Exam 2 Study Guide
Exam 2 Study Guide Psyc 4450
Popular in Learning
Popular in Psychlogy
verified elite notetaker
This 13 page Study Guide was uploaded by Elizabeth Heitmann on Friday March 4, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to Psyc 4450 at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute taught by Christopher L. Hubbell in Winter 2016. Since its upload, it has received 38 views. For similar materials see Learning in Psychlogy at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Reviews for Exam 2 Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 03/04/16
Exam 2 study Guide Classical Conditioning Introduction: I. Pavlov’s Discoveries a. Extinction i. Didn’t believe connections just disappeared 1. After 24 hours of rest, response would recover at a slightly lower magnitude ii. The concept of inhibition 1. During extinction phase, inhibitory connections form 2. Once they equal excitatory connections, no reaction will occur 3. Time causes inhibitory connections to breakspontaneous recovery 4. Conditioned inhibition: the tendency of a stimulus to block or inhibit responding as a result of previous training b. Counterconditioning i. Changing the CR that the CS produces by changing the pairing of CS-US Example: CS-shock(US) until CSjump or escape(CR) Next CS-food (US) until CSsalivation (CR) c. Stimulus control i. Generalization CS TONE– US until CSTONE CR ii. Discrimination 1. Discrimination training 1000 Hz-food 900 Hz – no food II. The Need for Control Groups a. An example: conditioning fear i. Little Albert 1. Conditioned fear of the white rat transferred to other white furry things 2. Said to be generalized fear 3. Other explanations that could be discounted with control groups a. Sensitization: an increase in response to CS is caused by the mere exposure to the CS i. Need a white rat (CS) only group b. Pseudoconditioning: exposure to intense US produced an increase in response to the CS i. Need iron rod (US) only group c. Interaction effects: combined stimulus creates fear i. Need an unpaired CS,US control group III. The Generality of Conditioning a. Autonomic Conditioning i. Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) ii. Blood Glucose Levels (BGL) 1. Inject rat with insulin a. Produces an decrease in BGL which causes the body to release more glucose into the blood stream 2. Repeat several times 3. Next inject with saline a. Injection causes an increase in BGL In this case: CS: cues associated with being injected US: Drug effects of insulin CR: increases in blood glucose levels iii. Pain Sensitivity iv. Nausea v. Immune system 1. Cyclosporine: suppresses immune system by decreasing antibody production 2. Rabbits a. Pair the opportunity to drink saccharin solution with a cyclosporine injection CS: saccharin taste US: decrease in antibody production CR: the body increases antibody production b. Inject rabbit with sheep red blood cells, which will increase the production of antibodies c. Allow the rabbit to drink saccharin d. Bigger immune response because of conditioning b. Skeletal Conditioning i. Sign tracking 1. Animal uses some kind of signal to associate the appearance of food 2. AutoShaping a. A type of sign tracking where the response to the CS is desired i. Training pigeons to make an operant response 1. Light up a key then present food 2. Pigeon starts to peck a the key which is the desired response that can be repeated c. Conditioned Motivation i. Hunger ii. Fear 1. Estes and Skinner a. Conditioned emotional response (CER) i. Based on observation that rats freeze in fear ii. CER-test 1. Teach rats to bar press for food 2. Pair CS-shock several times 3. Present CS when the rats are bar pressing 4. Record bar presses before CS and during CS in equivalent time units (eg 10sec) 5. Calculate the suppression ration SR=b/(a+b) Where a = # bp before CS b = # bp during CS When SR = .5 ne fear When SR = 0 terrified iii. Sexual Arousal iv. Expectations 1. During neuro training, conditioned expectations form just like conditioned responses Phase I: Conditioning with CS 1 Group 1: CS 1food Group 2: CS 2sucrose Phase II: Discrimination Training with CS and CS 2 3 Group 1 and Group 2 are treated exactly the same When CS i2 present: Right leverfood Left levernothing When Cs i3 present: Right levernothing Left leversucrose Phase III: Test with CS 1n the discrimination task Group 1 presses on the right lever because that lever gives food Group 2 presses on the left lever because that lever gives sucrose Classical Conditioning: The Details I. The Laws of Association a. Contiguity i. When 2 events occur together in time and space, an association will occur between them ii. The CS-US Sequence 1. Delay is the best iii. The Cs-US interval 1. The shorter the interval, especially in trace conditioning, the better the conditioning 2. Better conditioning if CS-US occurs in the same place b. Frequency c. Intensity II. Contingency a. The Concept of Contingency i. Robert Rescorla 1. Suggested that contiguity was not sufficient for association to form 2. Occurrence of US must be contingent on the occurrence of the CS 3. Statistic derived from 2 probabilities a. Probability that the US occurs with the CS (p(US/CS)) b. Probability that the US occurs without the CS (p(US/noCS)) b. Contingency and Conditioning i. Positive Contingency: P(US/CS) > P(US/noCS) 1. Rescorla 1968 a. Random Group: rats get tone(CS) and shock (US) randomly; sometimes together, sometimes apart b. Contingency Group: rat get tone(CS) at the same time as the random group, but they only get the shocks(US) that occur with the tones c. If contingency doesn’t matter, conditioning in both groups should be the same d. If contingency matters, conditioning in the random group won’t be as strong i. During a CER test, the random group continues to respond, but the contingency group does not, suggesting that contingency does matter e. Varied p(US/noCS) from 0.0 to 0.4 while p(US/CS) stayed at 0.4 ii. Negative Contingency: P(US/CS) < P(US/noCS) 1. CS predicts a period of safety from the shocks(US), because the shocks occur more frequently without the tone(CS) iii. Zero Contingency: P(US/CS) = P(US/CS) iv. Rescorla 1966 1. 3 Groups: a. Zero contingency group: 24 shocks and tones randomly b. Positive contingency group: 24 tones at the same time as zero group, but shocks only when they occurred with the tones in zero group c. Negative contingency group: 24 tones at the same time as the zero group, but shocks only when they did not occur with tones in zero group 2. Sidman Avoidance Task a. Jump over barrier every 10 seconds to avoid a shock b. Positive group jumped faster due to fear c. Negative group stopped jumping because they learned that the CS predicts safety d. Zero group jumped at a constant rate because they weren’t afraid v. The Contingency Space v. The Random Control 1. Learn that there is no relationship between CS and US III. Preparedness a. Until 1960’s, thought any stimulus could be used as a CS and produce a US b. Garcia and Koelling i. Taste Aversion Learning 1. Based on the observation that rats are bait shy a. Cautious about food that is new b. Will eat food from a place where they got sick before 2. Hypothesized that rats associated that nausea with the taste not the place a. If nausea was associated with the place they would not return to that place to eat 3. Rats drank flavored water that would make a flash and a noisy when they drank a. Bright-noisy-flavored water 4. ½ that rats were exposed to x-rays while drinking a. Causes nausea 5. Other ½ were exposed to a shock while drinking a. Causes fear 6. Test a. Rats got 2 choices: i. Bottle of bright-noisy water ii. Bottle of flavored water b. Should avoid both types of water due to conditioning c. Sickness was associated with gustatory cues not environmental cues d. Fear was associated with environmental cues not gustatory cues ii. Preparedness: the ability to associate some CS/US combinations more easily than others CS internalSinternal CS externalS external CS - US no CR internal external CS externalS internal CR iii. Laws od Association 1. Contiguity 2. Frequency 3. Intensity 4. Contingency 5. Preparedness c. Implications of Taste Aversion Learning i. CTA: conditioned taste aversion ii. The role of contiguity in associative learning 1. Preparedness showed that contiguity is not sufficient or necessary 2. Taste aversion is the one exception to trace conditioning iii. The role of paradigms 1. Paradigm: a way of thinking that has held up to scrutiny over time 2. CTA didn’t fit the paradigm of associative learning, so it was rejected initially d. The adaptive value of conditioning i. The value of conditioning 1. Helps organisms predict important events ii. The value of preparedness 1. Prepares organism to make certain associations, like taste and sickness IV. Blocking a. The Phenomenon of Blocking i. Leo Kamin 1. Take a compound CS (light and sound) and pair it with a foot shock 2. What happens when the sound is first paired with the shock? 3. Blocking procedure Experimental Control 1. Noise-shock ------------------------------- --- 2. Noise&light-shock 1. Noise&light-shock 3. Lightno fear in CER test2. Lightfear in CER test a. Light does not cause fear in experimental group because the noise is associated with the shock in the rats memory b. Kamin’s memory scan hypothesis i. When an organism encounters a US, it searches its memory for cues to determine a reaction 1. Rats being afraid of a CS because it triggers a shock V. Applications a. Systematic Desensitization i. Process used to treat phobias ii. Train person in a relaxation technique iii. Make a hierarchy of things related to the phobia that cause some level of anxiety iv. Work through the hierarchy starting from the lowest priority and present it to the person while they use the relaxation technique b. Aversion Therapy i. Harness fear to make a person avoid an activity ii. Used medication to make an alcoholic nauseous when they drank alcohol c. Behavior therapy i. Enuresis 1. Child wears a moisture detector when sleeping 2. Buzzes when moisture detected to wake child up 3. Eventually child associates buzzer with full bladder cues and wakes up on their own Classical Conditioning: Theoretical Considerations I. The Rescorla-Wagner Model a. Learning and the Role of Expectations i. If a US is unexpected , learning occurs ii. The more unexpected(surprising) the US, the more learning occurs b. The Learning Curve i. As repeated pairings occur, strength increases c. Quantifying surprise i. The difference between V max and V measures surprise d. Parameters: i. V: associative strength ii. Vmax: maximum amount of associative strength that the US can support iii. ΔVn: the change in associative strength on trial n iv. C: learning rate parameters ΔV =nC(V max– V) II. The Rescorla Wagner Model: Deriving Principles a. When using the model i. Note the Vmax and C ii. Keep track of which CS is present in each trial iii. Do the math correctly III. Evaluating the Rescorla-Wagner Model a. New Predictions: over-expectation i. Lose associative strength because subject expects more than given when presented with both stimuli b. Implications for Contingency i. Showed why learning does not occur in the zero contingency group c. Model’s Limitations i. Configural learning 1. When responding to a compound stimulus is different than responding to each individual element 2. Prediction: when stimuli are compound, the subjects will lose associative strength 3. What happens is the subjects form a new response to the compound stimulus that is not related to the original responses ii. Latent Inhibition 1. Pre-exposed to the CS 2. The model can’t account for it because Vmax = 0 when only the CS is present, so no learning should take place, but something is learned IV. What is learned through conditioning a. SS or SR? i. Pavlov 1. CS—USresponse a. SS learning ii. Hull 1. CSresponse and USresponse a. SR learning b. Signal or Substitute? i. Stimulus Substitution 1. Pigeons peck at the key differently based on what type of US is produced a. Foodeyes closed and beak opened b. Watereyes open and beak closed ii. Expectation (signal) 1. When Pavlov did not have the dog chained, when the CS was on, the dog would go to the food bowl and lick it because it expected food V. Performance a. Whatever an animal learns gets turned into performance b. Predicting the CR i. Autonomic responses 1. The CR is approximately the UR ii. Skeletal responses 1. Sometimes the CR and UR appear different a. Tone-shockUR = jumping b. Tone-shockCR = freezing c. Behavior Systems Analysis i. Rats have a defensive system so they can choose responses in danger ii. If the CS if shock and the rat can do something to avoid it, the rat will perform the expected response of running or jumping iii. If the rat has nowhere to go, it will freeze instead VI. Is Conditioning Automatic? a. Conditioning without awareness i. Most animals only have a primitive association system; humans have both but the cognitive system is stronger, so they are conditioned faster ii. Eye blink conditioning 1. Rabbits a. Tone-puff of air b. Blink at tone before puff c. Takes many trials to extinguish this response 2. Humans a. Only takes a few trials to extinguish due to cognitive system b. Spence, Homzie and Rutledge 1964 i. Got rid of cognitive system using a distraction task ii. Eye blink conditioning iii. Took longer to extinguish response because cognitive system is occupied iii. Spinal conditioning iv. Advertising b. Involuntary Conditioning i. Taste aversions will persist even if the person knows the sickness wasn’t caused by the food or the sickness from the food only happened once
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'