Techniques for Daily Bedroom Cleaning -Operant Conditioning

The method of manipulating and controlling one’s behavior via reinforcements and shaping is known as operant conditioning. This conditioning increases the desired reaction by unexpectedly reinforcing it once it occurs. This report will look at the behavior modification plan that was put in place to ensure daily bedroom cleanliness by utilizing both partial and continuous reinforcement schedules as well as token reinforcement. To achieve the intended behavior, this study used shaping and positive reinforcement. The behavioral program took three weeks to complete. The first week was spent establishing baseline behavior. In the first phase results indicated that the desired behavior had been achieved in three days out of seven, but at the second stage the achievement was five days out of seven.

Key words: behavior modification, behavior reinforcements, baseline behavior, desired behavior.

Operant Conditioning Techniques for Daily Bedroom Cleaning

The dissatisfaction of the psychoanalytic theories of Freud led to emergence and growth in popularity of the behaviorist era (Kazdin, 1989). Operant conditioning takes place when presents and punishments are used only when specific behaviors occur. However, withdrawing of incentives can lead to a reduction of reinforced behavior. Skinner and Thorndike came up with the Operant conditioning from animal studies in a laboratory. These researchers tried to manipulate the behavior of an animal using rewards or tokens. Its public knowledge that the behavior of human beings can be controlled and managed depending on the outcomes associated (Van den Akker, Havermans, Bouton, & Jansen, 2014). The study carried out by Sherman (1973) hypothesized that an individual’s behavior would ultimately improve if that behavior leads to a reward and automatically diminish if the consequence of the behavior is punishment. Sherman (1973) carried out his study in a typical environment of a class. He noted that some students would shout answers without raising their hands; consequently, the researchers guided the teachers to appreciate learners on any desirable behavior and ignore the bad practices. Praising the right students is a reward for the same while not giving attention to the disruptive ones is a punishment for bad behavior. The results were compared before and after the tutor changed strategies (Mowrer & Aiken, 1954). These results showed that the students who were praised continued with the excellent behavior of raising hands, while the disruptive learners whose behavior was punished had reduced significantly. Operational learning theory behavior is a function of its consequences (Skinner, 1953). The probability of a response reoccurring again dramatically depends on how it is reinforced. According to Skinner (1953), there are four categories of appraisals. Two of them lead to the strengthening of the behavior while the other two weaken the behavior. Reinforcement is the concept that is put in place to improve personality and traits.

A study carried out by Nay (1976) revealed that an individual avoiding social interaction after being hospitalized was able to engage in lengthy conversations after his interaction behavior was rewarded with TV time. This study is a clear indication of character modification through appraisal and shaping. The social traits of the boy only developed after it has been rewarded.

Appraisals are not only crucial for promoting the conducts that are socially acceptable but also can be used to control or get rid of dangerous conditions or diseases such as anorexia. Doctors have helped people suffering from anorexia to eat and add weight through operant conditioning by offering a reward to the patients when they eat (Larwin & Larwin, 2008). Kazdin (1989) made a description of a study carried out in 1978 by Pertschuk, Edwards, and Pomerleau. The study involved anorexic victims who were rewarded for every time they ate. Within two weeks, the participants of the program had gained approximately 9.3 pounds, but it was not the same case for the patients who did not participate in the program. This helped the program participants overcome their sickness.

Larwin & Larwin (2008) reduced the frequency of an eight-year-old child sucking her thumb, which was made possible by giving her pennies any minute that she was not sucking her thumb. With consistency in observation and commendation, the sucking of the thumb by the girl was eliminated. This confirmed the theory of modification of behavior through appraisal. If positive support is used, it eventually eliminates the behavior (Payne & Dozier, 2013).

Studies on operant conditioning indicated that positive assessment was effective in reduction of undesired behavior and had a higher compliance rate than the negative evaluation. A system where desired response is reinforced with tokens that are afterward exchanged for rewards is known as a Token economy (Tosheva, Penn, Basso, Wanner, & Laib, 2008). The process of shaping can also complete modification of behaviors. Shaping involves presenting incentives after a display of close approximation to the targeted behavior. The adjustment of the latter is a combination of techniques based on operant conditioning (Skinner, 1953).

The current target for this behavior modification plan involves the subject engaging in desired behavior in two stages due to natural enforcer such as the comfort and pride in a clean room. To meet the desired goal, the subject was to achieve a daily target conduct that would be rewarded by tokens to be later exchanged for a primary reinforce (Luiselli, 1997).

Method

Participants

The participant Brooke Connelly (BC) was a 25-year-old, psychology student. BC is highly unorganized and untidy when it comes to his bedroom. The participant has ADHD that affects his short-term memory and thus adversely affecting his rate of task completion. The Behavioral modification program is made up of organization, memory, and consistency of the participants, which in this case are severely affected by ADHD

Design

The design of the study was a single subject. In the current baseline analysis, the untidy bedroom results in discomfort. The independent variables consist of the CR phase of shaping the behavior, the PR phase of thinning behavior. The dependent variable is the daily increase in Bedroom cleaning towards the target behavior as it is shown in Appendix A.

Materials

A large tick sheet that would be used as a visual token and a Deck of cards that would be used both as negative and positive reinforcement.

Procedure

The period for the intervention is three weeks; the first week will be to establish the baseline (Appendix A). Phase 1 involves the implementation of the behavior modification plan, which will be done in the second week (Appendix B). The third week will include thinning of continuous reinforcement to every time the behavior of room cleaning occurs (Appendix C). The 1st phase, which is represented in Appendix B, involves behavior shaping by the use of continuous reinforcements of a game of cards. The expected conduct of bedroom cleanliness affected four parts that are, spreading the bed, putting items in the bedroom in the designated places, hovering off the floor of the bedroom and ensuring that the sheets are changed. The desired trait was progressively applied through shaping. The target behavior was taken into account for seven days. BC can mark a cross on a box in the tick sheet, for every day that the four tasks of bedroom cleaning are achieved, which he can later reward himself by playing a game of cards with his roommate. The tick sheet is an indication that BC has achieved the daily target behavior and is used as both a token and a primary reinforcement. The tick sheet gives motivation and increased self-efficiency since its shows success in goal achievement, which is also a positive reinforcement. The second phase consisted of thinning of continuous support.

Results

The results from the BMP were entirely successful in shaping BC’s Behavior on daily bedroom cleaning. The average number of bedroom cleaning activities from the baselines was 10 activates from the possible 28, phase one (28 operations) indicated that BC was determined to reach the desired target. For phase two, the desired behavior had been entirely achieved. All daily bedroom-cleaning tasks were completed within seven days. BC had overcome the effects of ADHD of short-term memory and cleaning his room became conditioned as an everyday activity that he had to undertake.

Discussion

This study implemented Operant conditioning (OC) to shape the behavior of untidiness towards the targeted behavior, which involved cleaning the bedroom on a daily basis. It was assumed that application of OC in the form of primary and positive reinforcement would enable BC to successfully clean his bedroom daily, which was the desired behavior. Phase 1 gave positive results. BC completed four tasks for Five days entirely out of the possible seven days. Despite the thinning in the second period, BC was able to achieve the four functions for all the seven days hence was the BMP was a success. The significant improvement in the second phase instead of a reduction of the behavior indicates that the timing of the thinning of continuous reinforcement was right. Hence, it gave positive results. It is a clear indication that the practice had been adequately established before the thinning was undertaken thus yielding positive results (Sundel & Sundel, 2004).

BC is suffering ADHD that has severely affected his short-term memory was mainly assisted mainly assisted by the large Tick Sheet which whenever he saw it acted as a reminder for the chores he had to undertake. His love too for the game of cards played a vital role in boosting the short-term memory such that whenever he wanted to play a game of cards he had to remember to clean his bedroom because the two activities had been intertwined together. This reward-based procedure helps to achieve defined target during each set-out period (Starling, Branson, Cody, & McGreevy, 2013).

According to Shoesmith (2015), “a schedule of reinforcement is a rule that describes a contingency of reinforcement, those environmental arrangements that determine conditions by which behaviors will produce reinforcement.” Studies carried earlier that were in support of shaping as a modification technique for behavior by Newquist & Gardner (2015), focused on the efficacy of a novel attention modeling, and how it can lead to an enhancement in sentimental perception capabilities. Attention shaping has higher scores on the FEIT. With the missing definite social behavior improvement, there is a possibility of increasing the strength of training through making one complete attention shaping (Schoemaker, Bunte, Wiebe, Espy, Deković, & Matthys, 2012).

Studies have shown that the use of positive reinforcement can be vital in modifying the juvenile delinquent behavior. Delinquents change their ways from the norms of societies to seek attention. Attempts to carry out punishments on them to improve but this bore little or no positive results. Martin & Iceberg (2015) carried out a study on a home of delinquents. They attempted ways of positive reinforcement with a target of educating them on behaviors that were socially acceptable. The results of operant conditioning revealed that the participants of the program had taken part in less criminal offenses than those who had not taken part in the program (Kazdin, 1989). The attention and rewards they received were desirable to them; hence, the method was successful.

BC’s desired behavior could be reinforced by a typical human desire to be comfortable and take pride in what is theirs. BC would be compelled to acquire comfort, which comes along with a tidy room and the ability to rest after school, which is only possible if the room is well organized. Also with a clean room, one is not ashamed to let in a friend; this gives enough motivation to ensure that the room is clean.

Based on Hull drive theory the desired behavior can be reinforced by basic human needs such as comfort. Hull says that the body will ensure it maintains its balanced state by various means such has sweating when it’s hot to cool the body (Greenspan & Sameroff, 2013). However, this theory fails to account for people take part in pleasure seeking activities such as BC playing the game of cards, which well played a vital role in ensuring achievement of the targeted behavior (Uchimoto, Yokoi, Yamashita & Okamura, 2013).

Behavioral symptoms that have been associated with Attention Deficit or Hyperactivity behavior (ADHD), which is disruptive before and times affects the short-term memory and lack attention, could be modified through operant conditioning (Martin & Iceberg, 2015). People with ADHD have continued to show difficulties in concentrating and being organized, thus making achieving targeted behaviors difficult (Garry & Joseph, 1983).

Critique

As much as operant conditioning has been successful in various areas, from education, rehabilitation and mentorship, there have been some criticisms of the theory. Among the significant critics is Kim, Seitz, & Watanabe (2015) who pointed out that recompenses and extrinsic only result in compliance, which is contrary to what most of the proponents of this theory think. Sawsan, Amal, Jihad, & Moataz (2015), add that this compliance comes as a result of a natural behavior that lacks deliberate choice. Maffei, Santos-Pata, Marcos, Sánchez-Fibla, & Verschure (2015) argue that this framework trains humans to anticipate for a reward to the extent that they may fail to find motivation when there is no reward. In this case, if BC could find it hard to clean his room when there are no more games of cards. Cushman (2013) disagreed with the argument that memory is not significant in influencing human decisions and that humans can naturally be conditioned to adapt to specific environmental factors. On the other hand, Kerr, Grayden, Thomas, Gilson, & Burkitt (2014) argued that Skinner’s evidence is non-transferable to the intricacy that exists among humans in their ability to communicate and respond to various environmental influences. Devecioğlu & Güçlü (2016) gave a more objective position that Skinner’s theory commands legitimacy in classroom management and other learning practices. Such arguments are sensible especially to the teachers and instructors; however, Skinner arguments were based on laboratory experiments with animals and are not substantiated that they can be useful to humans. Liefooghe & De Houwer (2016) add that on the other side critics like Kohn never hesitated to reduce Skinner’s recommendations to the classroom to a purely superficial framework of reward and punishment. In the real sense, Skinner’s ideas are more complicated than this and are beyond the simple principles of rewards and punishments. Starling, Branson, Cody, & McGreevy (2013) stress that the conditions in a classroom and a school setting are at the same time physical and temporal and should be ample for learning. It should not be used as an environment that attempts to control learning with various consequences or rewards.

In general, it is a fact that the operant conditioning theory is beyond reward and punishments, as it also stresses immediate feedback, scaffolding and enhancing student success. However, according to Emer, Mora, Harvey & Grace (2015), these are the actions of the teacher, and these efforts manipulate the environment of the class, which should not be the case in any learning, mentoring and rehabilitation institution.

Conclusion

Even though the principles of operant conditioning are sound and could lead to positive behavior change, the success of the theory, however, depends on the principal or manager in charge of overseeing the whole intervention, in other words, the person in charge of giving rewards and punishing immoral behaviors. With the design of this theory, it is evident that this approach can work well with minors or those people under supervision, but cannot be effective in behavioral change among autonomous adults, because offering punishment to such people is challenging and may require a lot of bureaucracy that is unnecessary for behavioral change. Therefore, the framework is only useful under the supervision of instructions. Administrators and managers who can analyze the performance and other relevant data on the students and offer them meaningful feedback can help in the supervision of instructions. Secondly, guidelines also play an important part in the success of this framework, with irrelevant communication channels, the subject at hand may rebel against the intervention instead of cooperating. In cases where the subject has revolted against this response, then the framework has failed, and worse outcomes could be realized.

References

Cushman, F. (2013). The Role of Learning in Punishment, Prosociality, and Human Uniqueness. In Sterelny K., Joyce R., Calcott B., & Fraser B. (Eds.), Cooperation and Its Evolution (pp. 333-372). MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vjqb0.21

Devecioğlu, İ., & Güçlü, B. (2016, November). A preliminary model for operant conditioning of rats in a detection task. In Biomedical Engineering Meeting (BIYOMUT), 2016 20th National (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

Emer, S. A., Mora, C. V., Harvey, M. T., & Grace, M. S. (2015). Predators in training: operant conditioning of novel behavior in wild Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivitattus). Animal Cognition, 18(1), 269-278.

Garry, M., & Joseph, P. (1983). Behavior Modification: What it is and how to do it. Second Edition. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Greenspan, S., & Sameroff, A. (2013). The Behavioral Approach to Discipline: Underpinnings and Three Principles. In Elements of Discipline: Nine Principles for Teachers and Parents (pp. 35-52). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt14bsx5v.8

Kazdin, A E. (1989). Behavior modification in applied settings. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole.

Kerr, R. R., Grayden, D. B., Thomas, D. A., Gilson, M., & Burkitt, A. N. (2014). Coexistence of reward and unsupervised learning during the operant conditioning of neural firing rates. PloS one, 9(1), e87123.

Kim, D., Seitz, A. R., & Watanabe, T. (2015). Visual perceptual learning by operant conditioning training follows rules of contingency. Visual Cognition, 23(1-2), 147-160.

Larwin, K. H., & Larwin, D. A. (2008). Decreasing Excessive Media Usage While Increasing Physical Activity a Single-Subject Research Study. Behaviour modification, 32(6), 938-956.

Liefooghe, B., & De Houwer, J. (2016). A functional approach to research on cognitive control: Analysing cognitive control tasks and their effects regarding operant conditioning. International Journal of Psychology, 51(1), 28-32.

Luiselli, J.K. (1997). Teaching toilet skills in a public school setting to a child with the pervasive developmental disorder. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 28, 163-168.

Maffei, G., Santos-Pata, D., Marcos, E., Sánchez-Fibla, M., & Verschure, P. F. (2015). An embodied biologically constrained the model of foraging: from classical and operant conditioning to real-world adaptive behavior in DAC-X. Neural Networks, 72, 88-108.

Martin, L., & Iceberg, E. (2015). Quantifying social motivation in mice using operant conditioning. Journal of visualized experiments: JoVE, (102).

Mowrer, O. H., & Aiken, E. G. (1954). Contiguity vs. drive-reduction in conditioned fear: temporal variations in conditioned and unconditioned stimulus. The American journal of psychology, 67(1), 26-38.

Nay, W. R. (1976). Behavioral intervention. New York: Gardner Press.

Newquist, G., & Gardner, R. (2015). Reconsidering Food Reward, Brain Stimulation, and Dopamine: Incentives Act Forward. The American Journal of Psychology, 128(4), 431-444. doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.128.4.0431.

Payne, S. W., & Dozier, C. L. (2013). Positive reinforcement as treatment for problem behavior maintained by negative reinforcement. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 46(3), 699-703.

Sawsan Saad, Amal Dandashi, Jihad M. Aljaam, & Moataz Saleh. (2015). The Multimedia-Based Learning System Improved Cognitive Skills and Motivation of Disabled Children with a Very High Rate. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 366-379. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.18.2.366

Schoemaker, K., Bunte, T., Wiebe, S. A., Espy, K. A., Deković, M., & Matthys, W. (2012). Executive function deficits in preschool children with ADHD and DBD. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(2), 111-119.

Sherman, A. R. (1973). Behavior modification: Theory and practice. Belmont: Wadsworth.

Shoesmith, G. (2015). Principles of Operant Conditioning. In Psychology: A New Complete GCSE Course, for AQA Specification 4180 (pp. 192-197). Cambridge: Lutterworth Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1cg4mcd.34

Starling, M. J., Branson, N., Cody, D., & McGreevy, P. D. (2013). Conceptualising the impact of arousal and affective state on training outcomes of operant conditioning. Animals, 3(2), 300-317.

Sundel, M., & Sundel, S. S. (2004). Behavior change in the human services: Behavioral and cognitive principles and applications. Sage Publications.

Tosheva, A., Penn, D. L., Basso, M. R., Wanner, J. L., & Laib, K. (2008).Attentional shaping as a means to improve emotion perception deficits in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia research, 105(1), 68-77

Uchimoto, K., Yokoi, T., Yamashita, T., & Okamura, H. (2013). Investigation of Toilet Activities in Elderly Patients with Dementia from the Viewpoint of Motivation and Self-Awareness. American journal of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, 28(5), 459-468.

Van den Akker, K., Havermans, R. C., Bouton, M. E., & Jansen, A. (2014). How partial reinforcement of food cues affects the extinction and reacquisition of appetitive responses. A new model for dieting success? Appetite, 81, 242-252.

Appendix A – Datasheet

Participant: Brooke Connelly

Target behavior: Daily cleaning of the bedroom

Baseline rate of behavior Week 1

Date

Amount of target behavior

Observations

Sunday

7/09

Was not recorded

Had spent the weekend at a friend’s place

Monday

8/09

Spread the bed

He was prompted to

Tuesday

9/09

None

Left the room messy, had forgotten the chore of cleaning the room.

Wednesday

10/09

Changed the sheets;

Cleaned the floor.

Had a friend visiting and did not want embarrassment

Thursday

11/09

Organized things,

Spread the bed.

Was reminded by the roommate

Friday

12/09

None

Had a lot of class work hence limited time.

Saturday

13/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

Carrying out general cleaning on a weekend

Mean = 0.3

Appendix B – Datasheet

Phase 1

Date

Amount of target behavior

Observations

Monday

15/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced with a game of cards by the roommate.

Tuesday

16/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced with a game of cards by the roommate.

Wednesday

17/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced with a game of cards by the roommate.

Thursday

18/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced with a game of cards by the roommate.

Friday

19/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced with a game of cards by the roommate.

Saturday

20/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced with a game of cards by the roommate.

Sunday

21/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced with a game of cards by the roommate.

Mean = 1

Appendix C – Datasheet

Phase 2

Date

Amount of target behavior

Observations

Monday

22/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

Had a reinforcement by a game of cards with the roommate.

Tuesday

23/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was not reinforced with a game of cards but achieved the target.

Wednesday

24/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room;

Added decorations in the room.

BC achieved target behavior, however, the number of tasks undertaken exceeded the expected four.

Thursday

25/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was not reinforced with a game of cards but later put a cross on tick sheet as a sign of commitment.

Friday

26/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC achieved the target without any reinforcement whatsoever.

Saturday

27/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

BC was reinforced by the large tick sheet which had to cross daily.

Sunday

28/09

Sheets changed;

Hovered the room;

Made the bed;

Organized items in the room.

Was not reinforced as the roommate was not in to play cards but the target was achieved.

Mean = 1