On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Rick Froman wrote:
> I am not an expert but I do teach Theories of Learning. There are some
> fairly straightforward distinctions between operant and classical
> conditioning that can be used to decide which is which.
>
> 1) Operant conditioning involves learning to make a voluntary response
> while classical is the training of a nonvoluntary response.
>
> 2) Classical conditioning involves the training of visceral (nausea),
> glandular (salivation) and reflexive skeletomuscular (eyeblink)
> responses.
>
Yes - this is the "strong" theory of classical/operant conditioning. But,
it does not really hold up. For example, most learning theorists consider
autoshaping to be an example of classical conditioning. However,
keypecking in pigeons is a pretty clear example of a "voluntary" skeletal
response. At the very least, Skinner certainly used keypecking as a
classic example of an operant.
Of course, autoshaping theory is itself complicated - and there is some
reason to believe that there operant components to autoshaping.
-- Jim Dougan
