow-Up

Thirty-one days later, Albert’s fear responses were retested. Some were
weaker than before, showing signs of partial extinction, but clear
avoidance remained.

It also revealed how children may use coping mechanisms, like thumb-
sucking, to manage distress.

Persistence of fear

When shown the rat and rabbit, Albert no longer reacted with
immediate, intense crying, but he still withdrew his body, turned his
head away, and avoided direct contact.

His reactions suggested that the conditioned fear had diminished in

intensity, but not disappeared.

New behaviors

During this follow-up, Albert displayed several new fear-related

behaviors:

 Head nodding: a repetitive motion when distressed.

 Shuddering: a physical tremor-like response.

 Covering his face: using his hands to shield himself from the
stimulus.

Thumb-sucking as a coping strategy

Albert sometimes sucked his thumb during testing.

 This behavior seemed to block or soothe his fear response, making him
appear calm.

Watson and Rayner had to physically remove his thumb from his mouth
in order to elicit the conditioned reactions again.

Extinction and Generalization of Fear

In this experiment, a baby who had previously shown no fear of a white

rat was conditioned to become afraid of it.

The study also illustrated two important concepts from Pavlov’s work on
classical conditioning.

 Extinction occurs when a conditioned association gradually weakens

and eventually disappears if it is not reinforced. Although the
conditioned fear response can be strong at first, repeated exposure to
the conditioned stimulus without the unconditioned stimulus will
cause the reaction to fade.

 Generalization happens when a conditioned response transfers to

stimuli similar to the original one. For Albert, fear extended beyond the
rat to other furry objects such as a rabbit, dog, fur coat, cotton wool,
and even a Santa Claus mask.

Planned Deconditioning

The study ended suddenly when Albert’s mother withdrew him from the
hospital on the same day as the last tests.

As a result, Watson and Rayner were unable to carry out their planned
deconditioning procedures to remove the learned fear, leaving Albert’s
emotional state unresolved.

Watson and Rayner intended to explore methods for removing conditioned fear
but were unable to do so when Albert left the hospital. They outlined four
strategies they would have tried:
1. Habituation: Repeated exposure to the feared stimulus (such as the
rat) without the noise, until the fear response gradually diminished.
This is similar to what modern psychologists call exposure therapy.

2. Tactile reconditioning: Tactile reconditioning: This involved pairing the

object that caused fear with pleasant physical sensations (like gentle touch on
comforting areas of the body). By today’s standards, this approach would be
considered ethically questionable, but at the time, Watson believed it could
help create positive associations to reduce fear.

3. Feeding association: Presenting the feared object while giving

Albert food, with the aim of creating a positive emotional link between
the two. This approach reflects the principle that strong biological
drives, such as hunger, can override fear responses.

4. Constructive play: Encouraging Albert to manipulate or play with

the feared object, possibly by modeling the behavior and prompting
him to imitate. The idea was that positive interaction could gradually
reduce avoidance.

Critical Evaluation
Methodological Limitations
The study is often cited as evidence that phobias can develop through classical
conditioning. However, critics have questioned whether conditioning actually
occurred due to methodological flaws (Powell & Schmaltz, 2022).

Why the Little Albert Experiment Was So

Controversial
While the experiment is one of psychology's most famous and is included in nearly every introductory
psychology course, it is widely criticized for several reasons. First, the experimental design and process
were not carefully constructed. Watson and Rayner did not develop an objective means to evaluate
Albert's reactions, instead of relying on their own subjective interpretations.
The experiment also raises many ethical concerns. Little Albert was harmed during this
experiment—he left the experiment with a previously nonexistent fear. By today's standards, the
Little Albert experiment would not be permitted.

What Happened to Little Albert?

The question of what happened to Little Albert has long been one of psychology's mysteries. Before
Watson and Rayner could attempt to "cure" Little Albert, he and his mother moved away. Some
envisioned the boy growing into a man with a strange phobia of white, furry objects.

Initial Attempts to Identify Albert

In 2009, researchers published the results of their attempt to track down the boy's identity. As reported
in American Psychologist, a seven-year search led by psychologist Hall P. Beck led to the discovery of a
child the researchers believed might be Little Albert.5
After tracking down and locating the original experiments and the possible identity of the boy's mother, it
was suggested that Little Albert was actually a boy named Douglas Merritte.
Unfortunately, the researchers discovered that Douglas had died on May 10, 1925, at the age of six, of
hydrocephalus (a build-up of fluid in his brain), which he had suffered from since birth.
In 2012, Beck and Alan J. Fridlund reported that Douglas was not the healthy, normal child Watson
described in his 1920 experiment.6 Instead, they suggested that Watson may have known about and
deliberately concealed the boy's neurological condition.

If true, these findings would have cast a shadow over Watson's legacy and deepened the ethical
and moral issues of this well-known experiment.
More recent evidence, however, suggests that Merritte was incorrectly identified as Little Albert.7

The Likely Identity of the Real Little Albert

In 2014, however, Beck and Fridlund's findings were questioned when researchers presented evidence
that a boy named William Barger was the real Little Albert.8
Barger was born on the same day as Merritte to a wet nurse who worked at the same hospital as Merritte's
mother. While his first name was William, he was known his entire life by his middle name—Albert.

Skinner argued that learning is an active process and occurs

through operant conditioning. When humans and animals act on and in
their environmental consequences, follow these behaviors.

If the consequences are pleasant, they repeat the behavior, but if the
consequences are unpleasant, they do not.
Albert Bandura: Social Learning Theory (1963)

Albert Bandura introduced social learning theory in 1963 with the

publication of Social Learning and Personality Development.

His theory emphasized that people learn not only through direct
reinforcement, but also by observing and imitating others – a process
known as modeling.

Bandura’s Bobo doll experiment in 1961 provided strong evidence for

observational learning.

Bandura’s theory introduced cognitive elements like attention, memory,

and motivation, positioning social learning theory as a bridge between
behaviorist and cognitive approaches.

Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (1963) proposed that people can learn not only
through direct reinforcement (rewards or punishments) but also by observing others and
imitating their behaviors — a process known as modeling. Bandura highlighted that cognitive
processes like attention, memory, and motivation play a central role in learning, making his
theory a bridge between traditional behaviorist approaches and cognitive psychology.

Bandura’s famous Bobo doll experiment (1961) clearly demonstrated observational learning.
In this study, children watched an adult model behave aggressively toward a large inflatable
clown doll called a Bobo doll, hitting it and shouting at it. Later, when the children were placed
in a room with the same doll, many of them imitated the aggressive behaviors they had
observed, even without being rewarded or punished. The experiment also showed that children
were more likely to imitate a model of the same gender and that seeing aggression being
rewarded or ignored influenced whether they copied it.

Key Terms in Social Learning Theory:

 Modeling: Learning by observing the actions of others.

 Observational Learning: Acquiring new behaviors by watching others.
 Attention: Focusing on the model’s behavior to learn it.
 Retention/Memory: Remembering what was observed to reproduce the behavior later.
 Reproduction: The ability to replicate the observed behavior.
 Motivation: The desire or reason to perform the observed behavior, influenced by
anticipated rewards or punishments.
 Vicarious Reinforcement: Learning occurs by seeing someone else rewarded or
punished, even if the observer does not experience it directly.
Real-Life Example
In a classroom, a student may notice a peer being praised for presenting confidently in front
of the class. Observing this, the student learns that confident speaking can lead to positive
outcomes (vicarious reinforcement) and may try to imitate the behavior in the next
presentation. They must pay attention to how the peer speaks, remember the techniques,
reproduce them, and have the motivation to gain similar recognition. This illustrates Bandura’s
key idea that learning often occurs through observation rather than direct experience.

Applications
1. Mental health

Applications of Behaviorism in Mental Health

Behaviorism views abnormal behavior and mental health issues as the result of
faulty learning, rather than unconscious conflicts or inner struggles, which is the
focus of psychoanalysis.

From this perspective, behavior therapy aims to help individuals unlearn

unhealthy or maladaptive behaviors and replace them with positive,
constructive responses, using methods based on conditioning principles.

One widely used technique is systematic desensitization, particularly effective for

treating phobias.

Systematic desensitization is a type of exposure therapy based on the

principle of classical conditioning. Wolpe developed it during the 1950s
to treat phobias and anxiety disorders.

It involves gradually exposing the individual to the feared object or

situation in a controlled and relaxed environment.

The process combines relaxation techniques with a hierarchical exposure

to the anxiety-causing stimulus, allowing the individual to confront and
reduce their fear without an anxiety response gradually.
 This therapy aims to gradually remove the fear response of a phobia and
substitute a relaxation response to the conditional stimulus using
counter-conditioning.

A desensitization hierarchy is constructed, and the patient works

through it, visualizing each anxiety-provoking event while engaging in
the relaxation response.

The number of sessions required depends on the severity of the phobia.

Usually, 4-6 sessions, up to 12 for a severe phobia.

The therapy is complete once the agreed therapeutic goals are met (not
necessarily when the person’s fears have been completely removed).

For example, a person with a fear of dogs might start by looking at pictures of
dogs, then progress to watching a dog from a distance, followed by standing
closer to a calm dog, and eventually petting or interacting with a dog.

By gradually pairing the feared situations with relaxation, the individual learns to
replace the fear response with calmness, demonstrating how behaviorism can be
applied to improve mental health in a systematic and practical way.

How Desensitization Works

 In vitro – the client imagines exposure to the phobic stimulus.

 In vivo – the client is actually exposed to the phobic stimulus.

Research has found that in vivo techniques are more successful than in
vitro (Menzies & Clarke, 1993). However, there may be practical reasons
why in vitro may be used.

There are three phases to the treatment:

Systematic desensitization involves a three-step process:
1. Relaxation Training: The individual learns deep muscle relaxation
techniques and breathing exercises to control anxiety and physical
reactions to [Link] step is very important because of reciprocal
inhibition, where, once the response is inhibited because it is
incompatible with another. In the case of phobias, fears involve
tension, and tension is incompatible with relaxation.

2. Establishment of Anxiety Hierarchy: The individual and

therapist collaboratively create a list of fear-inducing situations related
to the specific phobia, ranking them from least anxiety-provoking to
most. The list is crucial as it provides a structure for the therapy.

3. Gradual Exposure: Starting with the least anxiety-inducing

situation, the individual is exposed to each item while employing
relaxation techniques. They move up the hierarchy only when they can
remain relaxed at the current [Link] time, this exposure in a
relaxed state diminishes the anxiety response to the feared
stimulus. The client repeatedly imagines (or is confronted by) this
situation until it fails to evoke any anxiety, indicating that the therapy
has succeeded.

Examples
Applying the three-step process of systematic desensitization to treating a phobia
of spiders:
1. Relaxation Training:

 The individual is first taught relaxation techniques, such as deep

breathing, progressive muscle relaxation, or guided imagery.

 They practice these techniques until they can achieve a relaxed state
consistently on command.

2. Establishment of Anxiety Hierarchy:

 Together with the therapist, the individual creates a list of situations

involving spiders, ranked from least anxiety-provoking to most.

 This might look like:

1. Thinking about a spider.

2. Looking at a picture of a spider.

3. Watching a video of a spider.

4. Being in the same room as a spider inside a closed container.

5. Watching someone else handle a spider.

6. Standing close to a spider inside an open container.

7. Touching a spider with a gloved hand.

8. Holding a spider with bare hands.

3. Gradual Exposure:

 The client reaches a state of deep relaxation and is then asked to

imagine (or is confronted by) the least threatening situation in the
anxiety hierarchy.
  For example, in a relaxed state, the individual first thinks about a
spider. The focus here is on maintaining relaxation despite the
thought.

 Once they can think about spiders without anxiety, they move to the
next level, like looking at a picture of a spider while staying relaxed.

 The process continues, with the individual gradually exposed to

more direct interactions with spiders while maintaining their calm,
until they can eventually handle a spider without significant fear.

4. Throughout the process, the goal is for the individual to associate

spiders with feelings of relaxation rather than fear, eventually
diminishing the phobic response.

5.

Aversion Therapy
Aversion therapy is a behavioral technique designed to help individuals reduce or eliminate
unwanted behaviors by associating them with unpleasant stimuli.

The idea is that if a behavior consistently produces an uncomfortable or negative experience, the
person will gradually learn to avoid it.

For instance, someone trying to quit smoking might use a product that makes cigarettes taste
extremely bitter, so that each time they smoke, the unpleasant taste is paired with the act of
smoking.
Over time, the individual may start to associate smoking with this negative experience and feel
less desire to engage in it.

Similarly, a person who bites their nails could apply a harmless but bitter-tasting substance to
their nails.

Every time they attempt to bite, the unpleasant taste occurs, gradually discouraging the behavior.

Through repeated pairings of the unwanted behavior with a negative stimulus, aversion therapy
helps replace maladaptive habits with healthier alternatives, demonstrating a practical
application of behaviorist principles in everyday life.

Token Economies
Token economies are a behavioral technique commonly used in educational and clinical
settings, particularly with individuals who may need extra support in learning positive behaviors,
such as children with autism or ADHD.

In this system, desired behaviors are reinforced by giving the individual tokens, points, or
stickers each time they perform the behavior correctly.

These tokens can later be exchanged for rewards, such as extra playtime, a small toy, or a
favorite activity.

This approach is based on operant conditioning, where positive reinforcement strengthens

behaviors over time.

For example, in a classroom, a teacher might give a student a star token every time they
complete their homework on time. After collecting a certain number of stars, the student can
trade them for a prize, like a special privilege or a small treat. Over time, this system
encourages the student to consistently complete homework and participate actively in class.
Token economies show how behaviorist principles are applied in real life, allowing teachers,
therapists, and caregivers to support behavior change and promote mental health in a
structured, measurable way.

2. Education

Classical conditioning is relevant in education, especially in shaping

students’ emotional associations with learning.

However, operant conditioning plays a more significant role in everyday

classroom management and motivation.
Teachers frequently use reinforcement strategies to encourage positive
behavior and discourage disruptive actions.

Operant Conditioning in the Classroom

For example, praising a student for participation or awarding stickers for

completing homework can increase the likelihood of those behaviors
recurring.

Conversely, ignoring minor misbehavior (rather than reacting to it) may

reduce its frequency, a technique known as extinction in operant terms.

3. Addiction

Addiction and Cue Reactivity

Cue reactivity is the idea that people learn to associate certain situations or places with the
pleasurable effects of a substance, such as nicotine.

Over time, these cues can trigger cravings even before the substance is consumed.

For example, meeting with friends who smoke or being in a familiar environment like a pub can
automatically make a smoker feel the urge to light a cigarette.

This happens because repeated use of nicotine creates a strong association between these
environmental cues and the rewarding effects of smoking, a process explained by classical
conditioning.

For instance, a student who regularly smokes while studying in the library may start to crave a
cigarette every time they enter the library, even if they didn’t plan to smoke. The library
environment itself becomes a smoking-related cue, triggering physiological and psychological
responses linked to nicotine use. Understanding this process helps explain why breaking
addictions can be difficult, as it’s not only the substance itself but also the associated cues that
drive cravings and habitual behavior.
Weaknesses
1. Overreliance on Animal Studies

Many of the experiments carried out were done on animals; we are

different cognitively and physiologically. Humans have different social
norms and moral values that mediate the effects of the environment.

Therefore, people might behave differently from animals, so the laws and
principles derived from these experiments might apply more to animals
than humans.

2. Difficulty Explaining Spontaneous Behaviors

Behaviorism struggles to explain behaviors that seem to emerge without

any apparent environmental triggers or reinforcement history.

Spontaneous behaviors, such as creative insights, sudden changes in

preferences, or unprompted acts of kindness, are difficult to account for
within a strict behaviorist framework.

The inability to fully explain these behaviors highlights the limitations of

focusing solely on observable stimuli and responses, and suggests the
need for a more comprehensive approach that considers internal mental
processes and individual agency.

3. Neglect of Individual Differences

Behaviorism often assumes that the same learning principles and

environmental contingencies apply to all individuals, regardless of their
unique experiences, personalities, and cultural backgrounds.

This “one size fits all” approach may overlook important individual
differences that shape behavior and influence responses to interventions.
 By failing to account for the diversity of human experience and the role
of individual factors in shaping behavior, behaviorism may provide an
oversimplified or incomplete understanding of psychological
phenomena.

Humanism rejects the nomothetic approach of behaviorism.

It views humans as unique and believes humans cannot be compared

with animals (who aren’t susceptible to demand characteristics).

This is known as an idiographic approach.

4. Limited Explanations for Complex Behaviors

Behaviorist principles may struggle to fully explain more complex human

behaviors, such as language acquisition, creativity, problem-solving, and
abstract thinking.

These behaviors often involve higher-order cognitive processes and

symbolic representation, which are difficult to reduce to simple stimulus-
response associations or reinforcement contingencies.

The limited explanatory scope of behaviorism has led to the development

of alternative approaches, such as cognitive psychology, that aim to
provide more comprehensive accounts of complex mental processes.

Historical Timeline
 Pavlov (1897) published the results of an experiment on conditioning
after originally studying digestion in dogs.

 John B. Watson (1913) launches the behavioral school of psychology,

publishing an article, Psychology as the behaviorist views it.

 Watson and Rayner (1920) conditioned an orphan called Albert B

(aka Little Albert) to fear a white rat.
 Thorndike (1905) formalized the Law of Effect.

 Skinner (1938) wrote The Behavior of Organisms and introduced the

concepts of operant conditioning and shaping.

 Clark Hull’s (1943) Principles of Behavior was published.

 B.F. Skinner (1948) published Walden Two, describing a utopian

society founded upon behaviorist principles.

 Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior began in 1958.

 Chomsky (1959) published his criticism of Skinner’s

behaviorism, Review of Verbal Behavior.

 Bandura (1963) published a book called the Social Leaning Theory

and Personality development which combines both cognitive and
behavioral frameworks.

 B.F. Skinner (1971) published his book, Beyond Freedom and Dignity,
where he argues that free will is an illusion.

 1980s-1990s – The development of behavior therapy and the

increasing integration of cognitive and behavioral approaches in
psychology.

 2002 – The Association for Behavioral and Cognitive

Therapies (ABCT) was formed through the merger of the Association
for Advancement of Behavior Therapy (AABT) and the American
Association of Cognitive and Behavioral Therapies (AACBT)

Edward Thorndike: Law of Effect and Learning

Experiments
Edward Thorndike (1874–1949), an American psychologist, is considered one of the pioneers of
behaviorism and experimental learning theory. He conducted a series of experiments to
understand how animals learn through trial and error and proposed principles that form the
foundation of operant conditioning.
Thorndike’s Puzzle Box Experiment

Thorndike studied learning in animals, especially cats, using puzzle boxes. A cat was placed
inside a box that could be opened by performing a specific action, such as pressing a lever or
pulling a string. Food was placed outside as a reward.

 Observation: Initially, the cat engaged in random behaviors like scratching, biting, or
pushing. Eventually, by trial and error, it accidentally performed the action that opened
the box and got the food.
 Result: Over repeated trials, the cat learned to perform the correct action more quickly,
showing that learning occurs through gradual strengthening of successful behaviors.

Real-Life Example: A student learning to type on a new keyboard may initially press the wrong
keys randomly. Over time, through trial and error, they learn the correct key sequence, and
typing becomes faster and automatic.

Thorndike’s Laws of Learning

1. Law of Effect
o Definition: Behaviors followed by satisfying consequences are more likely to be
repeated, while behaviors followed by unpleasant consequences are less likely to
occur.
o Example: A student receives praise for submitting homework on time (satisfying
consequence), so they are more likely to submit homework on time in the future.
Conversely, if they are scolded for being late, they are less likely to repeat that
behavior.
2. Law of Readiness
o Definition: A learner is more likely to perform a behavior successfully if they are
mentally and physically prepared to do it.
o Example: A student who has studied vocabulary for a quiz is more ready and able
to recall the words, whereas an unprepared student will struggle.
3. Law of Exercise
o Definition: The more frequently a connection is used, the stronger it becomes.
Conversely, connections weaken if they are not practiced.
o Example: Practicing basketball free throws regularly strengthens the skill, while
neglecting practice causes skill deterioration.

Key Terms:

 Trial and Error: Learning by attempting multiple behaviors until success occurs.
 Satisfying/Unpleasant Consequence: Outcomes that increase or decrease the likelihood
of a behavior.
 Connectionism: Thorndike’s idea that learning strengthens the connection between a
stimulus (situation) and a response (behavior).

Operant Conditioning (B.F. Skinner)

While Thorndike laid the foundation, B.F. Skinner (1904–1990) expanded on it through
operant conditioning, showing that behavior is influenced by its consequences. Skinner used
the Skinner Box to study animals like rats and pigeons.

Skinner Box Experiment

 A rat was placed in a box with a lever. Pressing the lever delivered food (positive
reinforcement). Over time, the rat learned to press the lever quickly and consistently.
 In another setup, pressing the lever could stop a mild electric shock (negative
reinforcement), showing that behaviors increase when unpleasant stimuli are removed.

Real-Life Example:

 Positive Reinforcement: A teacher gives a student a star for completing homework,

increasing the likelihood of homework being done on time.
 Negative Reinforcement: Parents stop nagging when the child cleans their room,
making cleaning more likely in the future.
 Punishment: If a student is reprimanded for cheating, they are less likely to cheat again.

Key Terms:

 Reinforcement: Any consequence that increases the likelihood of a behavior.

o Positive Reinforcement: Adding a pleasant stimulus.
o Negative Reinforcement: Removing an unpleasant stimulus.
 Punishment: A consequence that decreases a behavior.
 Shaping: Reinforcing successive approximations of a desired behavior until the full
behavior is learned.