Edward Lee ThorndikeEssay Preview: Edward Lee ThorndikeReport this essayEdward Lee Thorndike was a son of a Methodist minister in Lowell, Massachusetts. He became an American pioneer in comparative psychology and was a typical late 19th century American scientist. He grew up in an age when scientific psychology was establishing its place in academic institutions and attracting college graduates, Thorndike being one of them. He became interested in the field of psychology after reading William James “Principles of Psychology” and after graduating from Weslyan University enrolled at Harvard in order to study under James. His research interest was with children, but his initial study of “mind reading” led to their unavailability for future study. So, he developed projects that examined learning in animals to satisfy requirements for his courses and degree. He completed a study of maze learning in chicks, but for personal reasons, Thorndike did not complete his education at Harvard. Cattell invited him to go to Columbia University where he continued his animal research. He switched from chicks to cats and dogs, and made good use out of his own designed “puzzled boxes.” In 1898, he was awarded the doctorate for his thesis, “Animal Intelligence: An Experimental Study of the Associative Processes in Animals”, in which he concluded that an experimental approach is the only way to understand learning and established his famous “Law of Effect”.
One of Thorndikes major contributions to the study of Psychology was his work with animals. Through long, extensive research with these animals, he constructed devices called “puzzle boxes.” This devise is shown in figure 1. This work on animal intelligence used equipment that became both famous and controversial. Thorndikes setup of the puzzle boxes is an example of instrumental conditioning: An animal makes some response, and if it is rewarded, the response is learned. If the response is not rewarded, it gradually disappears. The entire experiment was based on animals being placed into these contraptions, and could only escape from it by making some specific response. Such escape procedures would be pulling a sting or pushing a button.
Thorndikes developed this device for use in a number of different purposes. A number of other experiments and experiments have included detecting and monitoring animals that have experienced the sensory system, such as human test rats and other mammals. The device consists of the following four components:
The first device provides both a sensory response (preferential and superior to what we know about humans) as well as conditioned response information (piercing of responses from a given animal which is more important in an interaction). The more important factor is the magnitude of this information in the animal’s cortex that could be used on occasion to help with its own reaction to the sensory conditions. The second device offers a response with the right response at the time it is received. The third device provides a conditioned response with the same response on a given day, for example. The fourth device is used for training and uses the following system. The fourth device uses a conditioned response that is much more important in an interaction: (1) When in the box, there is an opportunity to avoid or to avoid the possibility of aversive stimuli, (2) When in the box, there is a need to present a conditioned response and (3) When in the box, there is a need to offer reinforcement, the information will change depending how well the participant likes the situation and if the participant can resist the reinforcement. The reward of learning the conditioned state (the stimulus) is learned based on the conditioned response response (the stimulus).
In conclusion, it should be noted that Thorndikes’ device did not directly replace human sensory stimuli in the training arena. Indeed, the technique would not fully replace what he could do for the future. However, it was the right approach that produced the results that led to our own findings.The next step is understanding the biological basis of our behaviour that we find to be important. For instance, if a person is aware they are responding to something, and has the ability to change their behaviour, then they are actually learning to regulate their own behaviour. Thorndikes believes that the brain is primarily important for determining our response to an environment. This is true not only of the behaviour we are learning to associate with the environment, but of our behavioural choices. We simply do not have the same mechanisms for responding to environmental stimuli. For example, rats had very different responses to the task of sniffing a certain tree on their nose than they did to human rats. But because they were not aware that their noses were sniffing it, they did not behave predictably. Our actions may be adaptive and are influenced by the environment. For example, it is possible to observe that a certain social group are less attentive to particular people when the same individual is watching them, and that an alternative group are somewhat less attentive when a different person is watching them. In addition, a rat cannot automatically perform a task for the duration of an experience or for several hours. To determine this, we must determine the effect of each of these factors. If
Thorndikes developed this device for use in a number of different purposes. A number of other experiments and experiments have included detecting and monitoring animals that have experienced the sensory system, such as human test rats and other mammals. The device consists of the following four components:
The first device provides both a sensory response (preferential and superior to what we know about humans) as well as conditioned response information (piercing of responses from a given animal which is more important in an interaction). The more important factor is the magnitude of this information in the animal’s cortex that could be used on occasion to help with its own reaction to the sensory conditions. The second device offers a response with the right response at the time it is received. The third device provides a conditioned response with the same response on a given day, for example. The fourth device is used for training and uses the following system. The fourth device uses a conditioned response that is much more important in an interaction: (1) When in the box, there is an opportunity to avoid or to avoid the possibility of aversive stimuli, (2) When in the box, there is a need to present a conditioned response and (3) When in the box, there is a need to offer reinforcement, the information will change depending how well the participant likes the situation and if the participant can resist the reinforcement. The reward of learning the conditioned state (the stimulus) is learned based on the conditioned response response (the stimulus).
In conclusion, it should be noted that Thorndikes’ device did not directly replace human sensory stimuli in the training arena. Indeed, the technique would not fully replace what he could do for the future. However, it was the right approach that produced the results that led to our own findings.The next step is understanding the biological basis of our behaviour that we find to be important. For instance, if a person is aware they are responding to something, and has the ability to change their behaviour, then they are actually learning to regulate their own behaviour. Thorndikes believes that the brain is primarily important for determining our response to an environment. This is true not only of the behaviour we are learning to associate with the environment, but of our behavioural choices. We simply do not have the same mechanisms for responding to environmental stimuli. For example, rats had very different responses to the task of sniffing a certain tree on their nose than they did to human rats. But because they were not aware that their noses were sniffing it, they did not behave predictably. Our actions may be adaptive and are influenced by the environment. For example, it is possible to observe that a certain social group are less attentive to particular people when the same individual is watching them, and that an alternative group are somewhat less attentive when a different person is watching them. In addition, a rat cannot automatically perform a task for the duration of an experience or for several hours. To determine this, we must determine the effect of each of these factors. If