SwiftSpear recently wrote an article stating:

I claim that a designer who puts effort into making sure their game is a better Skinner box is, almost objectively, just making a better game.

In the article, he goes on to make the distinction between “operant conditioning” with ANY reward and operant conditioning with inherently valueless rewards, coming to the conclusion that it is the nature of the rewards and not the conditioning itself that is important. You can read the article here: https://bennycr.wordpress.com/2017/03/22/evil-evil-skinner-boxes/

Keith Burgun subsequently wrote a response defending the usage of the term “Skinner Box” as an indicator of manipulative reward systems. You can read it here: http://keithburgun.net/why-skinner-box-is-a-useful-distinction/

Despite all our rage, we still respond favorably to operant conditioning.
Despite all our rage, we still respond favorably to operant conditioning.