Classical Conditioning
Pavlov

Origins (early 20th Century)

A behaviourist approach

Pavlov = physiologist, working on the salivary reflex in dogs.

He measured the amount of saliva secreted by dogs

He noticed that dogs rate of salivation increased when they saw the assistant coming even when they couldn't see it (dogs normally only salivate at sight, smell or taste)

He wondered whether dogs associated food with the bucket and whether it could be retrained with a bell

Method:

Each time the dog received food, a bell was rung for several seconds after - saliva that was secreted was measured

After several trials he sounded the bell without food

Findings:

When the bell was rung without food after several trials, the dog still salivated at the same rate

The dog had been classically conditioned to salivate to the sound of the bell - the dog associated the sound with food

Scientific names to the key parts of his theory:

Unconditioned Stimulus:

Unconditioned Response:

Neutral Stimulus:

Conditioned Stimulus:

Conditioned Response:

Natural/automatic response carried out without learning

Unlearned response that occurs naturally in reaction to the stimulus

Initially produces no specific response other than focusing attention

Triggers the same response as it is associated with something else

An automatic response established by training to a stimulus

Diagram:

UCS > UCR > NS > NS+UCS > CS > CR

Other Features:

CC in Humans:

Extinction

Spontaneous Recovery

Generalisation

If a stimulus is similar to the CS, the association will still be made

Re-emergence of a previously extinguished CR after a delay

If CS is repeatedly used without UCS the CR will slowly disappear

click to edit

Evaluation:

S - Evidence that CC can change behaviour (Pavlov)

W - Study was conducted on animals, this research does not prove that humans would also change behaviour after CC

S - Little Albert is an example of CC working

W - Little Albert is only one example and it is on a child

S - Experiment done in a lab so there is scientific credibility