Lesson-4

Learning

Learning Objectives

• To know the basic nature of learning

• To know the theories of learning
• To know the application of learning principles in organizational context

Definition of Learning

According to Stephen Robbins, learning may be defined as any relatively permanent

change in behavior that occurs as a result of experience. This definition is concerned with
behavior. As behavior is a collection of related activities, so change in behavior results in
change in activities which are responsible for the concerned changed behavior.

The present definition of learning has several components that deserve clarification:

1. Learning Involves Change

Change may be good or bad from an organizational point of view. People can learn
unfavorable behaviors to hold prejudices or to restrict their output, for example, as well
as favorable behaviors.

2. The Change should be Relatively Permanent

Temporary changes may be only reflexive and fail to represent any learning. Therefore,
the requirement that learning should be relatively permanent rules out behavioral changes
caused by fatigue or temporary adaptations.

3. Learning Involves Change in Behavior

Learning takes place when there is a change in actions. We should depend on observation
to see how much learning has occurred. For example, if a word processing operator who
keyboarded 70 words a minute before taking a new training course can now keyboard 85
words in a minute, we can infer that learning has occurred.

We can say that a person has learned whenever changes in behavior of that person take
place. In other words, we can say that changes in behavior indicate that learning has
taken place. Similarly, no change in behavior indicates no learning has taken place. It
should, however, be remembered that in certain types of learning, there are some periods
of time that follow the learning during which there is no indication of apparent changes.
This does not necessarily mean that no learning has taken place. These periods of no
apparent change in behavior are called the “incubation periods,” where the assimilation
and internalization of learning takes place.
But, in a general way, we may say that in the process of learning, people behave in a
changed way as a result of learning. Thus, we infer that learning has taken place if an
individual behaves, reacts or responds as a result of experience in a manner different
from the way he formerly behaved.

Theories of Learning

In order to explain the complex topic like human learning, various researchers have
approached the problem from various perspectives. This has given rise to different
theories of learning. Some of the most important theories of learning are as follows:

• Classical conditioning
• Operant conditioning
• Social learning

Traditional View-- Classical Conditioning

To understand contemporary thinking of learning, we first need to be aware of its

historical roots. Classical conditioning is a simple form of learning in which conditioned
response is linked with an unconditioned stimulus.

What do you do when you hear a bell ring?

A teacher told this story on himself. When most teachers hear a bell, one of the first
things they do is walk out into the hallway to be a monitor just to keep a watchful eye on
the students. And this teacher had acquired such a habit that when he was at home and the
doorbell rang, he would walk into a nearby hallway and "monitor" his family. For him, it
was simply such a strong habit that he would produce the right behavior (going into the
hall to monitor) at the wrong place (his own home).

Classical conditioning, perhaps the oldest model of change, has several interesting
applications to the classroom, ones you may have not thought about.

Components of Classical Conditioning

A Russian physiologist, Ivan Pavlov, conducted this experiment. A simple surgical

procedure allowed Pavlov to measure accurately the amount of saliva secreted by a dog.

When Pavlov presented the dog with a piece of meat, the dog exhibited a noticeable
increase in salivation.

When Pavlov withheld the presentation of meat and merely rang a bell, the dog did not
salivate.

Then, Pavlov proceeded to link the meat and the ringing of the bell. After repeatedly
hearing the bell before getting the food, the dog began to salivate as soon as the bell rang.
 Unconditioned Stimulus (US)
(Food) Salivation

Neutral Stimulus (NS) Picking up the ear etc., not

(Ringing of the bell) salivation

US + NS Salivation
(Food and ringing of the bell
together)

NS

Fig 4.1 Classical Conditioning

Consider a hungry dog that sees a bowl of food. Something like this might happen:

Food ---> Salivation

The dog is hungry, the dog sees the food, the dog salivates-- this is a natural sequence of
events. It is an unconscious, uncontrolled, and unlearned relationship-- see the food, and
then salivate.

Now, because we are humans who have an insatiable curiosity, we experiment. When we
present the food to the hungry dog (and before the dog salivates), we ring a bell. Thus,

Bell with Food ---> Salivation

We repeat this action (food and bell given simultaneously) at several meals. Every time
the dog sees the food, the dog also hears the bell-- Ding-dong, Alpo.

Now, because we are humans who like to play tricks on our pets, we do another
experiment. We ring the bell (Ding-dong), but we don't show any food. What does the
dog do?

Bell ---> Salivate

The bell elicits the same response as the sight of the food gets. Over repeated trials, the
dog has learned to associate the bell with the food and now the bell has the power to
produce the same response as the food.
This is the essence of classical conditioning. It is really that simple. You start with two
things that are already connected with each other (food and salivation). Then you add a
third thing (bell) for several trials. Eventually, this third thing may become so strongly
associated that it has the power to produce the old behavior.

Now, where do we get the term “conditioning” from all this? Let us draw up a diagram
with the official terminology.

Food ---------------------> Salivation

Unconditioned Stimulus ---> Unconditioned Response

"Unconditioned" means that the stimulus and the response are naturally connected. They
just came that way, hard wired together like a horse and carriage and love and marriage,
as the song goes. "Unconditioned" means that this connection was already present before
we got there and started messing around with the dog or the child or the spouse.

"Stimulus" means the thing that starts it while "response" means the thing that ends it. A
stimulus elicits and a response is elicited (this is circular reasoning). Let us consider
another diagram:

Conditioning Stimulus
Bell with Food -----------------------> Salivation
Unconditioned Stimulus------> Unconditioned Response

We already know that "unconditioned" means unlearned, untaught, pre-existing, and

already-present-before-we-got-there. "Conditioning" means just the opposite. It means
that we are trying to associate, connect, bond or link something new with the old
relationship. And we want this new thing to elicit (rather than be elicited) so it will be a
stimulus and not a response. Finally, after many trials, we hope for,

Bell ---------------------> Salivation

Conditioned Stimulus ---> Conditioned Response

Let us review these concepts.

1. Unconditioned stimulus-- a thing that can already elicit a response.

2. Unconditioned response-- a thing that is already elicited by a stimulus.
3. Unconditioned relationship-- an existing stimulus-response connection.
4. Conditioning stimulus-- a new stimulus that we deliver the same time when we give
the old stimulus.
5. Conditioned relationship-- the new stimulus-response relationship that we created by
associating a new stimulus with an old response.

There are two key parts. First, we start with an existing relationship, unconditioned
stimulus ---> unconditioned response. Second, we pair a new thing (conditioning
stimulus) with the existing relationship, until the new thing has the power to elicit the old
response.
A Little History and A Comparison

The example used above is from the first studies on classical conditioning as described by
Ivan Pavlov, the famous Russian physiologist. Pavlov discovered these important
relationships around the turn of the century in his work with dogs. He created the first
learning theory which precedes the reinforcement theory.

One important point to be noted is that classical conditioning says nothing about rewards
and punishments which are key terms in reinforcement theory. Consider a basic example,
as follows:

Conditioning Stimulus
Bell with Food ---------------------> Salivation
Unconditioned Stimulus ---> Unconditioned Response

Classical conditioning is built on creating relationships by association over trials. Some

people confuse classical conditioning with reinforcement theory. To keep them separated,
just look for the presence of rewards and punishments.

Everyday Classical Conditioning

This type of influence is extremely common. If you have pets and you feed them with
canned food, what happens when you hit the can opener? Sure, the animals come running
even if you are opening a can of green beans. They have associated the sound of the
opener with their food.

Classical conditioning works with people too. Go to K-Mart (a popular American

departmental store) and watch what happens when the blue light turns on. Cost conscious
shoppers will make a beeline to that table because they associate a good sale with the
blue light. And the research proves that people are more likely to buy the sale item under
the blue light even if the item is not of a good value.

Classical conditioning also works with advertising. For example, many beer ads
prominently feature attractive young women wearing bikinis. The young women
(unconditioned stimulus) naturally elicit a favorable, mildly aroused feeling
(unconditioned response) in most men. The beer is simply associated with this effect. The
same thing applies with the jingles and music that accompany many advertisements.

Perhaps the strongest application of classical conditioning involves emotion. Common

experience and careful research both confirm that human emotion conditions vary rapidly
and easily. When the emotion is intensely felt or is negative in direction, particularly, it
will condition quickly.

For example, I have heard from a person who, when he was in college, was robbed at
gunpoint by a young man who gave him the choice--“your money or your life.” It was an
unexpected and frightening experience. This event occurred around dusk. For a long time
thereafter, the guy often experienced moments of dread in the late afternoons, particularly
when he was just walking around the city alone. Even though he was quite safe, the
lengthening shadows of the day were so strongly associated with the fear he experienced
in the robbery that he could not help but feel the emotion all over.

Clearly, classical conditioning is a pervasive form of influence in our world. This is true
because it is a natural feature of all human beings. Also, it is relatively simple and easy to
accomplish.

The Contemporary View-- Learning as a Cognitive Process

Although it is not tied to a single theory or model, contemporary learning theory

generally views learning as a cognitive process. That is, it assumes people are conscious,
active participants in how they learn.

Feedback

Prior Learning Behavioral Choice Perceived

Consequences

First, in the cognitive view, people draw on their experiences and use past learning as a
basis for present behavior. These experiences represent presumed knowledge or
cognitions. For example, an employee faced with a choice of job assignments will use
previous experiences in deciding which one to accept.

Second, people make choices about their behavior. Third, people recognize the
consequences of their choices. Thus, when the employee finds the job assignment
rewarding and fulfilling, she/he will recognize that the choice was a good one and will
understand why.

Finally, people evaluate those consequences and add them to prior learning which affects
future choices.

Therefore, several perspectives on learning take a cognitive view. Foremost is the operant
conditioning or reinforcement theory.

Learning in Organizations

Most people associate learning with formal education and with school in particular.
While this association is quite logical, we should also note the pervasive extent to which
learning also occurs in organizations.
From a simple orientation perspective, for example, newcomers in an organization learn
when to come to work, how to dress, whom to ask for assistance, how to apply for annual
leave, when to expect a paycheck, how to file an insurance claim, and so forth.

From performance perspective, employees learn how to do their jobs more effectively,
what is expected of them in the way of performance outcomes, and what it takes to get
rewarded.

From a social perspective, employees learn how to get along with colleagues, which
behaviors are acceptable and unacceptable, the norms of the group, and so on.

Form a political perspective, employees learn how to get along with their bosses, whom
to avoid, whom to trust, so on and so forth.

And from a career perspective, employees learn how to get ahead, how to get promotions,
which job assignments to seek and which to avoid, and the like.

Clearly, then, much of the organizational life and the behavior of individuals within the
organization are influenced by learning and learning processes.