ch04 - Classical Conditioning: Mechanisms and Theory...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–17. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Classical Conditioning: Mechanisms and Theory
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Eyeblink Class Study 60 conditioning trials (blocks of 20) 7 blocks of 4 probe trials C1, P1, C2, P2, C3, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7 Acquisition, extinction
Background image of page 2
Results: Individual 100 75 50 25 1 3 2 5 4 6 7 % CR in Block Blocks (of 4 probe trials)
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Results: Averaged 100 75 50 25 1 3 2 5 4 6 7 % CR in Block Blocks (of 4 probe trials)
Background image of page 4
Unconditional/Conditional US: elicits response without training Cs: elicits response due to training (association) Not quite so clear-cut
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Consider Aversive conditioning: tone (CS), mild shock (US) Pavlov: mild shock(CS), food (US) Sign tracking: light (CS), saccharin (US) Taste aversion: flavour of saccharin (CS), illness (US)
Background image of page 6
Novelty Prior associations Familiar vs. unfamiliar stimuli Not “unlearning” of familiar stimuli, per se Basically, need to learn something different
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Latent Inhibition/CS Preexposure Highly familiar stimuli more difficult to associate with US than novel stimuli Preexposure group Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Exp. gr. “CS” alone CS-US test Cont. gr. nothing CS-US test Exp. Cont. CR magnitude
Background image of page 8
Latent Inhibition Habituation function Typically we think of habituating to a US; ambiguity in CS/US designation Attentional processes CS- could also explain, but doesn’t suppress responding to other CS+
Background image of page 9

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
US Preexposure Subjects exposed to US before CS-US pairings slower to produce CR Associative interference (Hall 2008) Association of contextual CS with US during US preexposure In essence, need to extinguish context CS to associate novel CS with US Could this be habituation of US, too? Test methodology?
Background image of page 10
Stimulus salience Stimulus novelty Conditioned suppression
Background image of page 11

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Method Stimuli CS: tone, light US: shock Stage 1: pair CS with US; suppression ratio Stage 2: pair second CS (novel or familiar) with US; suppression ratio Stage 3: extinction of second CS
Background image of page 12
Results T-T L-T L-L T-L 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Suppression Ratio 2 4 6 8 10 Day 1 2 3 1 2 Stage 2: 2nd stim. Stage 3: 2nd stim. extinction Tone Light Familiar Novel Familiars (T-T & L-L) show less suppression than novels (L-T & T-L): preexposure
Background image of page 13

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Salience and Intensity Salience: significance, noticeability, detectability Salience and intensity often used synonymously Low to moderate levels, probably interchangable Consider high level stimulus Physiological damage Not salient, but definitely intense Better to treat intensity as a component of salience
Background image of page 14
Salience Increase via: Intensity Relevance Physiological needs Similarity of environmental stimuli (e.g., naturalistic CS”)
Background image of page 15

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Belongingness: Stimuli Relevance Equipotentiality principle Pavlov Any stimulus should, relatively, be equally conditionable with any other stimulus E.g., CS1 easily associated with US1, should also
Background image of page 16
Image of page 17
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 58

ch04 - Classical Conditioning: Mechanisms and Theory...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 17. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online