Reinforcement

Operant Conditioning Vanessa Mejias November 28, 2011 Ross Seligman PSY/390 Operant Conditioning In a world that was ruled by psychoanalytic studies, and Thorndike’s puzzle box to explain behaviorism, B. F. Skinner was a revolutionary in the world of psychology. His studies and reports on operant conditioning has not only survived ridicule and skepticism in his time but has also survived the passage of time and social evolution to incorporate his theories several decades later.

By learning from and expanding upon Skinner’s schedule of reinforcement the world of social and academic learning has evolved from a puzzling act to a learned process that could be understood the world over. During his research Skinner developed a theory to modify behavior believing that behavior can be created because of a positive or negative stimulus or environment, instead of just instinctually responding to stimuli, like scratching an itch. While he did not create the foundation of behavior modification, his research allowed him to expand upon already existing theories developed by Pavlov and Thorndike.

Skinner’s theory consisted of two types of behavior, respondent and operant behavior (Olsen & Hergerhahn, 2009). To go along with, and help modify unwanted behavior Skinner developed two types of conditioning. Type S also known as respondent conditioning and Type R also known as operant conditioning. Type S conditioning is the equivalent to classic conditioning as described by Pavlov and focuses primarily on the significance of the stimulus creating a preferred response or behavior (Olsen & Hergerhahn, 2009).

Whereas type R conditioning is similar to Thorndike’s instrumental conditioning, by focusing upon the response after the stimulus (Olsen & Hergerhahn, 2009). The theory of operant conditioning focuses on the four types of stimuli that can elicit a response. Positive reinforcement is an act that adds to a reinforcement that will emit an increase in behavior, while negative reinforcement is an act that takes away a reinforcement that will create an increase in behavior.

Whereas punishment follows the same guidelines with positive and negative punishment however the difference lies in the behavior. While reinforcement will increase behavior punishment is supposed to decrease behavior. Extinction however is the act of eliminating the reinforcement or punishment to eliminate the behavior and go back to the behavior prior to attempted modification. The differences between positive and negative reinforcements are not that profound. In actuality the similarities are sounder than the differences.

Reinforcement is the act of increasing behavior, however it is the type of reinforcement used that causes the differences. If positive reinforcement is used then the stimuli will add to the behavior, for instance a dog is told to sit while the trainer pushes down on the hind side. Once the dog sits he or she is given a treat. Again the act is repeated with the same reinforcement given, so in this instance the dog is learning that once the required behavior is preformed it will receive a treat, the treat is adding to the increased and desired behavior.

However, in the form of negative reinforcement a stimuli is taken away to increase the desired behavior. For instance, if a child wants a donut but will not eat their food, then the caregiver will take away the donut and tell the child they need to eat their lunch before they have their snack. In this instance the snack is taken away so that the child will increase the behavior of eating what is required before unhealthy foods. Although reinforcement, punishment and extinction all have their uses, it is debatable which is more effective.

Skinner determined that punishment was not as effective as reinforcements. However the debate is whether positive or negative reinforcement is more effective. Upon review, it seems that positive and negative reinforcement has the same affect yet need to be administered under different circumstances based upon the behavior required, the environment, personality and cultural influences that play significant parts in an individual’s behavior.

Throughout Skinner’s research he created a method in which behavior modification could be observed. This is called a schedule of reinforcement. Although Pavlov started to experiment with partial reinforcement with classical conditioning, it was the comprehensive research that Skinner performed that resulted in the complete understanding and effectiveness of scheduled reinforcement.

An example of operant conditioning that uses scheduled reinforcement is toilet training. Toilet training incorporates operant and classical conditioning, however it is through the use of reinforcement that creates a positive outcome. During toilet training the child is introduced to the continuous reinforcement schedule, which means that every time the child controls their bladder and uses the toilet a reinforcement will be given.

After a time this schedule can be altered to incorporate the fixed interval reinforcement schedule, what this means is that after a set amount of time the child will use the restroom on their own and receive a reinforcement afterwards, so the child will learn to anticipate the reinforcement prior to the use of the toilet. Once toilet training is complete the child will go from operant conditioning [using the toilet for reward], to classical conditioning [using the toilet to feel relief from the discomfort of a full bladder].

Although Skinner’s methods have been ridiculed and are abstract compared to other behaviorists’ theories, his research has allowed the field of psychology to move onto other avenues of possibilities. Whereas, Thorndike, Hull, Pavlov and other known greats have set the foundation to psychology, it was Skinner’s methods and emphasis on operant conditioning that allowed mankind to evolve in the understanding of behavior in animals and humans alike.

As a result of Skinner’s radical views educators, animal trainers, psychologists, and caregivers are given hope that change in one’s behavior is attainable and eliminates the ‘blame’ method of humanity. Skinner’s work defines what it means to be ‘responsible for one’s own actions’. References Olsen, M. , & Hergerhahn, B. R. (2009). An Introduction to Theories of Learning [University of Phoenix Custom Edition eBook]. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Retrieved from University of Phoenix, PSY390 website.

Attitude Theories Attitudes are our positive and negative evaluation of a situation or object. Attitudes can be divided into three distinct components the cognitive, affective and the behavioral. They may take the form of the implicit attitude, explicit attitude and the dual attitude. The components of attitudes are the cognitive which helps people structure the world to make sense to them, the affective which helps people cope with emotional conflicts and the behavior helps people achieve rewards and gain approval from others.

One way that attitudes can be formed is through the classical conditioning theory. Classical conditioning is “learning through association when a neutral conditioned stimulus is paired with an unconditioned stimulus that naturally produces an emotional response” (Franzoi 2010,p. 157). Classical Conditioning is the affective component of attitudes. An example of classical conditioning would be “the soft click of the switch that turns on a noisy bathroom fan would have little effect on your behavior.

After the click a conditioned has been paired with a loud noise an unconditioned on several occasions you might begin to react to the click alone conditioned response” (Bacon and Kalsher, 2008, p. 161). Another example would be the famous study the dogs salivating at the saw or smelled food but not tasted it. Then they salivated at the sight the person bringing the food. Classical conditioning can be very useful in helping in the learning in shaping attitudes to protect us from overcoming certain fears in life and also help acquire aversion to certain foods.

Classical conditioning is a gradual process. Using this conditioning can help shape, form different attitudes in many of life situations. Classical conditioning of attitudes occurs below the level of conscious awareness. The other very influential way to shape attitude is the Operant conditioning form of learning. Through the behavioral component (Franzoi, 2010, p. 158). The Operant conditioning is a type of learning attitudes in which behavior is strengthened if followed by reinforcement maintain, changed and weaken if ollowed by punishment through consequences. Operant conditioning occurs when some action towards an object is rewarded or reinforced. Doing this enough times, the subject will do probably repeat it in the future. Also if behavior is not rewarded or is punished then future actions are less likely to occur. An example of a positive operant conditioning would be related to basic biological needs. Positive reinforcement include food when you are angry and conditioned reinforces include money, status, trophies and praises from others.

When we hear” you must clean your room before you watch TV” (Bacon and Kalsher, 2008, p. 172). This can shape a person’s attitude. A negative example of this “stimuli, other subway riders are moving away to escape the stench of a person’s cologne” (Bacon and Kalsher, 2008, p. 173). When people ride in the future they will remember that person and avoid them. This would definitely shape one’s attitude towards this person. Doing well will help shape attitude about eating habits. Since, they did not have a good experience with bad situations that will also shape attitudes.

We can use the operant conditioning in teaching techniques such as learning computers, aggressive driving, traffic safety and all goal oriented tasks. In conclusion we have discussed how attitudes can take form. They shape through the implicit attitude form which is activated automatically from our memory or through the explicit attitude which is consciously held. These attitudes are seen in classical, operant conditioning. References Bacon, R. and Kalsher, M, (2008). Psychology: From Science to Practice 2nd Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon Franoi, S. (2010). Social Psychology 5th Ed.

According to the equity theory, the level of motivation which an employee depends largely on his opinion of how well or poorly she is being treated with regard to another or other employees. If the employee feels that she is being treated equally to or better than the other employees, she is likely to be highly motivated. On the flip side of the coin, if the employee feels that the other employee(s) are being treated better than her (that is, there is favoritism directed against her), she will lack the motivation to achieve the desired outcomes.

The key to having highly motivated employees is therefore to treat all of them without favoritism or discrimination. For example, all employees performing equal work must receive equal pay (Ambrose and Kulik, 1999; Werner and Mero, 1999). The Skinner Reinforcement Theory asserts that employees naturally strive towards achieving equity among themselves. This state of equity arises at the point when the ratio of the employee’s outcome over his input matches the outcome/input ratio of the other employee(s).

when the employee’s behaviors are rewarded, they will either be repeated or not, depending on whether they led to positive outcomes or negative outcomes. Rewarding positive outcomes reinforces employee behavior and leads to a repeat of positive performance. On the other hand, punishing negative outcomes causes the employees not to repeat the negative behavior (Cherrington, 2000). In line with these theories, a number of employee motivation techniques have been enumerated.

Reeve (2001) identifies these as the use of attractive incentives, the social context, positive punishers, positive reinforcers, negative reinforcers, aversive incentives, as well as negative punishers. Attractive incentives are regarded as the rewards which employees enjoy by virtue of achieving certain desired and predetermined standards of behavior or performance. Some widely used attractive incentives include stock options, performance based bonuses, and profit-sharing plans.

On their part, aversive incentives punish the employees when they fall short of the performance or behavior standards which they are required to meet. Some examples of aversive incentives include disciplinary action such as suspension or dismissal (Cherrington, 2000). According to Cherrington (2000), negative reinforcers are techniques that are deployed to compel the employees to avoid certain negative behaviors and to behave or perform according to the formbook.

Examples of negative reinforcers include close supervision, giving the employees strict deadlines for the performance of certain tasks, and so on. On their part, positive reinforcers are aimed at encouraging the employees to continue behaving or performing in a certain manner. Some positive reinforcers include employee recognition. For example, the employees can simply be thanked or given certificates that acknowledge their good work (Cherrington, 2000). The social context is also another significant motivational factor for employees.

This encompasses elements such as the organizational culture of the firm, the organizational structure, the predominant style of leadership within the organization, opportunities for advancement within the organization, and the nature of the relationships between the members of the organization (Cherrington, 2000). The experiments of Elton Mayo, famously referred to as the Hawthorne Studies, have yielded the Hawthorne effect, which also has a great influence on motivational theory.

According to George Kimball, learning Is the result of a reinforced practice which results in a change in behavior. However, learning may not necessarily demonstrate itself in a change in behavior, but through the acquisition of knowledge. In other words, after learning, the individual will have new knowledge or be capable of doing something they would not have been able to do otherwise (Olson & Hermann, 2013). For example, when a child Is being potty trained, he learns how to use the toilet; his behavior will change from using a diaper to using the toilet o relieve himself.

To further explain the concept of learning, we will look at the role of behavior in relation to learning, classical and operant conditioning, and the relationship between learning and cognition (Olson & Hermann, 2013). Role of Behavior In Relation to Learning According to Simile’s deflation of learning, there are several ways In which learning can only be inferred from an observable modification in behavior. In other words, learning must be translated into observable behavior (Olson & Hermann, 2013).

However, a change in behavior may not be observable immediately, that is, there may e a potential to act differently tat later time. Lastly, according to Kimball, learning in the form of experience or practice, which must be reinforced, will result in a change in behavior (Olson & Hermann, 2013). With the exception of B. F. Skinner, most learning theorists agree that the learning process can only be assumed from modifications in behavior. However, not all changes in behavior are the result of learning.

Some changes in behavior could be the result of a temporary state, such as illness, fatigue, or drug use (Olson & Hermann, 2013). Some behaviors do not need to be learned, such as breathing or sweating. These behaviors are called homeostasis mechanisms. Their purpose Is to regulate a physiological stability. Humans are also born with reflexes. These reflexes, along with homeostasis, are necessary for survival. Learning Is often Identified through a relatively permanent change in behavior (Olson & Hermann, 2013).

Types of Learning There are two primary types of learning In terms of a procedures that can modify behavior: classical controlling and operant conditioning. Classical conditioning was first developed by Ivan Pavlov when he accidental discovered that his dogs had earned to associate the sound of a bell with dinner time, which caused the dogs to salivate (Olson & Hermann, 2013). There are two requirements to classical conditioning. There must first be a natural reaction to an existing stimulus, such as an event or object. Next, the unconditioned stimulus that elicits a natural response Is paired with a new or “neutral” stimulus.

The result Is that the formerly neutral my mom believes that giving her dog a high five before leaving the house makes her lucky because she won a couple of times at the casino after doing so. This prestigious behavior is a common example of classical conditioning in everyday life (Olson & Hermann, 2013). The second form of conditioning is operant conditioning, sometimes called instrumental conditioning. Operant conditioning is a term first developed by B. F. Skinner, who used an apparatus he called the Skinner Box. The Skinner box was used to introduced a reinforce to condition a desired response (Olson & Hermann, 2013).

Operant conditioning differs from classical conditioning in that the organism must act in a specific way before it is reinforced; in other words, enforcement is reliant on the organisms behavior. With classical conditioning, the reaction is considered to be involuntary (Olson & Hermann, 2013). The most important aspect of operant conditioning is that a reinforce is used to strengthen a behavior. There are four different types of reinforces: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment (Olson & Hermann, 2013).

Positive reinforcement is the addition of something agreeable or pleasant to strengthen a behavior. For example, giving the dog a treat after performing the trick properly. Negative reinforcement is the amoeba of something negative or unpleasant from the situation to strengthen the behavior. For example, when the students are well-behaved the teacher removes the essay question from the test (Olson & Hermann, 2013). Now, positive punishment is the addition of something the organism views as unpleasant to decrease or weaken a behavior.

For example, when the students are misbehaving, the teacher adds an essay question to the test. Lastly, negative punishment is the removal of something pleasant from the situation to weaken the behavior. When a child is misbehaving, taking away his or her favorite toy (Olson & Hermann, 2013). Relationship Between Learning and Cognition Cognition and learning are closely associated and are codependent on one another. Without cognitive processes, learning cannot exist. The cognitive processes consist of thinking, remembering, knowing, and problem-solving.

Other cognitive processes involve storing, receiving, processing, and using information learned by the individual (Olson & Hermann, 2013). Learning is the manner in which an individual gains knowledge or skills through experience and practice, which causes a change in behavior. Learning requires the use of many cognitive processes. Cognition is classically thinking, but not everything a person thinks about will be stored in their long-term memory for later use. In order to learn, a person must store the new knowledge into their long-term memory, usually done through repetition (Olson & Hermann, 2013).

How memory processes information varies on an individual basis. Some people are able to recall information after Just one experience, others need to repetition or practice to be able to recall the same information (Olson & wants to keep for retrieval at a later time. For example, when I was a child I watched a dinosaur movie for the first time, and did to have the knowledge to identify “the monsters”. Once my mother identified the monsters as dinosaurs to me I now had the cognitive experience of “dinosaur. I loved the movie and the idea of dinosaurs so much that over the next few months I read as much as I could about dinosaurs. Through reading and looking at pictures, I gained the ability to identify many different species of dinosaurs. Eventually, I became able to identify other reptilian animals of various sizes. Conclusion In summary, learning is the product of practice and experience that has been reinforced which results in a behavior modification. On the other hand, learning does not always reveal itself in a change in behavior, but through the procurement of knowledge.

However, most learning theorists believe that the learning process can only be presumed from a change in behavior. A relatively permanent change in behavior is a good indicator if learning has taken place. Classical conditioning and operant conditioning. Are two primary types of learning in terms of a processes that can modify behavior. The difference between operant conditioning and classical conditioning is that in operant conditioning is that the organism must act in a specific ay before it is reinforced; in classical conditioning reinforcement is reliant on the organisms behavior.

Learning and cognition have a close relationship and are codependent on one another. Without cognitive processes, learning cannot exist. In this paper, we looked at the concept of learning, we looked at the role of behavior in relation to learning, classical and operant conditioning, and the relationship between learning and cognition. References Olson, M. H. & Hermann, B. R. (2013). An introduction to theories of learning (9th deed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Positive and Negative Reinforcement Reinforcement is an essential part in identifying and encouraging a certain behavior. In the most classic definition, positive reinforcement is a method of identifying to children which behaviors are acceptable and appropriate and which are not (Sigler, E. & Aamidor, S, 2005). Reinforcement is often given as praise for doing a certain task. As educators, saying “great job” or a simple word like “fantastic” are expressed towards students as praise. However, when a student is struggling and praise is given such as “you are doing so well”, the negative aspects of praise present themselves.

The child is aware of the empty praise therefore it may work against the teacher if it is taken as a false praise. So, as educators, we must determine what reinforcements will work with each individual child through experimentation. Also, building a relationship with not just the child, but the parents and all those involved with the child will be instrumental in developing the proper use of reinforcements and can be helpful in gaining knowledge of certain behaviors. The stronger reinforcements for most children are usually food, candy, or drinks.

The durability and effectiveness of a reinforcer can usually be determined best by reinforcing the behavior intermittently or by providing a strong alternative which could interfere with the behavior in question (Ferster, C, 1961). Positive reinforcement is not just about the behaviors of the child but the reaction of the teacher and the adults to certain behaviors. Although a child may attempt to test the boundaries of one’s attention, positive attention does not make a child behave inappropriately (Sigler & Aamidor, 2005). The reinforcing comes from the teacher or adults actions and words.

For example, Joshua is an eight-year-old autistic boy who begins to whine and cry every single time the teacher tries to get him to begin a task that he dislikes. Most of the time Josh only wants to play on the computer, participate in gym, or eat. Each and every time Josh began to break down the staff usually asked him what he wanted or just gave in to what he wanted to do, not even trying to redirect him to the actual task at hand, which his classmates were doing. Joshua would get rewarded with chocolate, potato chips, and even some sympathy hugs from the staff.

The behavior became more frequent and the result was the same. By now Joshua knew what he was going to get when he acted out, which was whatever he wanted. However, to change his behavior the staff began to ignore Josh and his outbursts. After a short time of whining and crying Josh threw himself on the floor but the staff still ignored the behavior. He then realized that he was not going to get the same results as he was getting by whining and crying when things didn’t go his way. The teacher then got his attention with another activity and Josh began to take part in the activity.

A couple weeks later, after the same lesson, Josh’s behavior was almost extinguished and slowly that behavior was no longer happening in the classroom. On the other hand, negative reinforcement is the removal of an aversive stimulus to increase a certain behavior. For example, when a student is distracted from his work due to loud music playing, however his work improves when the music is off, then the music being turned off is the reinforce. The difference between positive and negative can sometimes be difficult to acknowledge when there are several consequences and the need of the distinction is debated.

The main purpose of giving punishments and rewards is to decrease or increase the behavior of the learner (Dad, Ali, Qadeer Janjua, Shazad, and Khan, 2010). Raul is a student with an emotional disorder and requires a great deal of support to help with his academic goals. Raul is extremely sensitive and becomes very overwhelmed when things don’t go his way. He whines, cries, and loses control when he feels exhausted from taking instruction. Raul is very intelligent and needs to get verbal praise throughout his day to stay on task. His triggers are usually when he is asked to sit down within the circle during circle time.

The behavior is him pulling away, crying, and hitting, trying to escape the actual activity. The maintaining consequence is that the adults let Raul leave the circle. There is not much fight with Raul because all those involved do not want the other students to become distracted. The first prevention is to give Raul some type of choice to coincide with circle time. A visual activity schedule could give him a more clear idea of what he should be doing and what the daily lessons and activities are. Raul will know exactly where he needs to be and what he needs to be doing at that particular time.

Also, manipulatives and intermittent praise are other preventions that the teacher can use. Intermittent praise is praised use throughout the activity but not regularly. This type of praise is given to become persistent. The new skills that can be developed are a part of the plan and may be implemented accordingly. Raul may have increased time of engagement, such as a longer duration of sitting within the circle. Raul will say “all done” when he has completed a task so praise can be given. This will help the adults notice him if he is not given the correct amount of attention.

The responses to Raul for sitting longer will also be all positive praise toward Positive reinforcement is something that rewards the individual for an action taken. When students do or exhibit the correct or desired behaviors in school, then rewarding them for this action is what is known as positive reinforcement. There are many examples for these actions. Students that hand in homework on time may be given time near the end of class to put their books away and work on or do something they want to do within the rules of the school.

Putting stickers on work well done so the student knows they did the right thing. Giving the class a free day or having fun activities planned for them to do instead of working on a certain day. Giving a weekly or reward to the student who has the best attendance or best behavior in the class. There are many ways to reward students or show them that by using good behavior, they can be rewarded for their actions and this will cause the student to want to do the right thing versus misbehaving in the classroom.

References Dad, H. ; Ali, R. ; Qadeer Janjua, M. ; Shazad, S. ; Khan, M. (2010). Comparison of the Frequency and effectiveness of positive and negative reinforcement practices in schools. Contemporary Issues In Education Research. 3(1), 127-135. Ferster, C. B. (1961). Positive reinforcement and behavioral deficits of autistic children. Child Development. 32(2), 437. Sigler, E; Aamidor, S. (2005). From positive reinforcement to positive behaviors: an everyday guide for the practioner. Early Childhood Education Journal. 32(4), 249-253.

Introduction The concept of incentives-based motivation is predicated upon the idea that persons are inclined to perform actions that lead to outcomes that they find favorable (Huseman, Hatfield & Miles, 1987; Muchinsky, 2005). Managerial theories of motivation utilize this concept of incentives in order to explore methods of stimulating employees to perform optimally in the workplace. Motivation can be classified into two types: internal and external (Bateman & Crant, n. d. ).

Internal motivation involves a person’s self-stimulation toward the performance of an action. In such a case, persons are inclined to act because the job itself is a form of incentive or reward for him or her. External motivation, on the other hand, involves the addition of a benefit as an outcome that attends the completion of a job. Therefore, though the particular job may hold no charm for a person, the promise of a benefit to be given by another upon the completion of the job serves as an external motivating factor.

Current ideas that drive incentive-based motivation within organizational management include equity, Vroom’s expectancy, reinforcement, and needs-based theories. Motivational ideas have also been encapsulated also in Young & Rosen’s Theory O and Douglas McGregor’s Theories X, which focus on the development of employees and the improvement of their positions within the company. These theories use the ideas of intrinsic (internal) and extrinsic (external) motivation as strategies for motivating employees and which lead to the overall benefit of the company.

The incentives involved in these theories range widely: from exploring the goals and talents of employees and matching them with those of the company, to creating incentives to match these goals where they do not exist otherwise. Literature Review Equity and expectancy theories as incentive-based theories are formulated on the idea that persons expect an incentive to result from the effort that they make on the job. For the expectancy theory of motivation, the person works under the impression that he or she will be rewarded at the end of the job.

Expectation theory links the overall outcome of the situation within the organization to that which the individual gets from his or her input (Muchinsky, 2005). Therefore, it is to the benefit of the entire body that the individual be rewarded in the way that he or she expects. Equity theory takes expectancy theory a step further in that it quantifies the expectation. The person hopes to get a certain level of compensation from the job that is equal to the effort that he or she puts in at it (Huseman, Hatfield & Miles, 1987; Muchinsky, 2005).

Reinforcement theory is based on the ideas put forth by Albert Bandura, which states that a person’s current actions regarding a certain project will be guided by previous reinforcement given towards those same actions. Therefore, if rewards or incentives are given for acting in a particular way, persons will usually continue in that course. Reinforcement of this type may be experienced first-hand or vicariously by persons. According to this, individuals are likely to change their behaviors to accord with other behaviors that have been positively reinforced (through incentives) in the past (Muchinsky, 2005).

The needs-based theory of motivation put forward by David McClelland stipulates that certain needs are present within managers and workers within an organization (Pardee, 1990). It is a theory geared specifically toward managerial and organizational behaviors, and it postulates three specific needs: the need for achievement, the need for power or authority, and the need for affiliation. The achievement aspect of the theory describes the person in question as desiring to achieve goals that are at once realistic and challenging.

This need is strongly tied to the idea of advancement, which may accompany or even define such a goal. The person’s need for power or authority is defined by his desire to be in charge within certain areas of his personal and professional life. He or she needs to have influence over people and to have an impact within his/her surroundings. This coincides with a person’s desire to lead and to have their ideas sanctioned and implemented within a given setting.

The need for authority is also tied to the desire for advancement, as promotions generally involve increase in rank and responsibility (Pardee, 1990). Persons’ need for affiliation represents their desire to be a part of something greater themselves. This includes the formation of friendships and working relationships in which a certain level of synergy exists. It also refers to the need to be regarded by others and held in their esteem. Such persons are content to work as part of a team and are always ready to provide their input as part of the team’s collective effort (Pardee, 1990).

This need can be catered to within organizations that provide a culture of involvement and collaboration between and among employees and managers. Theory O is a theory of motivation that is specifically geared toward organizational management. This theory, developed by Karen Young and Corey Rosen finds management working to create a more harmonized environment within the company (Winther, 1999). The incentive involved here is one of ownership of the project in question.

A major goal of managers who operate according to Theory O is human capital development and the utilization of the organization’s own human resources in formulating and implementing strategies. This places the employees in such a position of involvement that a sense of ownership is created, and this sense further motivates the employee to work diligently in his or her own field. The managerial position according to theory O is that the organization and its employees hope to benefit through the opportunities for learning and enrichment provided through the implementation of these harmonization strategies.

The managers therefore involve the employees in key processes of the company’s decision making, and change emerges gradually and spontaneously, usually keeping pace with the growth and development of the human resources themselves. As a result of the employees’ investment in the company, according to this theory, the growth of the company itself becomes their incentive as they feel that such growth would be of benefit to themselves (Beer and Nohria, 2001). Theory O takes a participative approach to the role of the employee within the organization.

Theory O is concerned with building a culture among employees through inclusion and widespread collaboration within the environment (Beer and Nohria, 2001). The theory seeks to increase the company’s profits, but takes a more longitudinal approach of seeking first to strengthen the stakes of the employees and increase productivity. Here, one finds that theory O accords with McClelland’s needs-based theory in that it caters to the employees’ need for affiliation within the organization and so becomes an incentive for continued loyalty and effort.

Theory Y, propounded by Douglas McGregor, holds managers responsible for organizing production elements toward the goal of economic profit-making. However, it operates under the belief that people are naturally inclined to work toward the needs of the organization and need only to be probed and motivated in order to uncover this natural tendency. Management therefore directs its efforts toward creating an environment in which people may realize their own propensity for completing tasks that benefit the company. The behavioral theory behind this is that humans seek and are able to find self-actualization in their work.

Employees can be self-motivated to do their jobs and accept changes to it given the right atmosphere and the proper encouragement from their managers. The incentive involved in this theory is the achievement of the individuals’ goals through the completion of projects mandated within the organization (Barnett & Droege, 2005). Application to Organizational Behavior Incentive-based management capitalizes on expectation and equity theories through the employment of a psychological contract, in which managers understand precisely what this equity entails and offers it to the employee.

Employees, in turn, understand that this reward is in store and are therefore motivated to continue working (Morrison & Robinson, 1997; Muchinsky, 2005). The inputs involved in equity theory include effort, commitment, and skill, while outputs include financial rewards, promotion, and job security (Huseman, Hatfield & Miles, 1987). Managers plan their incentives under the knowledge that employees expect better rewards for harder work.

Therefore, to encourage increased effort and commitment, managers take care to record and reward overtime or other displays of effort. Managers will also reward employees’ skills in certain areas by allocating to them more of the projects that fit their expertise and compensating them well for the proper performance of these jobs. Managers within an organization also have the opportunity to utilize reinforcement theory in the workplace, as employees are likely to continue behaviors that are positively reinforced through the use of incentives (Muchinsky, 2005).

Such incentives may be financial or positional, and because employees are likely to appreciate such rewards, managers are able to promote the desired behaviors by providing these incentives. Openly offering rewards also utilizes reinforcement theory, as employees who have not been practicing desired behaviors will have the chance to view the positive reinforcement and adjust their work attitudes and habits accordingly. Employers and managers may also capitalize on McClelland’s needs-based motivational theory as a means of providing incentives to employees in order to assure their optimal efforts and support.

Since employees express a need for achievement, tasks and challenges equal to an employee’s abilities may be provided for him or her in order to promote a sense of accomplishment that will encourage him or her to keep working hard. The employee’s need for authority and power may also be gauged and satisfied by providing incentives that accord him/her jurisdiction over certain projects. When the employee finds him-/herself in charge of a given project, it usually has the effect of inducing him/her to perform well in that office (Pardee, 1990).

The organization that is managed according to Theory O places itself in the position of having a strong foundation, through which employee satisfaction leads to increased productivity and eventually to greater shareholder value. One pitfall of implementing this managerial theory within an organization is that the effects (monetary gain) for shareholders, as a result of the method, might be slow in materializing. Necessary investment capital is often lost before such profitable economic ends can be realized.

However, organizations that manage change without implementing such employee incentives, while they possess the ability to survive in the short run, usually prove to be unstable over the long run. This occurs because their human capital base often displays a lower level of development, loyalty, and commitment to the organization’s goals (Beer and Nohria, 2001; Winther, 1999). Theory Y presents a favorable view of the human individual and, therefore, employees hired by managers who subscribe to this theory garner a high level of trust from their employees through the provision of incentives.

The environment created by those who view the human as having the ability to be self-motivated would appear to resemble a Theory O environment, and the incentives created in such an organization would occur in the form of human resource development initiatives. Efforts made by the managerial staff to discover and enhance the capabilities of employees acts as an incentive in that it allows employees to self-actualize within the job. This means that an alignment of employee goals and organization goals would be effected, so that the objectives the organization presents to employees would be seen as a means of achieving their own goals.

In effect, employee development would uncover their own drive to achieve their own goals, which would in fact be almost identical to those of the organization. Conclusion Organizations can utilize a wide range of incentive-based motivational theories in order to cater to the needs of its members. Such theories include equity and expectation theories, which are based on the idea that employees expect to get rewards that are at least equal to the effort they put into their work.

Reinforcement theory points toward the idea that rewards or incentives received or witnessed by employees will motivate them to act in a similar manner in order to receive such incentives. The needs-based motivation theory serves a method of demonstrating the types of rewards that are suitable for or likely to be appreciated by different employees. Finally, theories O and Y demonstrate methods of including employees in decision making and increasing their ownership of the goals and visions of the organization.

They also highlight the fact that employee development can become an incentive by pointing out ways in which the achievement of the organization’s goals can coincide with the achievement of employees’ own goals.

References Barnett, T. & S. B. Droege. (2005). “Theory X and Theory Y. ” Encyclopedia of Management. Accessed on May 5, 2007. Available: http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/management/Str-Ti/Theory-X-and-Theory-Y. html Bateman, T. S. & J. M. Crant. (n. d. ) Revisiting intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Charlottesville: University of Virginia. Retrieved on May 5, 2007 from http://www. commerce. virginia. edu/faculty_research/Research/Papers/IMOBHDP24. pdf Beer, M. & N. Nohria. (2001). “Breaking the code of change. ” Working Knowledge. Harvard Business School. Accessed on August 4, 2006. Available: http://hbswk. hbs. edu/item/2166. html Huseman, R. C. J. D. Hatfield, E. W. Miles. (Apr. , 1987). “A New Perspective on Equity Theory: The Equity Sensitivity Construct. ” The Academy of Management Review, 12(2), 222-234 Morrison, E. W. , & S.

L. Robinson. (1997). “When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. ” Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 226- 256. Muchinsky, P. M. (2005). Psychology Applied to Work. Belmont: Thomson’s Higher Education. Pardee, R. L. (1990). “Motivation Theories of Maslow, Herzberg, McGregor & McClelland. A Literature Review of Selected Theories Dealing with Job Satisfaction and Motivation. ” ERIC. NO: ED316767 Winther, G. “Theory O—Is the case closed? ” Economic and Industrial Democracy. 20(2). 269- 293.

Operant conditioning refers to the process through which a subject is compelled to adopting a new behavior through rewards and punishments. These rewards and punishments are collectively referred to as reinforcements. The major processes in operant conditioning include the extinction, discrimination, and shaping. These processes involve activities where only selected behaviors are followed by reinforcement. The resultant behavior determines whether reinforcement to be given will be a positive or negative.

Extinction process is exhibited when punishment does not happen as a result of a given behavior. This follows some acts of acclimatization where an organism is made to adapt to a new environment. The discrimination process involves the presentation of a given stimulus even earlier than the occurrence of a given behavior (Boeree, 2006). This is always intended to create a given set of a precondition. Shaping process is intended at bringing new forms of behaviors by use of positive reinforce elements. Such would fall in the class of training an organism on how to act to get a given response. Read also about application of behaviorism in education

Shaping g involves the application of both positive and negative reinforcements. Positive reinforcements acts by encouraging while negative reinforcements acts by discouraging a given form of behavior. Self reinforcement occurs when a person tries to control his personal behavior. In self regulation people understands suitable and unsuitable behaviors (Omrod, 1999). Self regulation follows a desire to act in accordance with the suitable behaviors and thereby avoiding unsuitable behavior. Skinner’s work involved the adaptation to a given set of behavior.

The act of self-regulation therefore aims at achieving the desired behavior through learning and character modeling. Self regulation is part of reinforcing self from other acts by making logical judgments.

References

Boeree, C. G (2006). Personality Theories: Skinner B. F. (1904-1990) retrieved on 27 July 2010 from http://webspace. ship. edu/cgboer/skinner. html

Omrod, J. E. (1999). Human Learning 3rd ed Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall retrieved from http://teachnet. edb. utexas. edu/~lynda_abbott/social. html