Behaviourism and ICTs

Pavlovian classical conditioning concerns the matching of stimulus to involuntary effects. After experiencing a routine of meals heralded by the ringing of a bell, an animal eventually salivates at the ring of a bell, whether or not a meal is simultaneously provided. This form of conditioning produces physical, reflex-like responses to non-physiological triggering events.

Skinnerian operant conditioning involves the control of voluntary actions through reward and punishment. In operant conditioning, the experimenter’s control of consequences steers the subject’s behaviour. The experimenter rewards or punishes according to the subject’s compliance. Animals capable of higher cognitive functioning are able to make choices, albeit choices based on consequent known effects. Operant conditioning exploits the premise that animals will seek reward and avoid punishment. Hence, when conditions are controlled (there is no escape, negotiation, or neutral option) and reward and punishment are the choice of the controller, compliant behaviours can be trained into the reward-seeking/punishment-avoiding subject, such behaviours can include demonstration of learning (Watson, 1913).

Of the two forms, it is operant conditioning that, prima facie, seems to possess some – albeit narrow – pedagogic potential. In behaviourist teaching practices, appropriate behaviour is rewarded and inappropriate punished according to binary right/wrong display (Skinner, 1964). Learners are rewarded for the production of a specified answer or punished for the production of incorrect answers. In highly instructional situations (e.g. training), such methods possess advantages (Winn and Snyder, 1996), particularly if the objective of the training is behavioural in nature. If the objective is the demonstration of cognitive ability via the articulation of reasoning or critical thinking, for example, behavioural methods are inadequate and likely obstructive. Behaviourist learning models require the material of teaching to be pellet-like so that the necessary binary outcomes can be offered. Such reductionism will impose either bluntness or excessive specificity in the material taught, and, arguably, fail to indicate comprehension beyond appropriate utterance. The entire system also presents ethical complexities when applied to humans, primates, and other high functioning animals.

Educational technologies emerged during the long reign of behaviourist influence on teaching theory: the first “teaching machines” were mechanical devices developed by Pressey in the 1920s. In the 1950s, Skinner created programmed instruction/”PI”, which was an electrical update of Pressey’s manual technologies. Also in the 1950s came computer-assisted instruction/“CIA”, which grew to prominence in the 1980s and whose format survives in online multiple-choice assessments today.

Vygotsky (1962) argued that behaviourist methods are unproductively confining, over-focussed, and asocial. Theorists of other schools have criticised behaviourism for similar reasons. Skepticism notwithstanding, behaviourist principles have resurfaced in more powerful forms. Whether the behaviour that occurs in gamification is definable as learning of any sort is a matter for debate, but gamification appears to apply aspects of both operant and classical conditioning. (The following is informed speculation, not settled science.)

In gamified learning, learners behave appropriately because they are reward-seeking; the material of learning is pelletized as micro-challenges; there is also the possibility of secondary, social reward via the sharing of scores with peers (Kapp, 2012). The learner avoids the punishment that is absence of reward and social relegation as a result of poor performance. Both video games (Koepp et al, 1998) and social media (Turel et al, 2014) have been associated with specific neurological effects (elicited dopamine release and looping). By presenting experiences that prompt desired behaviours in the bounded environment of online space, web designers – knowingly or otherwise – could be exploiting conditioning. With interaction, positive involuntary responses become frequent, so the subject associates these with the environment of occurrence (website, game, etc.) resulting in a desire to obtain the reward (dopamine release). Engagement is thereby maintained or increased (Koepp et al, 1998; Hoeft et al, 2008). The online incarnation of behaviourist learning principles invites criticisms similar to those directed at its forebears.