Classical and Operant Conditioning- Comparison

Classical and operant conditioning share many of the same basic principles and procedures. For example, Kimble (1961) has pointed out that the basic principles of acquisition, extinction, spontaneous recovery, and stimulus generalization are common to both types of learning. There are several differences, however, between classical and operant conditioning. Although a basic feature of operant conditioning is reinforcement, classical conditioning relies more on association between stimuli and responses. A second distinction is that much of operant conditioning is based on voluntary behavior, while classical conditioning often involves involuntary reflexive behavior.These distinctions are not as strong as they once were believed to be. For example, Neal Miller (1978) has demonstrated that involuntary responses, such as heart rate, can be modified through operant conditioning techniques. It now appears that classical conditioning does involve reinforcement. And many classical conditioning situations also involve operant behavior. For example, let's assume that Tina was conditioned to fear rats like Little Albert. She would first learn to associate the rat with the loud noise through classical conditioning. Then presentation of the rat would produce a fear reaction and Tina would learn to escape from the aversive stimulus through operant conditioning (negative reinforcement). This is sometimes called the two-factor theory of avoidance conditioning (Mowrer & Lamoreaux, 1942).

Classical Conditioning	Operant Conditioning
Acquisition	Acquisition
Extinction	Extinction
Spontaneous recovery	Spontaneous recovery
Stimulus generalization	Stimulus generalization
Association between stimuli and responses	Reinforcement
Based on involuntary reflexive behavior	Based on voluntary behavior