What makes you entirely unique from any other person on this planet? One may argue that every person is uniquely the sum of every experience they have ever had. We have all witnessed different things, were taught specific lessons, or experienced certain events that have shaped how we make decisions and display specific behaviors.
Let’s focus in on that last word: behaviors. This article is all about the behavioral perspective of personality. While this view has its critics, it is the result of some of the most fascinating and well-known psychological experiments to date.
What is Behavioral Perspective?
The behavior perspective, or behaviorism, is the belief that personality is the result of an individual’s interactions with their environment, including the decisions they make and the actions they take. Psychologists can pinpoint and connect habits and behavior to predict how a person’s personality was shaped.
These interactions may include:
- Traumatic life experiences
- Lessons from your parents and teachers
- Lessons from movies, TV and other forms of media
All of the things that we have observed contribute to how we will later behave.
Taking every single interaction that a person has with the world into account can feel overwhelming. So let’s zoom in on two ways that we may be conditioned to behave one way or another. According to behaviorism, these types of conditioning shape all of our later decisions and ultimately our personality.
The Two Types of Conditioning
Psychologists have categorized behaviorism into two different processes: classical conditioning and operant conditioning. There are two important people that you should know in the world of behaviorism, and they illustrate the two different types of conditioning.
You probably already know one. Ivan Pavlov is the father of the now famous “Pavlov’s dog” experiment. In this experiment, Pavlov set off a metronome for a group of dogs. When the dogs heard a bell after this metronome, they would get a treat. This is a case of classic conditioning.
Soon, the dogs started to physically salivate when they heard the metronome. They automatically associated two unrelated stimulus through behavioral training. (There’s also an episode of The Office where Jim conducts a similar experiment on Dwight.)
Are we like Pavlov’s dogs? Do we associate two stimuli to each other and grow to commit certain behaviors from this association? The Little Albert Study says we do.
This study was led by an American psychologist named John B. Watson. Watson used a young boy named Albert as his “dog.” He exposed the boy to images of a white rat and other items. Then, he would make a loud and scary noise when the boy saw the image of the rat. Soon enough, the boy was classically conditioned to react with fear whenever he saw any image of a white rat.
There is one caveat in this experiment. Little Albert also began to act in a similar manner to other white things. Rather than associating his fear and the loud noise with the rat for being a white, Albert made other assumptions and behaved in an unpredictable manner toward other objects that he personally associated with the rat.
Keep this in mind. Can we consider behavior perspective a comprehensive theory unless it can account for how we associate two separate stimuli?
The second type of conditioning is operant conditioning. This type of process can help to better predict how someone will behave. Rather than using two unrelated stimuli, operant conditioning uses rewards and punishments to shape behavior. The person can predict the reaction they will get if they behave in a certain way and may alter their behavior based on the reaction that they want.
The man that many people associate with operant conditioning is named B.F. Skinner. (You can remember that “Skinner” created “Operant” conditioning because they both have 7 letters in their name) Along with Freud, he is one of the top known psychologists in the world today.
Skinner and Freud didn’t always agree, but their theories coincide to help explain why people make decisions. Freud believes that the unconscious mind is constantly seeking pleasure and avoiding pain in any way possible.
We often associate rewards with pleasure and punishment with pain. Skinner believed that you can change a person’s behavior by using a series of rewards and punishments. People are going to seek the behaviors that they know will bring them pleasure, even if they were not inclined to act in that way in the first place.
Skinner’s work led him to learn pigeons how to play ping pong and help soldiers during World War II. While you may not think that pigeons are naturally sporty or patriotic creatures, operant conditioning led them to display these types of behaviors.
Skinner’s Box (also known as an Operant Conditioning Chamber) is a famous laboratory piece used to study the behavior of animals.
Within the box, there was a small animal (usually a rat). There was also a lever, and a food dispenser that was hooked up to the lever and would give out a food pellet. Skinner wanted to see if the rat would associate pushing the lever to dispensing food.
Well, it worked!
Why did the rat push the lever in the first place though, because it surely didn’t know the lever would dispense food pellets. Well, rats are exploratory creatures (like us humans) and would explore their environment. This includes pushing random buttons like the lever!
After a ton of further research, Skinner realized there are 4 ways to encourage or discourage behavior. Here is the definition and some examples of Operant Conditioning:
Positive Reinforcement: Add something, and increase the behavior. An example is to give the rat a food pellet when it pushes the lever.
Negative Reinforcement: Remove something, and increase the behavior. An example is to continuously shock the rat’s feet, and only stop shocking it when the rat pushes the lever.
Positive Punishment: Add something to decrease the behavior. An example would be smacking a dog when it barks.
Negative Punishment: Remove something to decrease the behavior. An example would be to stop paying attention to a barking dog.
Behavioral Perspective In Television and Real Life
How does behaviorism explain habits like addiction? This Reddit post from r/psychology offers an analysis using the Queen’s Gambit as an example.
How Behavioral Perspective Fits in With Personality Psychology
Behaviorism says that we (and our personality) can change every day. If you are “trained” right, you can become a person with any sort of personality trait. It certainly gives hope to people who may aspire to be more driven, punctual, or have any other traditionally “good” or “successful” trait.
Anyone who has successfully trained a dog to behave in a certain way knows that there is some truth to this theory. Behavioral perspective, however, is rather limited when it comes to the overall psychology of personality. Behaviorists don’t take into account the thoughts and feelings that are behind someone’s actions.
A person may be on time for work every day, not because they want to or because they are in general a punctual person, but they may just be terrified of losing their job and not having any money. Sometimes, people choose to sacrifice their values and larger personality for wants, needs, and desires.
Behaviorism is just one piece of the personality psychology puzzle, but it’s an important one to know. We can’t entirely discredit behaviorism because it does influence how people make decisions.
Think about some of your daily habits. Why do you do them? Do they reflect who you are overall as a person, or do they reflect values and patterns of thought that you have established over the years? What does your commitment to these values say about your personality?