What are the key differences in respondent versus operant conditioning? 

Respondent conditioning and operant conditioning are two different types of learning processes that have key differences in their principles and applications.

Respondent conditioning, also known as classical conditioning, was first studied by Ivan Pavlov. It involves the association of a neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus to produce a conditioned response. In other words, a response is elicited by a stimulus that did not originally produce that response. For example, in Pavlov's famous experiment, a dog learned to associate the sound of a bell with the presentation of food, causing the dog to salivate at the sound of the bell alone.

On the other hand, operant conditioning, studied by B.F. Skinner, involves the association of a behavior with its consequences. This type of conditioning focuses on the voluntary behaviors of an organism and how they are influenced by the consequences that follow them. For example, if a rat in a Skinner box learns that pressing a lever results in the delivery of food, it will continue to press the lever to receive food.

The key differences between respondent and operant conditioning lie in the type of behavior being conditioned and the nature of the stimuli involved. Respondent conditioning deals with involuntary, reflexive responses to stimuli, while operant conditioning deals with voluntary, goal-directed behaviors. Additionally, respondent conditioning involves the pairing of stimuli, while operant conditioning involves the consequences of behavior.

In summary, respondent conditioning focuses on the association between stimuli and involuntary responses, while operant conditioning focuses on the association between behaviors and their consequences. Understanding these key differences is important for applying the principles of each type of conditioning in various learning and behavior modification settings.