Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Theories and Research on Classical Conditioning (THE FORM OF THE…
Theories and Research on Classical Conditioning
THEORIES OF ASSOCIATIVE LEARNING
Thomas Brown
(1820) was the first to propose the principle of frequency. The more frequently two stimuli are paired, the more strongly the individual will associate the two.
Karmin
(1968) contradicted this. Rats were tested in two phases of being exposed to shocks. The first group received a light and unconditioned stimulus and the second group received nothing. In the second phase both groups were exposed to light, a tone, and the unconditioned stimulus. After this, when group one was exposed to the tone, there was no fear response. When the second group was exposed there was a fear response. The lack of response from group one is referred to as
blocking
From this
Robert Rescorla and Allan Wagner
(1972) developed the
Rescorla-Wagner model
.
More noticeable conditioned stimuli will condition faster than less noticeable
This leads to
*overshadowing
, where one intense conditioned stimulus will elicit a strong conditioned response and a weak conditioned stimulus will elicit a weak response
If two or more conditioned stimuli are presented, then the expectation will be equal to their total strength (or cancel out if opposite conditionings)
This is where blocking occurs. To counteract, the unconditioned stimulus must change
The larger the discrepancy between expectation and actual, the greater the conditioning will occur
If the unconditioned response is greater than expected, the conditioned stimulus' will receive excitatory conditioning
If less than expected, inhibitory conditioning
If equal, no conditioning
Accurately predicts the
overexpectation effect
which states that two independent stimuli are stronger then when conditioned together
Other theories
Theories of Attention
The
conditioned stimulus preexposure effect
states that a conditioned stimulus is weaker if presented before being conditioned with the unconditioned stimulus. Contradicts the Rescorla-Wagner model because there is learning here just not with the unconditioned response.
This lead to the development of other theories by
Mackintosh
(1975) and
Pearce and Hall
(1980).
Theories of Comparing
Assumption that a subject will compare the likelihood of an unconditioned stimulus occurring given a conditioned stimulus
Contextual stimuli
(the sights, sounds, smells, etc) play an important role because they were all present when conditioning took place
Principle states that as other conditioned stimuli undergo extinction, other conditioned stimuli become stronger
TYPES OF ASSOCIATION
Holland and Rescorla
(1975) found that second order conditioned stimuli were bound to the response and not the unconditioned stimulus.
Other studies however have found the opposite leaving debate over which is correct for second order conditioning in the air
Sensory preconditioning
is when two conditioned stimuli are associated before the presentation of the unconditioned stimulus
Ross and Holland
(1981) had two possibilities: a light, a tone, then food; or a tone on its own. The tone elicited the conditioned response when it was preceeded by a light but not when it was on its own. The light may be referred to as an
occasion setter
BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ON CLASSICAL CONDITIONING
Taste eversion defies the contiguity principle in conditioning.
Garcia and Koelling
(1966) showed taste aversion also seems to be associated with tastes better than other stimuli.
Seligman
(197) said this is due to
prepared association
because there is an innate propensity.
Wilcoxon, Dragoin, and Kral
(1971) found that rats were only sensitive to taste after illness while quail were sensitive to color and taste because evolutionary traits
The
equipotentiality premise
states that any stimulus may become a conditioned stimulus
Humans have fears of snakes spiders scorpions etc Is this prepared association?
Dimberg and Ohman
(1996) tested with inconclusive results.
Lett
(1973) showed that learning took place from 60 minutes to 24 hours after being rewarded with food. This was long term associations without taste aversions
Long term taste aversion and short term shock associations show a similar learning curve but at different time intervals
THE FORM OF THE CONDITIONED RESPONSE
Shepard Siegel
(1975) showed that rats tolerance is influenced by their environment.
Compensatory conditioned responses
are those that are designed to counteract an effect. (Decreased salivation after drinking coffee with caffiene)
Rozin, Reff, Mack, and Schull
(1984) tested compensatory conditioned responses. Coffee drinkers reduce salivation because the caffeine makes them salivate. When given decaf, they salivate less but there is no extra salivation from the caffeine to make them normal.
Siegel, HInson, Krank, and McCully
(1982) found that heroin ODs are reported more frequently in novel environments.
Cue exposure treatment
is when addicts are put into situations where they would use their addictive habit, but don't so it is extinguished.
Moon and Lee
(2009) used a virtual environment to stimulate quitting smokers and noticed a decrease in brain activity where cravings were after several services
Siegel and Ramos
(2002) say that the exposure must be novel each time and many sessions must take place to reduce spontaneous recovery
Schull
(1979) proposed the
conditioned opponent theory
which built off of the b-process being classically conditioned. Basically the same environment empowers the b-process
A. R. Wagner
proposed the
sometimes opponent process
which states that sometimes the conditioned response is the opposite and sometimes it will mimic the unconditioned response. You can predict by seeing if the response is
monophasic
(eye puff makes you close eye then open like normal) or
biphasic
(heart shock increases heart rate then dips below normal then is normal) in which case the conditioned response will be the opposite of the unconditioned response
PHYSIOLOGICAL RESEARCH ON CLASSICAL CONDITIONING
Different conditioning phenomena may involve different brain locations
Blocking may occur in the hippocampus but removing the hippocampus does not prevent conditioned inhibition
Different conditioned responses involve different brain locations
Cerebellum damaged subjects learned association to less effect but still did using other parts of brain
Many different brain structures may be involved in the production of a simple conditioned response
PET scans show increased blood flow in many parts of the brain when being condtioned
The neural pathways involved in the conditioned response are often different from those involved in the unconditioned response
With eye blinking, unconditioned response goes straight to the brain stem where the conditioned response goes through the cerebellum
Individual neurons have been found whose activity appears to be related to the acquisition to the conditioned response