Basic Learning Final Exam Study Guide
Aversively motivated learning
Escape: Situations in which subjects learn an instrumental response to escape from or terminate a conditioned response to escape from or terminate a conditioned stimulus that elicits fear.
• Motivating stimuli: An unpleasant stimulus is present, you do something to get rid of it • Example with rat: Shock the floor, stays on until the rat presses the lever. In such a small compartment, rat finally presses the lever and the shocks stop. After a couple trials, when the shock starts, the rat quickly presses the lever.
• Similarities to Appetitive Conditioning: unpleasant stimulus is present, escape response: pressing lever to get rid of shock. The bigger the reward, the bigger the shock, the faster the learning.
• Delayed offset: when reward is delayed for 10 seconds after, learning does not occur or is slow to occur
Avoidance: differs from escape because the subject makes a response that prevents/precludes the unpleasant stimulus We also discuss several other topics like What copies dna in the process of transcription?
• Example: if you have enough money and fly to Florida in September because come November, December there’s going to be snow, you have made an avoidance response. You did not wait for the snow to come. Don't forget about the age old question of What refers to the situation where the consumers shop offline to get a feel of the product then buy the product online at a cheaper price?
• **Example: If a rat made 100 avoidance trials, how many shocks did it get during those trials? Answer: 0. Once it learns the avoidance, it will never get shocked again. • Value: you prevented the stressful event from occurring If you want to learn more check out Pdcaas means what?
• Avoidance response comes from escape response first, after a while you get an anticipatory response. No longer an escape.
• Discriminative avoidance
o Shuttle avoidance: two chambers, no door between them, the rat can go back and forth. Called shuttle avoidance because after the tone comes on, shock comes, it goes from one side to the other. Like a shuttle train going back and forth. Much harder for rats to learn because there’s no one place that’s always safe.
▪ 2 types of tasks for shuttle avoidance: Two-way avoidance, where they go back and forth to avoid shocks and One-way avoidance just moves from If you want to learn more check out What is the difference between highly developed and less developed countries?
one side the other, not back and forth.
▪ Scalding shower example: when the toilet gets flushed, all the cold water goes away so you get burned by the shower water, so you jump out of the water; escape response. You learn that when your roommate flushes the Don't forget about the age old question of What is the meaning of phospholipid monolayers?
toilet, you get out of the water before it burns you.
▪ Anxiety disorder where fear motivates avoidance of cues. Those cues may not be dangerous anymore; PTSD. That noise can trigger fear. Can be very persistent, doesn’t go away.
▪ Stimulus generalization of avoidance: person bitten by a snake comes to fear/avoid the rope.Don't forget about the age old question of Speciation means what?
• Terminology: Pavlovian
o Based on theoretical interpretation
o Brogden’s study
▪ Guinea pigs on a running wheel. Had one group that had a tone followed by a brief shock, which elicited a running response. After tone, they
learned to run before the shock. The other group, partial reinforcement group, tone is followed by shock unless guinea pig ran during the tone. It didn’t get a shock and the tone went off. Partial reinforcement because when tone and shock are paired, they are feared 100%, if you pair them part of the time, it is a partial reinforcement.
▪ When the animal can control the absence of the shock, it became an avoidance. Learn much more quickly. Therefore, it is not strictly
▪ Basic Problem: Absence as reward
• Absence of a shock can be rewarding
▪ Mowrer’s 2-process model to account for avoidance response
• 1. Pavlonian conditioning of fear
o First few trials, the rat has no idea what is coming. Tone
paired with shock. CS(warning signal) + UCS.
• 2. Instrumental fear reduction
o Accidentally run in advance of shock occurring, avoidance
response and tone turns off. When tone turns off, the fear
turns off as well. Source of the reward.
o Escaping from the fear produced by the signal. When they
do that, they get rid of the signal, which gets rid of the fear.
▪ Application to Freud’s theory
• Repression as avoidance
o Unconscious suppression
o Neal Miller: evidence that you can respond to things
without experiencing or knowing it.
o Priming: present brief words on screen to college students,
almost can’t be recognized. A few dirty words added.
Anxiety changes the skin conductors. They measured the
skin conductors, the skin conductors changed when the
dirty words appeared. They were able to recognize
o Evidence for two-process model
1. Importance of CS offset (Kamin’s study)
▪ Delay should impair avoidance learning (delay reinforcement)
▪ Twins reared apart: share the same genetic makeup. Twins were
reared around the corner from each other. Could be genetic or
environment. Weakened the case.
▪ Study with Richard Solomon. If the source of reinforcement is so important and if we delay offset, it should impair learning. The
quicker the termination of the signal, the faster the avoidance
2. Manipulation of Pavlovian Process
▪ Solomon and Turner
o Transfer of control experiment
▪ Phase 1: animals were trained to make avoidance of
light. Light comes on, 5 seconds later shock.
Subjects learn to make avoidance response
▪ Phase 2: Take same subjects, put in same situation,
but they can’t escape. Tone 1: always followed by
brief shock. Tone 2: discrimination learning. Never
followed by shock.
▪ In test phase, does not give shock. Gives either tone
1 or tone 2. They avoid to the tone that had been
paired with shock and not the tone that was not
paired with shock. Transfer of control. They have
learned that when you get fearful, you make
avoidance response. They are not learning the tone
but the light. They add the tone, so they are fearful
of both light and tone. You’ve transferred/extended
control of the avoidance response.
3. Fear as acquired drive
▪ Rats were given Pavlovian fear conditioning to a signal. Tone comes on followed by shock. 2nd phase of this study, no more
shock. Turn on tone, and now there’s a doorway and no more
shocks. If they are afraid of the tone, is it a motivator? Yes, they learn to turn off the tone. Learned fear serves the motivated
response. The removal of the fear serves as a source of
▪ Frustration was an unpleasant stimulus. Tone was paired
repeatedly with no food. Will they do something to turn off tone that is paired with absence of food? Frustration tone serves as
4. Monitoring fear during avoidance
▪ Circularity: They are avoiding because they are afraid, how do we now they’re afraid? Because they are avoiding.
▪ Study: Independent test of fear to break circularity. Train rats to bar press for food. Avoidance training to tone. Takes them out.
Presents tone while bar pressing. If they are afraid, they will
suppress bar pressing, which they did. If they were avoiding, they also suppress bar pressing. There are two processes, activation of fear and response of getting rid of the signal.
o Challenges for two-process view
▪ Sidman’s free operant paradigm
• No trials. Sidman avoidance. Train rats to make avoidance
response without signal. 2 intervals: Every ten second delivers a
brief shock. Subjects needs to learn to make response during the
interval and the response will postpone shock. Shocks are
scheduled. If rats make a response during the interval, it cancels
the next set of scheduled shock. Without making response, shock
come back. If subject keeps responding, it will cancel all future
shocks. Avoidance learning.
• Time is a signal because every ten seconds there is a shock.
• Takes hours to learn where regular avoidance is learned in about
▪ Other avoidance issues
o Species specific defense responses (SSDR’s): if the response the subject makes when it’s frightened is compatible with avoidance response, it will learn quickly and easily. If it’s not compatible, it is difficult to learn.
▪ Ex: rats do not easily learn to make bar press to avoid. Can learn to escape with bar press but not to avoid. 3 behaviors: flea, freeze, fight. Pressing a
lever is not one of those behaviors of fear.
▪ Compatibility of the response that’s required and the outcome.
o Social transmission of fear
▪ Rhesus monkeys: monkeys that came from the wild were all afraid of snakes. Assumption: genetic trait that made them afraid of snakes.
Monkeys reared in the lab were not afraid of snakes. Measure: Put an
empty aquarium in front of monkey. On the other side of aquarium, they
offer treat. Now there is a snake in aquarium, the wild monkeys go crazy, lab monkeys reach out for the treat and ignore the snake. Is fear acquired? Use wild monkey as a model. The lab monkey sees the wild monkey go
wild and they too go wild. Social learning.
Learned Helplessness (prior shock effect): what happens when you remove the relationship of response and outcome
• Does pre-shock facilitate avoidance? The learning of avoidance was impaired rather than facilitated.
o Pre-shocks for seconds: no escape. Stressful shocks impair their learning. o Is it previous shock effect or lack of control? Transfers negatively, they don’t escape or avoid when they have the chance.
▪ Tripartite design (3-part design)
• Group 1: no shocks, disregard. Phase 1: shock comes, one set of
animals (group2) can escape, shock continues until they escape.
Shock comes for group 3: yoked animals, there is nothing they can do to stop the shock, the escaped animal controls when the shock comes on. Phase 2: everybody can escape and avoid. The group that was yoked was not fine, as if they had learned in the first phase, they can’t control the stimulus. Learned to be helpless when they could do something. Negative transfer to 2nd task.
▪ Alternative explanations
• Shock sensitization? No
• Competing motor response
o Test: deliberately highly incompatible, train competing response
▪ No impairment
o Learned some other response that’s not the appropriate one. Gets in the way of 2nd task
o Learned to make escape response by standing facing the wrong way, shuts off shock. After training, the escape and
avoid rather than standing facing the wrong way. They
have learned to control the shock. When one doesn’t work, they try something else.
▪ Immunization: most successful way form of medical treatment • Could we immunize animals so that they’re protected?
• If they learned once in their lifetime that they can do something to prevent unpleasant event, will it carry over?
• 10 escape trials. Now getting inescapable shock because the prior learning protects them and they’re not helpless. Learned to cope. Do not show learned helplessness.
▪ Generality across species
• Studies with humans
o College students in inescapable trial, show learned
helplessness. They do not learn as quickly as they ought to. Despite past experiences. Because situation is different to
what college students would ordinarily experience.
o Health/therapy relate implications
▪ Ulcer formation
• Is development of ulcers because of shock
stress? No, it must be a psychological
• Learned helplessness group developed more
▪ Appetitive analog learned laziness
▪ Learned helplessness in spinal cord (Robin Joynes)
• If spinal cord is severed, there is no regeneration.
• Spinal reflexes (no brain): there is not connection from the brain to
o Noxious stimuli (nociception)
▪ No pain
▪ Something will cause a spinal reaction but is not
pain. They can learn to avoid by keeping leg lifted.
▪ Spinal cord has motor programs that are
independent of the brain. Those paralyzed can do
some walking behaviors. They may be able to walk.
• Applications in humans
o Christopher Reeves (Superman): went horseback riding.
Broke his spinal cord. Quadriplegic: all four limbs were
bad. He died young from the spinal injury.
Avoidance and Extinction
• Not partial reinforcement
• Approaches to therapy
o Dog injury to leg: twisted his left rear leg. Not good for a big dog lead to arthritis. Fix it with surgery. Dog still limping because he learned avoidance response (putting leg down pain), put something unpleasant on the right paw, eventually forces him to use left rear leg. Comes around and starts using it again.
o Flooding (response prevention, blocking): if you prevent avoidance response from occurring, then allowed it to occur again, you can extinguish it quickly. Like response prevention.
▪ Facilitative extinction
• Trained a rat to run down a pathway. No shocks in gold box
(avoidance response), how many avoidance responses will they
make? Couple hundred. Other group introduce blocking (blocking
sidewalks). After you open the door, it reduces the avoidance
o Residual fear and implications
▪ Animals were still afraid although they stopped avoiding
▪ Might generate other inappropriate behaviors
• Definition: delivery of an unpleasant stimulus contingent upon response/behavior. o Suppresses behavior.
o eg, Bruxism: grinding teeth when asleep.
▪ Sensing device in their mouth to determine the pressure of teeth grinding. They got a mild shock when they grinded their teeth and eventually
stopped the grinding.
• Are effects transient?
o Thorndike; Skinner: punishment only has a temporary suppressant.
▪ The punishments that were used were mild. With more severe punishment, the suppression is more permanent.
• Variables that influence
i. Initial high level
a. Harder to suppress
ii. Maintain with weaker level
2. Strength of response to suppress
i. How well learned and how well practiced it is
3. Motivational level
i. Inherently conflict situation
ii. Cocaine (Individual difference): Group 1: rats have little cocaine, group 2: moderate cocaine, group 3: rats are hooked. Punishment for seeking
cocaine. Not very effective to those hooked, they will take the punishment. Any rewarding substance that’s being punished, will resolve in some
animals being suppressed and others not.
4. Schedule of punishment
5. Delay of punishment
6. Gradual introduction of punishment (shock)
i. Ex, Rats were trained to run down alley, group 1: continues to run fast to get to food, group 2: severe punishment suddenly, responding is
suppresses quickly. Group 3: gradually increasing punishment, give them the severe punishment, we don’t see change. They have learned to put up with the punishment. Lost your ability of control with punishment.
ii. Impairs effectiveness
iii. Abused children
a. The parents had started off with mild punishment, behavior slowed down but continued, then were applying sever punishment. They
had lost control by introducing punishment gradually. Parents get
in trouble. Parents were ashamed.
• Interpretation of punishment
o As passive avoidance
▪ There's only one thing that a subject must not do
o Refrain from acts
o Ex: invisible fence
▪ Dog can do whatever it wants except go past the invisible fence
▪ Approach tendency is very high, if there is a rabbit on the other side of the fence, it is tempting. The punishment loses to the approach and they go across. Once they go across, they can’t come back because the fence
doesn’t care which side you’re coming from, the dog will get the shock if they try to come back.
▪ Strategy for birds near swimming pool
• Wires used for fly fishing over a swimming pool. It was a form of
passive avoidance; the bird would smack into the wires and get a
slight shock and learned to stay away from the pool
o Two-process theory
▪ Response linked stimuli elicit fear
• Stimulus is produced by the response itself
• Ex: rat bar pressing for food and being punished for bar pressing.
The act of bar pressing produces feedback. That response linked
stimuli becomes associated with the shock and therefore become
fear of eliciting. Making the response elicit fear. Stopping the
response will reduce fear.
▪ Termination of response gets strengthened because of fear being reduced • Non-suppressive effects of function
o Vicious circle effect: punishing an avoidance response can paradoxically lead to an increase in the avoidance response
▪ Ex: Rate were trained to run down an alley, tone comes on, they learn five seconds later the shock comes on. After ten trials the rats don’t wait for the shock, they avoid it. How can we get the rat to stop avoiding?
• Group punished for avoiding. Makes them avoid even more
o Bed wetting is often related to anxiety. It would be
counterproductive to punish for bed wetting.
o The reason punishment doesn’t work is because it makes
them more afraid.
o Punishment becomes a discriminative cue for a reward
▪ Punishment is arranged where the punishment predicts something good • A rat is punished and then given a shot of cocaine, it undermines
• Suzy like Handle’s ice cream but she never gets to go there unless
she was punished. We are pairing the punishment and reward.
• Discriminative cues for when the punishment will occur
o Rat is bar pressing for food. When tone is on for 30
seconds, bar presses produce food but also produce
punishment. Punishment is strong enough to make the rat
not bar press
o Suzy uses foul language at school. They tell her parents and
she is punished. Suzy stops swearing at home but still
swears at school because she knows that at the school, she
is able to swear without being punished right after. For the
moment, she can get away with it.
• Ethical considerations
1. Power differential
i. Punishment is given by the person in power
ii. Guards over prisoners, parents over children, etc.
iii. It can be abused. Prison situations power is abused. Bodily punishments are no longer used in school because it could turn into abuse.
iv. Sometimes the punisher is getting pleasure from punishing
2. Behavior therapy
i. Autistic children can be self-destructive. When they are self-destructive, you don’t want that to continue. There are three ways to stop it: restrain
them, give them drugs, or punish them. Punishment is more affective, it
will suppress the response.
Animal Cognition: Memory
• Definition: an inference of behavior from performance.
• Theoretical construct (interference) of animal cognition
o Importance of anthropomorphism
▪ Giving animals human traits like being sad, happy, etc.
• Comparing memory to learning
o Memory and learning are not the same thing. They are different processes. o Operational and functional differences
▪ Operational differences are obvious; one is learning, one is remembering ▪ Functional differences: learning and memory does not respond the same way
• Not affected the same way by same variables
• If you try to learn something in massed trials, you can learn it
faster than if the trails are widely spaced. Massed learning is faster
learning, but spaced learning has more retention.
• Retrieval focus
o Types of tests for memory (3R’s)
▪ Recall: identify and describe, vicious circle effect
▪ Recognition: multiple choice, true/false, easier than recall
▪ Relearn: if you have learned something before, now you have forgotten it, you can relearn it faster than when you start from scratch.
• Short term/working memory in humans
o Acquire something and retain it for a brief period of time
o Capacity and duration
▪ Capacity: 7(+-2)
▪ Peterson’s Paradigm
• Present college students with a trigram (3 letters), then asked in
various intervals. To prevent from rehearsing, as soon as trigram
was flashed, they count back out loud to prevent from cheating.
The duration of short-term memory is perceived accurately
because those tested right after word is shown they got it 100%,
when they were tested 30 seconds later, it was harder for them.
▪ Animal research working vs reference memory
• Hunter’s task for working memory
o Delay of response test: trained dog. 3 locations. A light is
on at one location where food is. Turn the light off and wait
5 seconds. Dog has memory up to a minute to remember
where the light was. Dog still pointing that way, not really
memory. Did another experiment and turns it around and
upside down, it can still be successful.
• Delayed matching to sample (DMTS)
o Trained pigeons. 3 disks. The middle is target stimulus.
They have to pick the matching one. Memory: have to
respond best to make sure they’re paying attention. Now
must pick the right one to move on to the next phase.
o In DMTS and schizophrenia
▪ Trace decay
• The longer the sample was present, the stronger the trait. A
stronger trait is presented by longer presentation time
• Vary duration of sample and retention interval (D. Grant)
• Stronger trace? Yes, interference from previous trials
▪ General vs. Specific rules learned
• Test with novel stimuli
o Chimps: matching rule
o Pigeons: “same as” if trials have unique training
▪ Symbolic (conditional) DMTS
• Sample cues different from test stimulus
• Ex: if red, vertical lines are correct, if blue, horizontal lines are correct
• Accuracy not based on fading physical representation (like red to pink)
o Spatial memory in radial (Olton) maze
▪ Behavioral biology
• Foraging in nature (birds and nectar)
• Multiple arms (8) all baited. Game: don’t return to empty arm • Rats: very successful
o Rule out odor trail or algorithms (rules)
o How do they succeed? Cues outside of maze
▪ If using odor cues, successful
▪ If you take them out, spin (rotate) the maze, put
back in, not successful
▪ Format/objective of maze
• Duration of memory?
o Interrupt after half of choices (4 out of 8)
o Return after various intervals
o Morris water maze
▪ Kiddie wading pool with platform (hidden underwater or visible) escape from water (even though good swimmers-lazy)
▪ Objective: find the hidden platform
▪ 2 methods of solving: Different starting points or train from same place (test from different place)
• Importance of cognitive maps
o Extra maze cues
o Possible navigational cues
o Memory mechanisms
▪ Issue of Stimulus coding
• Abstracting of information
▪ Prospective vs Retrospective coding
• 2 ways to know
1. Test strategies by varying memory load
2. “Save room for dessert” effect
o Rehearsal and Retention
▪ Holding info in working memory
• Phone number; auditory rehearsal
▪ Directed forgetting in humans and pigeons
• Bjork studies
o F-cue: “Forget cue” after items
▪ Discriminate signal for no test
o Long term memory
▪ Capacity and duration
• Unlimited capacity, indefinite duration
▪ Methodological issues in studying
• Equal levels of learning
o Famous flawed study fast vs slow learners
• Recovery of memory
o Not due to new learning
o Sources of forgetting (2 main)
▪ Meaning of forget: does not imply lost from storage, often retrieval failure ▪ Interference (2 types)
• Proactive (earlier memories)
o You first learn material B then material A, you will
remember material A because nothing is learned after
o Same parking lot, different parking spots, after 20, 30 times
you don’t remember where you parked
o Underwood study
▪ Used students
▪ Tasks: how many prior things students learned
▪ The more students learned recently, the poorer
▪ 15% recall
• Retroactive (later, after target memories)
o Competing memories = interference
o Learned material A then something else then learn material B
o Paired associate learning
▪ Ex: cup-hat, dog-book. Then cup-tree, dog-clock
▪ What was learned first? Recall good, recognition
▪ Ex: stimulus: face. Response: name
o Overcome interference: overlearning the material
▪ Context change (background)
• Change of those background cues can impair the recall or retention of the task
• Shift removes retrieval cues
o Retrieval cues are less important if answers are in front of you
• Scuba diving study
o Expert divers learned words then tested. How do they
learn? Wet vs Dry. Those that have context change, they
didn’t do so well. If context matched, they were fine.
• Classroom as context (Smith)
o Familiarized the people in the class, change of context
doesn’t really matter
o Better on recall in same classroom
• Crib liners for infants (Rovee-Collier)
o Leg kicking; crib liner (context)
o Context switch is not due to performance, it impaired the memory
• Avoidance tasks with rats
o change context, poor recall
• Cognitive interview
o Reinstate context in which a person witnessed an important event
o Ex: witnessed a liquor store hold up, then interviewed by police. To try to enhance memory, how were you feeling?
What was the weather like? All context cues allow for
context reinstatement for witness.
o Retrieval processes
▪ Priming and Reactivation experiments
• Various reminder cues lead to memory recovery
o Ex: CS alone, UCS alone, or just context
• Implicates retrieval (not storage loss)
o Ex: Pilot and emergency materials
▪ You want them to study and know the emergency
material as much as possible
o Memory dysfunctions
▪ Anterograde amnesia
• Forgetting events after trauma to brain
• Failure to establish new memory
▪ Retrograde amnesia (and role of retrieval processes)
• Forgetting of events prior to CNS trauma
• Time-dependent (“window” of vulnerability)
▪ Lab studies
• Rats-retrograde amnesia
o Electroconvulsive shock
o If shock is immediate, immediate amnesia and vice versa
• McGaugh Consolidation model
o Consolidation interrupted by agent
o Hebb’s book: neural activities that continues (like a Gong)
▪ Reverberating circuits idea
▪ Something destructive = memory doesn’t get
established (cement dry)
▪ Alternative view: retrieval impairment
• Spontaneous recovery? No
• Some evidence in humans, problematic
• Ex: mugged, lost consciousness, had retrograde amnesia. As time went by, his memory started to come back slowly. Old memory is relearned by their friends telling them about the things that
▪ State dependency
• Amnesia state is like the drug state after training
• If memory becomes linked with internal link, we have a switched state. Delayed onset. Internal link last for hours and in time
retrieve the memory
▪ KSU study
• Compare RA for new vs old reactivated memory
• Various characteristics
▪ Rutger’s study
• Exception to gradient
• RA for old reactivated memory
o Cue exposure to reactivate
▪ NYU study (Neuroscience)
• Referred to as reconsolidation
• Highly specific brain are to induce RA
▪ Current issues/therapies
• Molecular level – similarities and differences
o Infantile amnesia
▪ Freud observations
• People could not remember at 3 years of age
▪ Animal research
• Basic memory issue, even in rats
• Train rats on fear test before and after weening, then test
• Fear memory forgotten in young animals, thus, basic
▪ Human research
• Difficulties: actual memories or learned?
• Strategy: birth of sibling. 5 years old, they remember. 2 or 3 years old, they don’t remember
• Paradox: long term effects of early experience but rapid memory loss?
• Reconcile? One likely mechanism: reinstatement
o Periodic but abridges re-exposures, if they were getting
1,000 shocks. 1 shock later will help with re-exposure
▪ New developments
• Richardson lab
o Distinction differs in infant rats
o No recovery
• Effects of early stress
o More rapid maturation of HPA axis
o More adult like
▪ Better retention
▪ Recoveries from extinction
o Memory distortions (false memories): memories are not like a video ▪ Piaget’s false memory from childhood
• He believed that the nanny was robbed when she took his out for a stroll. He learned that his memory was false. The nanny was
actually the one stealing from them and she told him the false story and he believed it was a memory.
▪ Bartlett’s “War of ghosts” study
• “schema to recall – inferential process from schema
o Died at sunset rather than sunrise, but since sunrise is
viewed as a better story, they made a mistake of changing
the memory without noticing
▪ Memory made consistent with culture
▪ Memory is like a schema
▪ Loftus Misinformation effects
• Car crash
o 2 groups of college students look at a picture of a car crash
for a moment
o Group 1: “How fast do you think they were going before
o Group 2: “How fast do you think they were going when
o Test: “Was there glass on the ground?”
▪ They said yes because of presuming there would be
after a crash but there was no glass on the ground
▪ Legal implications
• Eyewitness testimony = “Best” memory
o Not very reliable
o False conviction of rape
▪ White lady was certain it was the black man that
raped her, but another black man pled guilty to
raping her years later
▪ Other issues
• 1. Juries impressed by confidence of witness
o But no relationship between degree of confidence and
• 2. Repressed memories: Real or False?
o Girls says she remembers her uncle used to molest her. She
repressed the memory and something made it come back
▪ Clinicians can produce memory when trying to find
out the truth
▪ Can MRI real true memories from false ones? No.
Cache memory (hiding something)
• Squirrels finding acorns
o Lab study: they remember where they hide their own acorns
• Shettleworth study with birds that cache
o 100 holes, and 10 seeds. The birds do find where they hide their seeds accurately o Alternative explanation: they have preferences, like to go left.
o Rule out: double hoarding experiment
▪ The birds get 10 more seeds and since they already have seeds to the far left, they have to go a different direction. Preference is ruled out
• Clayton’s Scrub Jay study
o Importance of timing and memory
▪ Can remember where they hid, what they hid, and when they hid it
▪ Jays prefer worms over pine nuts
▪ After a while worms deteriorate, so pine nuts were preferred after a long period of time
Serial Pattern Learning (Sequences; language, phone number, music)
• Dr. Fountain’s work (New learning in rats)
o Ex: Learning monotonic (same direction) vs Non-monotonic (different direction) ▪ Decreasing reward size in memory
▪ Learning: run slowly on the last trial
• Monotonic vs Non-monotonic series
o Importance of patterns and rules
▪ Monotonic learns faster
• Easier to learn sequence in orderly change (14-7-5-3-1-0)
• Octagonal chamber (8 levels)
▪ Pauses between each set of 3
▪ Response patterns: 123-234-345....
▪ Rats can learn the order of the chunk
o Drug effects
▪ Rule learning in rats leads to tests sensitive to drug effects (acute or long term)
▪ There are signs of impairment when you take drugs away from adolescent rats
▪ “Behavioral Teratology”
• Severe formations
• Behavioral impairments
• Transitive interference
o Logic (A>B,B>C, so A>C)
o Sports (no transitivity) Team A beats Team B, Team B beats Team C, but you can’t say that Team A beats Team C
o Lab studies: apes and rhesus monkeys can do transitive inference
• Perceptual concept learning
o Requires generalization and discrimination
▪ Discriminate categories: cats vs dogs
▪ Discriminate within categories: Cat A is not Cat B
o Concept of tree in pigeons (Hernstein’s study)
▪ Picture of trees, pigeon pecks the key and gets a reward
▪ Memorized? No. It is the concept of a tree
▪ Same study but with pictures of fish. Pigeons are still accurate with
pecking when they see a fish.
Timing in animals
• Duration estimation
o Variation of conditional delayed matching to sample o Cue: duration the light is on the key
▪ If short cue (5 sec): red
▪ If long cue (10 sec): green
▪ After many trials, they can learn to discriminate
• Peak procedure
o Variant of F1 schedule
o Reinforcement omitted to see when responding “peaks” o Distribution of responses (see slide)
▪ The longer the time, the less responses per second