In Scenario C, several facts and definitions are inconsistent with the true facts of the
terms used in this research. Specifically, the definition of classical conditioning is explained
falsely within the scenario, as well as facts about the term conditioning and primary reinforcers.
When defining the term classical conditioning, Dr. Breal describes it as a process of learning for
an individual with the help of rewards. However, instead of defining classical conditioning, the
psychologist defines the term operant conditioning. In Lilienfeld’s (2014) terms, operant
conditioning is “learning controlled by the consequences of the organism’s behaviour,” just as
Dr. Breal describes in Scenario C (pg. 220). In contrast, classical conditioning …show more content…
Breal claims that the sweet treats given to participants when they
complete their exercise are called conditioned reinforcers. Yet, in Lilienfeld’s (2014) terms, this
definition of conditioned reinforcers is paired with the term primary reinforcer, an “item or
outcome that naturally increases the target behaviour,” which is identical to the psychologist’s
definition of conditioned reinforcers. (pg. 231).
When introducing the term conditioning, Dr. Breal states that this psychological
technique has only been discovered only recently. However, according to Lilienfeld (2014),
“several centuries ago, a school of thinkers called the British Associationists believed that we
acquire virtually all of our knowledge by conditioning” (pg. 212). More specifically,
conditioning was developed back in the early 1800s, rather than newly discovered.
In Scenario C, Dr. Breal asserts that he has made a new discovery that maintaining
regular exercise prevents illness and improves one’s overall health, and what’s more, being
rewarded a treat increases the duration of a one’s exercise. However, what Dr. Breal doesn’t
realize is that his claim is pseudoscientific since it does not follow the guiding principle
terms used in this research. Specifically, the definition of classical conditioning is explained
falsely within the scenario, as well as facts about the term conditioning and primary reinforcers.
When defining the term classical conditioning, Dr. Breal describes it as a process of learning for
an individual with the help of rewards. However, instead of defining classical conditioning, the
psychologist defines the term operant conditioning. In Lilienfeld’s (2014) terms, operant
conditioning is “learning controlled by the consequences of the organism’s behaviour,” just as
Dr. Breal describes in Scenario C (pg. 220). In contrast, classical conditioning …show more content…
Breal claims that the sweet treats given to participants when they
complete their exercise are called conditioned reinforcers. Yet, in Lilienfeld’s (2014) terms, this
definition of conditioned reinforcers is paired with the term primary reinforcer, an “item or
outcome that naturally increases the target behaviour,” which is identical to the psychologist’s
definition of conditioned reinforcers. (pg. 231).
When introducing the term conditioning, Dr. Breal states that this psychological
technique has only been discovered only recently. However, according to Lilienfeld (2014),
“several centuries ago, a school of thinkers called the British Associationists believed that we
acquire virtually all of our knowledge by conditioning” (pg. 212). More specifically,
conditioning was developed back in the early 1800s, rather than newly discovered.
In Scenario C, Dr. Breal asserts that he has made a new discovery that maintaining
regular exercise prevents illness and improves one’s overall health, and what’s more, being
rewarded a treat increases the duration of a one’s exercise. However, what Dr. Breal doesn’t
realize is that his claim is pseudoscientific since it does not follow the guiding principle