28 Sep

What about Behaviorism Theory of Learning

I’m quite fascinated by the Behaviorism Theory of Learning and I want to share it with you. This view of learning according to according to the flow behavior, not the other is a change in behavior as a result of the interaction between stimulus and response.

Or in other words, learning is the change experienced by students in terms of its ability to behave in new ways as a result of interaction between stimulus and response. The experts are a lot of work in this genre include: Thorndike (1911), Watson (1963), Hull (1943), and Skinner (1968).

1. Thorndike According to Thorndike (1911), co-founder of the flow behavior, learning is a process of interaction between the stimulus (which may be thought, feeling, or movement) and response (which also can include thoughts, feelings, or movement).

Clearly, according to Thorndike, changes in behavior may be intangible something concrete (observable), or that nonkonkret (not observable). Although Thorndike did not explain how to measure a variety of behaviors that non concrete (measurement is one thing that became an obsession of all adherents of the flow behavior), but Thorndike’s theory has much to inspire the other experts who come afterwards.

Thorndike theory referred to as “flow connectionist” (connectionism). Experimental procedure was to make in order to escape the cage of each animal to the place of food. In this case if a caged animal, then these animals often perform a variety of behavior, such as biting, rubbing his body to the sides of the box, and sooner or later the animal was tripped on the bar so that the box open and the animal will escape into the food.

2. Watson In contrast to Thorndike, according to Watson, a pioneer who came after Thorndike, stimulus and response should be shaped behavior “observable” (observable). In other words, Watson ignores a variety of mental changes that may occur in learning and regard it as a factor that does not need to know.

Not that all the mental changes that occur in the minds of students is not important. All that is important, but these factors can not explain whether learning has occurred. Only by assuming so, according to Watson, predictable changes what would happen to the students.

Only thus also the psychology and science of learning can be equated with other sciences such as physics or biology is very much oriented on empirical experience. Based on this description, adherents of the flow behavior rather choose not to think about the things that can not be measured, although they continue to recognize that all that’s important.

Three other experts were Clark Hull, Edwin Guthrie, and BF Skinner. Like the two previous experts, these last three people who also use the stimulus-response variables to explain their theories. However, although all three experts were named the same, namely the founder of the flow behavior (neo-behaviourism), they differ from each other in some ways as described below.

3. Clark Hull Clark hull (1943) put forward his theory that the main concept is strongly influenced by Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. For Hull, a person’s behavior serves to maintain viability. Therefore, in theory Hull, biological needs and satisfaction of biological needs occupy a central position.

According to Hull (1943, 1952), concept needs a boost (drive), such as hunger, thirst, sleep, loss of pain, and so on. The stimulus is almost always associated with these biological needs, although the response may be many different forms. This theory, especially after Skinner introduced his theory, it is not widely used in the practical world, although often used in various experiments in the laboratory.

4. Edwin Guthrie Edwin Guthrie contiguity a theory which holds that learning is an associative link between a specific stimulus and specific response. Furthermore, Edwin Guthrie held that the relationship between the stimulus with the response is a critical factor in learning.

Therefore, the provision required frequent stimulus to be more lasting relationship. In addition, a response will be stronger (and even become a habit) if the response is associated with a variety of stimuli.

For example, someone who has a habit hard to break. This can occur because the act of smoking is not only associated with one kind of stimulus (e.g. enjoyment of smoking), but also by other stimuli such as drinking coffee, hanging out with friends, wanted to look handsome, and others. Guthrie also noted that the “punishment” plays an important role in the learning process.

According to a punishment that is given at the right moment, will be able to change one’s habits. For example, a girl who each time came home from school, always discard clothes and hat on the floor. Then his mother told to dress and re-used topics by his son, then back out, and returned home with hat and shirt as he hung on the hangers.

After doing that several times, hung up his hat and shirt responses become associated with the stimulus entered the house. However, this penalty will not the dominant factor in theories of behavior. Especially after Skinner increasingly popularized the idea of ??”strengthening” (reinforcement).

5. Skinner Skinner (1968) which comes later is Saxon neo behaviorism that diverts from the lab to classroom practice. Skinner has another opinion, which was able to beat the prestige of the theory of Hull and Guthrie. This may be due to the ability of Skinner in “simplifying” complexity theory and explains the concepts that exist in these theories.

According to Skinner, a description of the relationship between stimulus and response to explain changes in behavior (in relation to the environment) according to Watson’s version is an incomplete description.

The response given by students is not as simple as that, because basically any given stimulus interact with one another, and this interaction ultimately affects the resulting response.

While the responses given will result in various consequences, which in turn will affect student behavior. Therefore, to understand students’ behavior completely, it takes an understanding of the response itself, and the consequences caused by that response.

Skinner also explained that using mental changes as a tool to explain the behavior will only make things became more complicated, because the “tool” is finally demanding needs explained “what it is frustrating”. An explanation of this frustration will likely require another explanation. And so on.

Of all the supporters of theories of behavior, Skinner’s theory was perhaps the greatest influence on the development of learning theory. Some learning programs such as the Teaching Machine, Mathematics, or other programs that use the concept of stimulus, response, and reinforcing factors (reinforcement), are examples of programs that take advantage of Skinner’s theory.