35101007

35101007 - 9/11/08 Learning and Behavior Psychology 351...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 9/11/08 Learning and Behavior Psychology 351 Thomas G. Brown, Ph.D. Last Class   Classical   Paradigm   Specification   Pseudoconditioning   Asynchronisms conditioning The Dog 1 9/11/08 Stimulus Asynchronism UCS CS CS CS CS CS Forward Trace Delayed Simultaneous Backward Other Basic Phenomenon   Temporal Conditioning UCS –  Every x seconds –  What is the CS? Contemporary Research   Sign   Fear Tracking - Autoshaping Conditioning - CER   Eyeblink Conditioning   Taste Aversion Learning 2 9/11/08 Factors in Conditioning   Number   CS of Trials Intensity   UCS Intensity   CS-UCS Interval (asynchronism)   UCS Duration   Instructions   Test Trials Factors in Conditioning   Number   CS of Trials Intensity   UCS Intensity   CS-UCS Interval   UCS Duration   Instructions   Test Trials Control Procedures   Easy   How to exclude voluntary responses to exclude pseudoconditioned responses   Provide the control group with essentially the same conditions as those given the experimental group except the most important feature   CS-UCS pairing 3 9/11/08 Control Procedures   Present   Present the CS alone the UCS alone   Present both CS and UCS but randomized and not paired   Present both CS and UCS but in backward conditioning format   Present both CS and UCS but in simultaneous conditioning format Inhibition   Extinction   CS and Spontaneous Recovery without UCS - Pavlov (1929) Drops Trials Theory - Active Inhibition   Inhibitions builds up and cancels out Units of Excitation Units of Excitation excitation Post-conditioning Units of Excitation Post-exctinction Units of Inhibition Units of Inhibition Post-conditioning Post-exctinction 4 9/11/08 Conditioned Inhibition   How to measure inhibitory properties of CS Recovery   Summation   Spontaneous –  CS paired with UCS: CS+ –  CS paired with no UCS: CS–  Present CS+ and CS- at same time   Retarded Acquisition –  Establish as CS- first then make it a CS+ Lubow (1965)   Goats   Patch and sheep of light as CS   No UCS (shock) for 0, 20, or 40 trials, then UCS 80 0 20 Percent of Trials With a CR 0 1 2 3 Sessions 4 40 Inhibition of Delay   Kimmel (1965) –  CS: 7.5 second red light –  UCS: shock –  UCR/CR: GSR –  50 trials 4.2 Latency 2.5 Trials 5 9/11/08 Disinhibition   Novel tone shortens latency 4.2 Latency 2.5 Trials Stimulus Generalization   Trained on 2000 Hz –  Tested on other frequencies Experimental Neurosis CS+ CS- 6 9/11/08 Special Cases   Sensory preconditioning conditioning   Interoceptive conditioning   Acquired Taste Aversion   Autoshaping   Conditioned Suppression   Semantic –  Conditioned Facilitation Sensory Preconditioning   Two neutral stimuli are paired –  One is used as a standard CS –  Then, other is substituted   Coppock (1958)   PC Group: 10 pairings of tone/light   Control Group: 10 presentations of tone and light but unpaired   IPC Group: 10 pairings of light/tone Sensory Preconditioning PC Group Tone Light 2 seconds Tone Control Group Light 3 seconds 2 seconds Light IPC Group Tone 2 seconds 3 seconds 3 seconds 7 9/11/08 Sensory Preconditioning   PC Group: 10 pairings of tone/light Group: 10 presentations of tone and light but unpaired   IPC Group: 10 pairings of light/tone   Then, light paired with shock   Control –  GSR as UCR/CR –  Present tone 5 times   PC Group: substantial GSR change to tone (CR)   Control and IPC: no CR Sensory Preconditioning   Demonstrates minimal conditions necessary for learning to occur   Question may have existed since Aristotle Tone Light 2 seconds Shock 3 seconds 8 ...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online