Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Pavlov (1927) - Classical Conditioning (LEARNING) - Coggle Diagram
Pavlov (1927) - Classical Conditioning (LEARNING)
Procedure
Pavlov limited the direct contact that the dogs had with the experimenter by studying them in a soundproof laboratory to prevent extraneous variables, such as noise, from impacting the results. The dog's mouth was linked to a tube that drained saliva and a measuring device counted the number of drops of saliva produced. First, Pavlov would establish a baseline measure of salivation in response to an NS like a metronome or buzzer. Then, he paired the NS with the UCS of food around 20 times. He demonstrated forward and backward conditioning and tested stimulus generalisation, extinction and spontaneous recovery. This was all seen through an observation screen.
Aim
Later, to investigate the role of conditioned reflexes in the eating behaviour of dogs and how salivation is produced as a result of two unrelated stimuli being associated.
Initially, to investigate the digestive processes of dogs in relation to their brain functioning, linked to their salivation roles.
Conclusions
Experimental stimuli that previously had no relation to a reflex action, through repeated pairings, could trigger a salivation reflex and through learning by association the CS (metronome ticking) could produce a CR (salivation).
Evaluation
✓ Reliability - Pavlov conducted a series of experiments over 25 years with different dog breeds and different NS. All of these used a standardised procedure and he continually found that CS would produce CR using an NS. Other researchers also measured the saliva produced, giving the research inter-rater reliability.
✓ Application - This research has useful applications in the real world, for instance in alcoholism and phobia treatments. Systematic desensitisation can be used by pairing a phobia with a coping mechanism for example. Therefore, it demonstrates that by using the principles of classical conditioning, as suggested by Pavlov, treatments can be developed .
✓ Objectivity - The results from Pavlov's series of experiments were objective and empirical. For example, 9 seconds after the metronome sounded, salivation began and by 45 seconds, 11 drops of saliva had been produced. Pavloc isolated the dogs to control the risk of extraneous variables impacting the conditioning process. He found any stimuli would produce a CR so he had to control all the stimuli except the one being studied. This made his research scientific.
✗ Validity - Pavlov's study had low ecological validity as it took place in an artificial laboratory setting. The dogs were isolated in soundproof conditions and observed via a screen, which is untypical of their normal environments. The process of being presented with odd stimuli was unusual, so potentially their reactions may have been unrepreseantative of their typical behaviour due to the unfamiliar circumstances.
✗ Ethics - Pavlov's study could be considered unethical, even if the scientific benefit outweighs this. Dogs are social animals and to be kept under isolated and harnessed conditions may have caused unnecessary distress to them. Furthermore, they had a salivation tube surgically inserted which may have caused further harm and permanent damage. Therefore, Pavlov's study doesn't correlate with modern ethical guidelines to protect animals under reserach conditions.
✗ Generalisability - Using ideas of evolution and extrapolation of animal reflex behaviours to humans, Pavlov believed he could generalise his findings. However, it's difficult to generalise as humans and dogs have structurally different brains that may respond differently (humans have a larger cerebral cortex with more cognitive capacity and more neuronal connections). Therefore, we can't generalise classical conditioning in animals to human reflexes.
Results
After classical conditioning, in one trial Pavlov recorded that salivation commenced 9 seconds after the metronome sound and by 45 seconds, the dog had produced 11 drops of saliva.
No response was found to the NS or CS in backwards conditioning (presenting the NS after the UCS). 5-10 seconds after the food (UCS) was presented and the buzzer was sounded, salivation wasn't achieved.
Forward conditioning - presenting the NS before the UCS (metronome before food)
Backward conditioning - presenting the NS after the UCS (metronome after food)
Before conditioning:
UCS (food) → UCR (salivation)
NS (metronome) → no conditioned response
During conditioning:
UCS (food) + NS (metronome) → UCR (salivation)
After conditioning:
CS (metronome) → CR (salivation)