Final answer:
Classical conditioning involves learning to associate two stimuli until the neutral stimulus can elicit the reflexive response alone, as shown in Pavlov's dog experiments. Operant conditioning deals with learning the relationship between voluntary behaviors and their consequences, exemplified by Skinner's work with rats in a box. In both, behavior is modified over time through different associative processes.
Step-by-step explanation:
Classical Conditioning vs Operant Conditioning
Classical conditioning and operant conditioning are both forms of associative learning, but they differ in fundamental ways. Classical conditioning involves an organism learning to associate a neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus that elicits an automatic, reflexive response. Over time, this neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus, causing the organism to elicit a conditioned response. A key example of this is Pavlov's experiments with dogs, where a bell (neutral stimulus) was paired with food (unconditioned stimulus) to eventually elicit salivation (conditioned response) without the food being present.
Operant conditioning, on the other hand, involves an organism learning to associate a voluntary behavior with its consequences, such as reinforcement or punishment. B.F. Skinner, with his invention of the Skinner box, demonstrated how rats learned to press a lever to obtain food. This form of learning relies on the consequences of behavior to shape future behavior, either increasing it through rewards or decreasing it through punishment.
When comparing the two, classical conditioning is about associating two stimuli, while operant conditioning is about associating behavior with its consequences. Learning that studying can improve grades on an AP® test is an example of operant conditioning, where the consequence (good grade) reinforces the behavior (studying).