LEarn~

Operant Conditioning is different from Classical Conditioning in that the behaviors studied in Classical Conditioning are reflexive (for example, salivating). However, the behaviors studied and governed by the principles of Operant Conditioning are non-reflexive (for example, gambling). So, compared to Classical Conditioning, Operant Conditioning attempts to predict non-reflexive, more complex behaviors, and the conditions in which they will occur. In addition, Operant Conditioning deals with behaviors that are performed so that the organism can obtain reinforcement.

b) there are many factors involved in determining if an organism will engage in a behavior - just because there is food doesn't mean an organism will eat (time of day, last meal, etc.). SO, unlike classical conditioning...(go to "c", below)

c) in Op. Cond., the organism has a lot of control. Just because a stimulus is presented, does not necessarily mean that an organism is going to react in any specific way. Instead, reinforcement is dependent on the organism's behavior. In other words, in order for an organism to receive some type of reinforcement, the organism must behave in a specific manner. For example, you can't win at a slot machine unless several things happen, most importantly, you pull the lever. Pulling the lever is a voluntary, non-reflexive behavior that must be exhibited before reinforcement (hopefully a jackpot) can be delivered.

d) in classical conditioning, the controlling stimulus comes before the behavior. But in Operant Conditioning, the controlling stimulus comes after the behavior. If we look at Pavlov's meat powder example, you remember that the sound occurred (controlling stimulus), the dog salivated, and then the meat powder was delivered. With Operant conditioning, the sound would occur, then the dog would have to perform some behavior in order to get the meat powder as a reinforcement. (like making a dog sit to receive a bone).

Read more: http://www.alleydog.com/101notes/conditioning.html#ixzz1eog7X4Oa