Answer:
Operant conditioning and classical conditioning are two forms of associative learning, but they differ in several ways.
Classical conditioning involves learning by association between a neutral stimulus and a biologically significant stimulus. The process involves the pairing of the two stimuli, and the neutral stimulus eventually comes to elicit the same response as the biologically significant stimulus. For example, Pavlov's dogs learned to associate the sound of a bell (neutral stimulus) with the presentation of food (biologically significant stimulus), and eventually, the sound of the bell alone was sufficient to elicit the same response as the presentation of food. Classical conditioning was first described by the Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov.
Operant conditioning, on the other hand, involves learning by association between a behavior and its consequence. The process involves a consequence (either a reward or punishment) being delivered after a behavior, which then influences the likelihood of that behavior being repeated in the future. For example, a rat that presses a lever in a Skinner box and receives food as a reward is more likely to repeat the behavior of pressing the lever. Operant conditioning was first described by the American psychologist B.F. Skinner.
In summary, classical conditioning involves learning by association between a neutral stimulus and a biologically significant stimulus, while operant conditioning involves learning by association between a behavior and its consequence.
Key scientists related to each type of conditioning:
Ivan Pavlov: Russian physiologist who first described classical conditioning in the late 19th century through his work with dogs and salivation.
B.F. Skinner: American psychologist who first described operant conditioning in the mid-20th century through his work with rats and Skinner boxes.
Step-by-step explanation: