Learning And Behavior Final

Front 1

a concept used in Gestalt Psychology that refers to the human mind's tendency to consider an object in its entirety before it perceives the object as the sum of individual parts. A simple example of this is when a person is trying to buy a car. They first identify that it is a "car." Then they note the color, make and model. After this, if interested, the person will start to note the details; condition of the body, number of cylinders, engine condition, trim, etc.

Back 1

Reification

Front 2

One of two ways reification can occur in psychology is known as a fallacy in concrete thinking. This occurs whenan abstract belief or concept is treated as if it was tangible or real. The fallacy is the process of assigning a psychological property to an object as if it had its own capabilities. An example of this would be the phrase, 'You can't fool mother nature,' which would personify nature as a real person.

Back 2

.

Front 3

who was not convinced that animals learned by observing other animals

Back 3

Thorndike

Front 4

who stated "nothing in my experience with these animals favors the hypothesis that they have any general ability to learn to do things from seeing others do them."

Back 4

Thorndike. Placed one cat, the model in a puzzle box. Placed 2nd cat, the Observer in adjacent cage. Results: no difference between the observing and non-observing cats.

Front 5

in the 1930s Carl Warden and colleagues demonstrated that_______ do learn by observing conspecifics.

Back 5

monkeys

Front 6

in the 1960s Albert Bandura and colleagues demonstrated that _______ learn by observing.

used modeling to treat behavior disorders.

Back 6

Humans.

Front 7

A change in behavior due to the experience of observing a model.

Back 7

Observational (or vicarious) learning definition

Front 8

an observer looks on as a model's behavior produces reinforcement.

Back 8

Vicarious reinforcement.

Front 9

An the observer looks on as a model's behavior is punished.

Back 9

Vicarious punishment.

Front 10

Warden and Jackson 1935: 2 compartments with identical problems to solve in each. Problem: pulling chain opened door and ask us to raisin. Model monkey: free, and previously shaped, to solve the problem

Back 10

observer monkey: restrained and naïve–Observer watched 5 trials of model.- Then give an opportunity to solve problem within 60 seconds. Results: 47% of all solutions occurred within 10 seconds, and 75% solved within 30 seconds. Observers solve problems faster than non-observing monkeys

Front 11

Herbert in Harsh 1944:

Back 11

4 naïve observer cats.

One model.

30 or 15 observation trials.

Results: observers outperformed the models. 30–trial observers outperformed 15–trial observers.

Front 12

Presley and Riopelle 1959: observational avoidance learning with monkeys.

Back 12

Model–placed in shuttle box; a light proceed electric shock by 4 seconds; target behavior: escape/avoid shock by jumping hurdles.

Observer–watched until model had 28 successful avoidance trials. Then placed in shuttle box.

Results: observer reached criterion in fewer trials than model did.

Front 13

Bandura and McDonald 1963. Children listen to stories and judge behavior of protagonists.

Back 13

Story 1: John breaks 15 cups while listening to his mother's call to dinner.

Story 2: Henry breaks 1 cup while stealing a cookie.

Pretest phase:–children made differential judgments of protagonist behavior on subjective or objective basis.

Exp. phase: teach subjective children to use objective approach via observational learning.

Results: observation facilitates learning

Front 14

Rosekrans & Hartup 1967: demonstrated differential effects of reinforcement and punishment of a model's behavior.

Back 14

Nursery school children observed model plane with toys.

condition 1; aggressive acts by model were reinforced ( i.e. verbal criticism)

results: children who observed aggressive behavior reinforced played more aggressively.

Front 15

Kanfer & Marston 1963: college students sat alone in a labrum. Communicated with experimenter via microphone and earphones.

Back 15

Researcher signaled the students to speak 1st word that came to mind. Between trials, students heard prerecorded tape of other students.

–One group heard students reinforced for human nouns.

–2nd group heard same tape recording without reinforcement.

Results: hearing others reinforced increased frequency of observers behavior.

Front 16

Observational learning versus imitation

Back 16

observational learning and imitation are often equated. However, imitation of a model does not necessarily imply that observational learning has occurred. Nor does failure to imitate necessarily mean that learning has not occurred.

Front 17

Is the tendency to imitate modeled behavior even when imitation of the behavior is not reinforced.

–Product of learning and direct reinforcement

–taught through multiple exemplar training.

Back 17

Generalized imitation

Front 18

generalized imitation continued

Back 18

when taught to imitate the behaviors of certain individuals, in certain context, individuals are likely to imitate other behaviors under similar circumstances.

Baer & Sherman 1964–observed generalized imitation in young children.

Conclusion: it is possible to reinforce the general tendency to imitate.

Front 19

True or false. Observing consistent reinforcer, the server more likely to imitate.

Back 19

True

Front 20

variables affecting observational learning

Back 20

consequences of the model's behavior–consistent reinforcement or punishment of a model's behavior gets better results than inconsistent consequences.

Rosekran & Hartup 1967

Front 21

Variables affecting observational learning continued

Back 21

consequences of the observers behavior- if observing others pays off, we tend to spend more time observing others.–If a given behavior produces one kind of consequence for a model and a very different kind of consequence for an observer, the latter consequences will win out.–Individuals usually do what works for themselves regardless of what worked for a model.

Front 22

Variables affecting observational learning continued. Characteristics of the model–studies have demonstrated that human observers tend to learn more and for models who are?

Back 22

competent

attractive

likable

prestigious

–Berger 1971: college students observed a fellow student or research assistant. (Model was actually the same person.)

Those who were told they were observing a fellow student showed less evidence of the learning.

Front 23

Variables affecting observational learning continued: observers age.–Observational procedures can have different effects with different age groups.

Back 23

Adams-Curtiss and Fragaszy 1995–young monkeys are more likely to imitating model than are older monkeys. Levy et al. 1974–children tended to imitate the picture choices of a model, and adults did not imitate.

In general, younger children learn less from observing others than older children do, and older children usually learn less than adults.

Front 24

Variables affecting observational learning continued: observers learning history–the ability to learn from a model may also depend on learning experiences prior to viewing a model. Adults may learn more than children from observing others because the adults have had more practice at it. Other variables:

Back 24

emotional state of the learner.

Complexity of the task being modeled.