Post by sjangwal on Sept 23, 2017 0:33:58 GMT
Describe a situation in which it seems plausible to explain someone’s behaviour as an example of the law of effect. Do the same for the law of exercise. Does it seem to you that these laws are like the law of gravity and Boyle’s law which cannot be violated; or are they better conceptualized as patterns of behaviour that are regularly, but not always, observed? Explain.
A situation which exemplifies the 'law of effect' would be when people decide on what food to eat. Thorndike's definition of the 'law of effect' is, "the likelihood of a behavior being repeated depends on its outcome: a behavior with positive outcome is more likely to be repeated, whereas behavior with negative outcome is less likely to be repeated."
People are more inclined to choose foods that they either enjoy the taste of or because of the health benefits associated with that food (positive outcomes). Also, people are less likely to eat foods with perceived bad tastes or negative health implications (sometimes, taste>health). Either way, the outcomes of previous experiences with any food will influence your decision the next time you are presented with the same food.
An example of the 'law of exercise' is seen any time you watch professional athletes in any sport. Rarely are athletes born with that level of skill or athleticism we see on television. The law of effect states, "the more often an association is strengthened, the stronger it will become." In other words, the more often an athlete practices a skill involved in their respective sports, the more likely that skill will be performed with relative ease.
These laws that Thorndike states are like the law of gravity or Boyle's law in the sense that they are observable. However, Thorndike's laws differ from gravity or Boyle's law because his laws are not absolute and "the likelihood of a behaviour" can differ from person to person. This is the case because the law of effect and the law of exercise are observed patterns of behavior that can be influenced by many factors like culture, time, and meaning systems.
For example, a child may be forced to eat vegetables because the parents believe vegetables are necessary to be healthy despite the child's negative outcome (taste) towards the vegetable. The same child may grow up and either begin to enjoy vegetables, continue to hate vegetables, or even realize that the parents were right about the health benefits. The outcome of this would depend on the child's environment while growing up and other meaning systems set up around them.
A situation which exemplifies the 'law of effect' would be when people decide on what food to eat. Thorndike's definition of the 'law of effect' is, "the likelihood of a behavior being repeated depends on its outcome: a behavior with positive outcome is more likely to be repeated, whereas behavior with negative outcome is less likely to be repeated."
People are more inclined to choose foods that they either enjoy the taste of or because of the health benefits associated with that food (positive outcomes). Also, people are less likely to eat foods with perceived bad tastes or negative health implications (sometimes, taste>health). Either way, the outcomes of previous experiences with any food will influence your decision the next time you are presented with the same food.
An example of the 'law of exercise' is seen any time you watch professional athletes in any sport. Rarely are athletes born with that level of skill or athleticism we see on television. The law of effect states, "the more often an association is strengthened, the stronger it will become." In other words, the more often an athlete practices a skill involved in their respective sports, the more likely that skill will be performed with relative ease.
These laws that Thorndike states are like the law of gravity or Boyle's law in the sense that they are observable. However, Thorndike's laws differ from gravity or Boyle's law because his laws are not absolute and "the likelihood of a behaviour" can differ from person to person. This is the case because the law of effect and the law of exercise are observed patterns of behavior that can be influenced by many factors like culture, time, and meaning systems.
For example, a child may be forced to eat vegetables because the parents believe vegetables are necessary to be healthy despite the child's negative outcome (taste) towards the vegetable. The same child may grow up and either begin to enjoy vegetables, continue to hate vegetables, or even realize that the parents were right about the health benefits. The outcome of this would depend on the child's environment while growing up and other meaning systems set up around them.