Operant Conditioning in the Criminal Justice System

Psychology in Criminal Justice: Operant Conditioning in the

Criminal Justice System

Elodie Bullock

Psychology of Criminal Behavior

CCJS 461

4 February 2014

Running Head: OPERANT CONDITIONING 2

Running Head: OPERANT CONDITIONING

Psychology in Criminal Justice: Operant Conditioning in the

Criminal Justice System

“A psychology of consciousness or mind is followed by a

psychology of action and behavior (behaviorism), from which a

psychology of mind and consciousness reemerges.” (Bartol &

Bartol, 2011, p.81).

Behaviorism is a scientific approach to psychology that

seeks to develop explanations of behavior. It was first assumed

by Wilhelm Wundt (1832- 1920), one of the founding figures of

modern psychology who instituted the first psychology laboratory

in Germany, that the study of subjective mental life was the

correct subject matter for psychology. Following Wundt’s path,

E.B. Titchener (1867- 1927) also assumed that the suitable

subject matter for psychology was subjective mental life or

consciousness. For him, elements of subject matter were

sensations, feelings, and images. Titchener brought his

approach, which he called “structuralism’, to the United States

3


in 1892. In the early 190012./;;;;;w3,s,“functionalism”, an

alternative to structuralism, emerged (Moore, 2011). This new

approach employed similar research methods as structuralism but

emphasized the function of conscious mental phenomena. These two

approaches used introspection as a method, which became

problematic as it lacked reliability. Both the structuralism and

functionalism approach were soon discredited due to a lack of

consistency and agreement (Moore, 2011). Jonh B. Watson (1878-

1958) argued fiercely against both structuralism and

functionalism. He discarded conscious mental functioning as a

subject matter in psychology as well as introspection as a

method. Instead, he strongly suggested that behavior should be

the subject matter and that the method should rely on

experimental observation of behavior. He named this new approach

“behaviorism”.

Behaviorism assumes that behavior is a learned response to

environmental stimuli. Everyone begins life with a clean slate,

as time goes on, behavior is shaped through positive or negative

reinforcement as well as positive or negative punishment.

4


Positive or negative reinforcement increase the likelihood that

an antecedent behavior will occur again. In contrast, positive

or negative punishment will decrease the likelihood that the

antecedent behavior will occur again. Therefore, according to

behaviorists, behavior can be measured, influenced, and altered

by training. Watson assumed that behavior could be observed and

studied without considerations of internal mental conditions.

Behaviorism theories maintain that only observable behavior

should be studied as internal reactions such as cognitive

ability, moods, and emotions are subjective. Watson was

determined that the mind should be removed from scientific

consideration, as it was not measurable or observable. He

strongly believed that psychology’s purpose was to comprehend,

foresee, and condition behavior (Bartol &Bartol, 2011, p81).

According to behavioral theorists, there are two major

types of conditioning, which are classical and operant. Pavlov

(1849-1936), a Russian psychologist, carried out a renowned

research on classical conditioning that really influenced

Watson’s views. In his research, Pavlov used dogs as subjects.

5


He strapped the dogs, presented them with food, and measured

their flow of saliva. After a while, Pavlov noticed that the

dogs began salivating before receiving the food. A number of

dogs would begin salivating from the moment they saw their

caretaker. Next, Pavlov hypothesized that he might be able to

“program” the dogs to associate events or things (such as the

ring of a bell) with food and cause a biological reaction, the

production of saliva. In his experiment, Pavlov associated the

ring of a bell with meat powder. Once the dogs associated the

bell with the meat powder, the sound of the bell only would

cause them to produce saliva. In this experiment, the

unconditioned stimulus (meat powder) produced an unconditioned

response (salivating). The unconditioned stimulus was then

associated with a conditioned stimulus (sound of a bell) to

obtain a conditioned response (salivating due to learned

association). Therefore, a neutral stimulus was associated to a

stimulus that naturally occurs. As a result, the neutral

stimulus ultimately generates a response in the absence of the

naturally occurring stimulus.

6


Operant conditioning refers to a learning method during

which behavior is affected by the consequences of an antecedent

behavior. During operant learning, consequences are associated

to behavior. When a situation is affected by behavior, a subject

learns what behavior to adopt or avoid, in order to receive

rewards or prevent punishment. B.F Skinner (1904-1990), one of

the most influential psychologists in the U.S in the 20th

century, uncovered the operant conditioning principle by

establishing an association between behavior and consequences

during an experiment. For his experiment, Skinner trained

pigeons to peck at keys and push levers to obtain food. The

pigeons learned that their behavior (pecking) had an effect on

the situation (create an access to food), which was favorable

(reward) (Barol and Barol, P 84, 2011).

There are several components that can affect operant

conditioning. These include reinforcements, which are events

that will cause the reoccurrence of a behavior. As I previously

mentioned, reinforcements may be positive or negative. Positive

reinforcement refers to the favorable outcomes or events that

7


follow a specific behavior. These outcomes may be praise or

reward. For instance, if a child is praised every time she

tidies up after herself, she will keep doing so. Negative

reinforcement refers to the removal of unpleasant outcomes. For

instance, if an inmate no longer has to do difficult shores if

well behaved, the impact will be an increase in good behavior

(Ambia, 2013).

Another component of operant conditioning is punishment. As

for reinforcement, there are positive and negative forms of

punishment. Punishments are events that will cause the weakening

of a behavioral response. Positive punishment refers to an

unfavorable or unpleasant outcome that follows a behavior. For

instance, if an inmate is placed in solitary confinement after

assaulting a guard, the outcome will decrease the likelihood of

a second assault. Negative punishment refers to the removal of a

positive outcome as a result of a behavior. For instance, if a

child is forbidden to go out to play as a result of using bad

words, the child will then avoid using bad words (Ambia, 2013).

8


Lastly, the last component of operant conditioning is

extinction. Extinction refers to the lack of outcomes following

a behavior. When a behavior is not followed by any consequences,

positive or negative, that behavior will decrease in occurrence.

For instance, if a child is throwing a tantrum but the parents

do not respond, the child will cease the tantrum (Ambia, 2013).

Operant conditioning is applicable in numerous ways. It is

applicable at home with animals, at school with children, at

work with employees, bust most importantly it is applicable in

the Criminal Justice System. In the criminal justice system we

can easily identify how legislations, judges, or the law

enforcement use reinforcement and punishment to discourage/

encourage certain types of behavior.

Criminal Statutes were enacted as a response to particular

situations or behavior that are considered to be

unconstitutional by the U.S legislation. As an example, I will

refer to the U.S Statutes concerning sexual abuse. Part I,

Chapter 109A, Sec. 2241, of the 2010 U.S Code states that

“Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction

9


of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison,

institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by

direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the

head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly—

(1) causes another person to engage in a sexual act by

threatening or placing that other person in fear (other than by

threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person

will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or

kidnapping); or

(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other

person is—

(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or

(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or

communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;

or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and

imprisoned for any term of years or for life.” (Justia, n.d).

This statute has for aim to prevent sexual abuse as a behavior.

It informs the general public that sexual abuse is not an

acceptable behavior and that it is punishable. Here the theory

10


of operant conditioning applies as the statute declares that if

anyone commits sexual abuse (behavior), the response that will

follow this act will be a fine (negative punishment) and

imprisonment (positive punishment). By making a behavior legally

unacceptable and punishable, the legislation aims to discourage

criminal behavior and therefore diminish its occurrence. The

goal of the enactment of criminal statutes is to prevent

criminal behaviors to ever happen by communicating to the

public, the association between criminal behavior and its

consequences.

The enforcement of statutory laws “activates” the statutes.

It reinforces the idea that statutory laws must be taken

seriously and are inviolable. Having poor enforcement of the

statutory laws would be a form of reinforcement of criminal

behavior, as criminals would not associate their behavior with

unfavorable consequences. What are learned by the enforcement of

statutory laws is that some behaviors are not to be adopted at

any time and that the response to these behaviors will be

unpleasant. The knowledge that statutes are not just present,

but are also actively enforced, dissuades lawbreakers

11


furthermore. Additionally, the enforcement of statutory laws

that deal with crimes of omission, reinforce good behavior.

Citizens learn that if they do not do what they are ought to do;

punishment will follow (Ambia, 2013).

When an offender has been charged with an offense (based on

probable cause), he or she will be trialed. During the trial,

the prosecution is going to try to convince a jury that the

defendant is guilty by presenting facts supported by evidence.

I’ve identified several ways conditioning learning applies

during the prosecution of criminal cases. First of all, the

prosecution itself is a form of positive punishment resulting

from the defendant’s behavior. It must not be a pleasant outcome

for the defendant to be sitting in front of a judge and a jury

while a prosecutor tries to convince its members that the he or

she is guilty and should be sentenced. Therefore, the

prosecution process could decrease the occurrence of criminal

behavior. Then, the theory of operant conditioning applies

during the plea bargain, as the defendant must make the decision

to plead guilty or innocent according to the outcomes of his or

12


her decision. In this situation, reinforcement is used to incite

the defendant to “tell the truth”. The reinforcement would be a

lighter sentence, that would be associated to the behavior of

admitting he or she committed a crime. However, if the defendant

refuses to plead guilty (behavior) then the outcomes would be

unpleasant, as he or she would have to face a heavier sentence

(positive punishment). Additionally, the prosecution of criminal

cases encourages good behavior and discourages bad behavior, as

the decision made by a jury will either be a pleasant or

unpleasant outcome resulting from the defendant’s behavior. If

the prosecution can prove and convince the jury that the

defendant is guilty of committing a crime (behavior) the outcome

would be that the he or she would be found guilty by a jury and

given a sentence by a judge (positive punishment). If the

defense can prove that the defendant did not commit a crime

(behavior), then he or she would be found innocent by the jury

and will not be given any sentence (negative reinforcement).

During the prosecution, I believe that the defendants, who are

found guilty, learn that their behavior was unacceptable and

will be punished furthermore if they recidivate. In many cases,

13


the defendants will then avoid recidivism.

The sentencing of convicted offender is an application of

operant conditioning with the components of positive and

negative punishment. The more objectionable a behavior is, the

harsher the punishment will be. Various penalties, depending on

the offence, are decided by the court. Non-custodial sentencing

orders are the penalties that do not involve imprisonment

(Penalties and Sentences Act 1992). They include the following

examples:

- Good behavior bounds; when given a good behavior bound, the

offender must make a promise to the court that he or she

will be of good behavior. If the offender do not respect

his recognizance order, he or she will be given another,

tougher sentence. Conditioning learning applies here as

good behavior is reinforced and bad behavior discourage.

The positive reinforcement used is the release of the

offender and the positive punishment is the penalty that

will follow further bad behavior.

- Non- contact and banning order: when an offender has

14


committed a felonious offense against a person, he or she

will be forbidden by the court to have any contact with the

complainant or to attend specific locations. This penalty

aims to discourage any further bad conduct. The negative

punishment here would be the interdiction to attend certain

locations or to get in contact with a specific person

- Probation: when offenders are on probation, they may remain

in their community but must report to a probation officer

on a regular basis. This penalty aims to discourage any

further bad behavior or discourage criminals to try to

escape authorities. The negative punishment is that

offenders may no longer leave their community; the positive

punishment is that they have to report to a probation

officer and comply with any other conditions ruled by the

court.

Custodial sentencing orders include penalties of

imprisonment. Imprisonment is imposed when violent, sexual, or

other serious offenses have been committed. The length of prison

terms depends on the nature of an offence. An indefinite

15


sentence may be imposed to offenders who have been recognized to

be a danger to the community or have committed an unforgivable

crime (Penalties and Sentences Act 1992). Operant conditioning applies

in these situations with the element of positive punishment

(imprisonment). Previous criminal behaviors are deterred. In

some rare cases, imprisonment may become a positive

reinforcement for bad behavior as some people (e.g. those who

live on the streets) may see it as a favorable outcome (roof

over head and access to food).

The theory of operant conditioning also applies to inmate

sanctions within correctional institutions with the elements of

punishment and reinforcement. Good behavior is often reinforced

within correctional institutions with positive and negative

reinforcements. Positive reinforcement may include rewards for

good behavior such as comfort (e.g. extra pillows, soft blanket,

etc...), entertainment (e.g. games, books, etc…), or pleasant

responsibilities (e.g. remunerated jobs) and trust. Negative

reinforcement may include moving an unpleasant inmate to another

cell, taking away some disagreeable shores, or dismiss mandatory

16


sanctions. From positive reinforcement, inmates learn what

behaviors are acceptable. They learn that by acting “good” their

incarceration becomes more tolerable and pleasant.

Punishment is another element of operant conditioning within

correctional institutions. Bad behaviors are deterred with

positive and negative punishment. Positive punishment may

include placement in solitary confinement, chaining of the hands

and feet, or physical damage (e.g. inmates who try to escape may

be shot by the guards). Negative punishment may include the

interdiction to go outside, the removal of personal items and

cigarettes, or the prohibition to visiting. Inmates learn what

behaviors are not acceptable and are discouraged to recidivate.

Operant condition also applies to community- based

supervision. Offenders are supervised by social workers and may

be subject to one to one or group interventions. The goal of the

conditions of community- based supervision is to reduce re-

offending and encourage good behavior by developing strategies

that will create and maintain positive long-term changes in an

offender’s life. These positive changes are the positive

17


reinforcement that will result from a decrease in bad behavior

and an increase good behavior. Positive reinforcement may

include education, employment, stopping a drug abuse, or

successfully managing anger. All these positive changes will

encourage offenders to adopt good behaviors in their everyday

life.

Operant learning has been very successful in the criminal

justice system as many laws were written with its theory in

mind. It fulfills its goal to shape behavior, as without these

laws, many more people would probably adopt bad behavior. I

believe that many citizens have been tempted to commit crimes

but decided not to do so because of the consequences that would

follow. I now appreciate the association between behavior and

consequences as B.F Skinner explained it. I can identify how the

criminal justice system relies on this association to shape the

behavior of U.S citizens. But yet, nowadays, so many people

still commit crimes. I wonder if this could mean that the

operant leaning theory cannot be relied on in every situation or

that the U.S constitution imposes punishments that are too

18


minimal and that the rewards from criminal behavior outweigh the

consequences. I’ve read many articles about criminal cases and

case laws and several times I’ve taught that the sentences given

to the offenders were too light compare to the amplitude of

their actions. Today, criminals recidivate their crimes right

after getting out of incarceration and accumulate sentences.

This makes me think that the operant conditioning theory must

have some flaws or that maybe some sentences should be revised.

19


References

Ambia, D. (2013). “Operant Conditioning in the Criminal Justice

System.” Web. Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/4821117/Operant_Conditioning_in_the_Cri

minal_Justice_System

Bartol, A. Bartl, C. (2011). “Criminal behavior: a psychological

approach.” 10th edition.

Cavender. Gray, (1979). “Law and Human Behavior.” Vol 3. P. 203-

215. Web. Retrieved from

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfvie

wer?sid=effade9a-e77f-40c1-87a3-2357bcc1cafb

%40sessionmgr4003&vid=6&hid=4202

20

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=effade9a-e77f-40c1-87a3-2357bcc1cafb@sessionmgr4003&vid=6&hid=4202



https://www.academia.edu/4821117/Operant_Conditioning_in_the_Criminal_Justice_System

https://www.academia.edu/4821117/Operant_Conditioning_in_the_Criminal_Justice_System


Handrick, T. (2011). “Operant Conditioning and Criminal

Behavior.” Criminology and Justice. Retrieved from

http://criminologyjust.blogspot.com.tr/2013/04/operant-

conditioning-and-criminal.html#.UvC-EnmgfwI

Moore, J. (2011). “Behaviorism.” Psychological Record. Vol 61.

P. 449-465. Web. Retrieved from

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/eds/pdfviewer/

pdfviewer?sid=3913d311-ebb4-4809-9c97-edf28750f0de


Moore, J. (2013). “Three Views of Behaviorism.” Psychological

Record. Vol 63. P. 681-691. Web. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfvie

wer?sid=d8c1a395-3cb8-495d-aacc-99c06f4e186b


Justicia. (n.d). ”Sec.2242. Sexual Abuse.” Justicia US Law. Web.

Retrieved from

21

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=d8c1a395-3cb8-495d-aacc-99c06f4e186b@sessionmgr111&vid=3&hid=116



http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=3913d311-ebb4-4809-9c97-edf28750f0de@sessionmgr4003&vid=3&hid=4202



http://criminologyjust.blogspot.com.tr/2013/04/operant-conditioning-and-criminal.html#.UvC-EnmgfwI

http://criminologyjust.blogspot.com.tr/2013/04/operant-conditioning-and-criminal.html#.UvC-EnmgfwI


http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2010/title18/parti/chap109a/sec22

42/

United States Courts. (n.d.) “Criminal Cases.” Retrieved from

http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCou

rts/HowCourtsWork/CriminalCases.aspx

22

http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/HowCourtsWork/CriminalCases.aspx

http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/HowCourtsWork/CriminalCases.aspx

http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2010/title18/parti/chap109a/sec2242/

http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2010/title18/parti/chap109a/sec2242/

Operant Conditioning in the Criminal Justice System

Documents

Transcript of Operant Conditioning in the Criminal Justice System