2 - Extinction seems to result from interference rather than inhibition
According to Bouton: the CS occurs without a US during extinction therefore there is competing learning
A CR, extinguished in an environment different from the environment in which it was learned, reappears if the organism is returned to the original learning environment
A CR reappears after being presented with a CS after extinction if the US is again presented unpaired
The observation that the most salient component of a compound stimulus will become conditioned to a US and the weaker component will not.
example: Loud Tone and Weak Light as compound CS - Loud tone would become conditioned to a US.
Sounds usually form better CSs
(t1)Light (t2)Light + Tone (test) Tone (result) No CR
(t1)------------- (t2)Light + Tone (test) Tone (result) CR
Type of Contingency where a CS is followed by a US
Type of Contingency where a CS is never paired or followed by a US
Contingency where the CS-US Relationship is random
Truly Random/Zero Contingency
Type of Contingency that produces an inhibited response
Best type of contingency for a control group
Truly Random/Zero Contingency : by using a control group that is only exposed to the CS with no US research accidently pairs the CS with a negative contingency
When organisms learn that their behavior is independent of outcomes, they sometimes give up trying. Such animals ecome passive and withdrawn and seem to accept whatever happens to them. Often associated with the emotional state of depression in Humans
Learned Helplessness : an inescapable shock given to a rat, then tested with avoidance training will not try to avoid the shock - they have already been conditioned that they cannot avoid the shock
Organisms pay attention to environmental stimuli looking for clues about what is coming. Blocking (2nd CS) works because the organism has already found a good clue so 2nd CS gets ignored. Theory also explains Pre-Exposure Effect where Rescola and Wagner's theory doesn't
Mackintosh's Attention Theory
Presenting a CS without a US, then pair CS to US animals will not condition as well as if it was a novel CS
Pre-Exposure Effect : a part of Mackintosh's Attention Theory
We learn to the extent that we process things, and we process things that are suprising. US is something suprising (food, shock, etc.) If a CS signals the US coming it predicts the US, therefore the US is no longer suprising.
Kamin and Wagner Suprise Theory
2nd CS is presented after 1st CS has already alleviated suprise of US therefore there is no longer any suprise to process
Blocking explained by Kamin and Wagner's Suprise Theory
After a truly random control is used a CS is harder to condition when a CS-US contingency is introduced. Refers to the diminished efficacy of a CS that is used in a random control condition.
<< Rescorla & Wagner postulated that pre-exposure would have no effect, Mackintosh explains that no predictive value was introduced, Kamin & Wagner postulate there was no need to process so it was ignored. Mackintosh and Kamin & Wagner explain better >>
CS pre-exposure (no US) leads to poorer conditioning when a contingent US is paired to it. The decrement in acquisition of a CR due to pre-exposure of a CS
Describes the facilitation of conditioning that occurs when an established conditioned inhibitor (CS) is subsequently paired with a US
Animals don't learn new responses, but a cognitive expectancy about when to exhibit appropriate species-specific reactions
Bolles Expectancy Theory
Formed when a CS is correlated with an important outcome like US presence or Absence (very similar to Classical Conditioning) (Bolles)
Formed between responses and outcomes (similar to instrumental conditioning) (Bolles)
Long delay can still cause conditioning. Ease of learning is remarkable (1st trial). Very extinction resistant. Shock had no influence on conditioning, but nausea does
Garcia - Taste Aversion
Believed there here three inborn emotions : Fear, Rage, Love. Emotion were developed from those three and paired with other CS through classical conditioning. Emotion is based on 1 - heredity and 2 - experience. Founder of behaviorism
School of psychology that does not use introspection, avoids innate behaviors, and doesn't discuss mental processes.
Showed it was easier to condition fear to an animate object than an inanimate object by recreating Watson's baby Albert experiment. Disproved Watson and Pavlov's theories. Probably a biological predisposition because it would have been adaptive
Learning theory that focused on Contiguity and Frequency with no intrest in reinforcement. Encounter stimulus then instinctive response : s-r-(s)-r-(s)-r
Watson's Learning Theory
The procedure whereby a conditioned stimulus is presented but is not followed by reinforcement. Under these circumstances, the magnitude of the conditioned response gradually becomes smaller until the CS no longer elicits a CR
Technique used to eliminate undesirable behavior whereby a CS is paired with a US other than the one that originally reinforced the undesirable behavior. For example, if a CS was originally followed by a shock, thus producing fear, the CS could be paired with food, thus producing a response incompatible with fear
Organism is forced to experience feared CSs long enough to learn that an aversive experience will not follow, thus creating the conditions necessary for extinction
Therapeutic technique developed by Wolpe where a phobia is extinguished by having a client approach the feared experience one small step at a time while relaxing after each step. Approx 90% success rate
Therapy based on behavior and not unconscious processes
Study of the mind's influence over physiological health. i.e. chemotherapy reduces immune system, over time Ps immune system can reduce entering the parking lot to the clinic.