<p>I was taking a practice ap psychology test and was curious how operant and classical conditioning are different.</p>

<p>My test claims that the difference comes from the fact that Classical conditioning is based on an involuntary action and Operant Conditioning is based on voluntary action but obviously this is false since what may be involuntary/reflexive for some may not be the same for others.</p>

<p>An example they gave is how someone may move their hand away from an iron because of 'reflex' whereas they will attempt to do well on a test because they are aware of a reward, but what about someone that has a lot of experience with the given subject and simply does well on the test because they reflexively feel the need to do well. I know for me personally when given a math problem that I can't immediately solve or outline a heuristic for solving I tend to drop all external thoughts and work on it, often with a the same determination with which my dog chases after a squirrel. </p>

<p>This is of course because over time I have gained enough experience, practice, and interest in the field to do so. Thus for others attempting to solve problems will be a voluntary action, but for me personally I have an involuntary need to work on them.</p>

<p>But then again, when someone throws a ball at me, being that I don't have much experience with sports, I tend to first think "theres a ball!" before the reflex for catching initiates while for others that tends to fire off immediately.</p>

<p>So what is the actual difference between voluntary and involuntary actions besides familiarity with said action?</p>

<p>And if familiarity is the only difference then honestly how do Classical and Operant conditioning differ?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-02T14:28:21.263Z
Familiarity is definitely not the difference, and your test's claim is not obviously false. You seem to have misunderstood the strict definition of the unconditioned aspects of classical conditioning. Your experience does not factor into unconditioned stimuli or unconditioned responses. I'll expand on this in an answer when I get a chance if no one beats me to it.
Nick Stauner
<cognitive-psychology>
How does Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning really differ?
Sidharth Ghoshal
# How does Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning really differ?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-04-02)

I was taking a practice ap psychology test and was curious how operant and classical conditioning are different.

My test claims that the difference comes from the fact that Classical conditioning is based on an involuntary action and Operant Conditioning is based on voluntary action but obviously this is false since what may be involuntary/reflexive for some may not be the same for others.

An example they gave is how someone may move their hand away from an iron because of 'reflex' whereas they will attempt to do well on a test because they are aware of a reward, but what about someone that has a lot of experience with the given subject and simply does well on the test because they reflexively feel the need to do well. I know for me personally when given a math problem that I can't immediately solve or outline a heuristic for solving I tend to drop all external thoughts and work on it, often with a the same determination with which my dog chases after a squirrel.

This is of course because over time I have gained enough experience, practice, and interest in the field to do so. Thus for others attempting to solve problems will be a voluntary action, but for me personally I have an involuntary need to work on them.

But then again, when someone throws a ball at me, being that I don't have much experience with sports, I tend to first think "theres a ball!" before the reflex for catching initiates while for others that tends to fire off immediately.

So what is the actual difference between voluntary and involuntary actions besides familiarity with said action?

And if familiarity is the only difference then honestly how do Classical and Operant conditioning differ?

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Familiarity is definitely not the difference, and your test's claim is not obviously false. You seem to have misunderstood the strict definition of the unconditioned aspects of classical conditioning. Your experience does not factor into unconditioned stimuli or unconditioned responses. I'll expand on this in an answer when I get a chance if no one beats me to it.  

---

## 0 answers

