Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

29 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
responding similarly to similar stimuli
Guttman and Kalish
Trained pigeons to peck at one color

Test phase: showed a variety of colors, some close to training stimulus, some not

Results: birds pecked more at colors that were more similar to the training stimulus

Conclusion: Birds' response gradient is a function of how similar test stimulus was to training stimulus
Steepness of response gradient
precise measure of stimulus control
Flat response gradient
org responds in similar fashion to all test stimuli, stimulus feature varied among test stimuli does NOT control behavior
Steep response gradient
org responds more to some test stimuli than to others, stimulus feature varied among test stimuli DOES control behavior
Riccio CTA Study
Gave rats LiCl paired with chocolate milk, split into two groups
GI: Tested 24 hours later, would drink sweet milk but not chocolate milk

GII: Tested 1 week later, avoided both sweet milk and chocolate milk

Conclusion: GII forgot specific stimulus attributes, and thus generalized their aversion to include sweet milk
Discrimination training
teaches organisms not to generalize

Ex) Two keys, S+ and S-, learn that if peck S+ get a reward, no reward if peck S-

Ex) To test if birds can see color, reward for one color but not another, if go back and choose the rewarded stimuli, can see color
Jenkins and Harrison
Discrimination training in pigeons

GP I: 1000 cps tone (S+), no tone (S-)
GP II: 1000 cps tone (S+), 950 cps (S-)
GP III (control): 1000 cps tone for all

GP I: Peak responding at S+
GP II: Tighter responding, animals learned that small difference in sound=reward, least generalization of all groups
GP III:----
control group=intermediate stimulus control
both training groups=more stimulus control than control group, less generalization
Two conclusions of discrimination training
1) increases stimulus control of instrumental behavior, decreases generalization

2) particular stimulus (eg. tone frequency is most likely to gain control of responding if the S+/- vary along that dimension
Intradimensional discrimination
S+/S- vary only in terms of the value of the stimulus feature

a form of expert performance
Peak shift (only occurs with intradimensional discrimination training)
the shift of the peak of the generalization gradient in the OPPOSITE direction of
Hanson (1959)
(S+)=a 550 nm light
All groups had the same S+, diff S-

GP 1:( S-)=590 nm

GP 2: (S-)=555 nm

GP 3: (S-)=550 nm

GP1: Peak response is closest to 535 nm
GP2: Peak responding far away from S+, around 530 nm

Conclusion: Degree of peak shift depends on similarity btw S+ and S-. The more similar S+ is to S-, the greater the degree of peak shift.
Spence's theory of peak shift
There is an excitatory gradient that peaks at S+ and there is an inhibitory gradient that peaks at S-; therefore, the more similar S+ and S- are, the greater the degree of overlap.
Discrete stimulus
stimulus with a clear onset and offset
Contextual stimuli
also control responding

Ex) Rats and shock/food in room A/B

Ex) Pigeons get food in noisy context, no food in quiet context, become very active when put in noisy chamber

noisy chamber=S+
quiet chamber=S-
Honig (1963)
line discrimination study with pigeons
-Took animals into context 1, where S+ is key with vertical line and S- is key with horizontal line
-In context 2, S+ is horizontal line, S- is vertical line
-Animals had to use context to learn what "rules of the game" are
-Test=put animals in room with a bunch of different cues they could peck at (lines at diff orientations), animals could learn that when in certain context, rules were like they were in training

Conclusion: S+/S- were discrete stimuli, context=modulator
stimulus that signals a relationship between between two other events, used when talking about instrumental conditioning
occasion setter
usually related to CC where context signals relationship btw CS and US
Two basic procedures used to study aversive control of behavior
1) avoidance procedures
2) punishment procedures
avoidance procedures AKA active avoidance
subject has to make an instrumental response to avoid/prevent something bad from happing

Ex) kid cleans room to avoid being punishment

Ex) study to avoid doing badly on a test

Increases instrumental response
punishment procedures AKA passive avoidance
Instrumental response brings about a consequence/outcome

Ex) passive avoidance lab task

Decreases instrumental response
Bechterev (1913)
had people put finger on metal disk
warning tone/light
shocked finger periodically

avoidance response=operant conditioning, removal of finger changes the outcome (does not happen in CC eg. rat freezing (CR) does not change fact that gets shocked)
Brogden study
2 groups of guinea pigs in running wheel
-Gave them CC-->CS (tone) + US (shock)
UR=run on running wheel

GP1 (CC)=shock always presented 2 secs after tone came on, did not matter whether guinea pig ran or not (beh has no effect on outcome)

GP 2 (Avoidance conditioning)=if guinea pig ran and moved wheel during tone, avoided getting shocked

GP1=increase running a little, then decrease, no very strong conditional response
GP2=within a few days, avoiding shock 100% of the time

Conclusion: Avoidance is different from CC because results from two groups are not identical
Discriminated/Signaled Avoidance Task
each trial initiated with CS, if do not make response, CS (tone) followed by US (shock)

early trials=escape
later trials=avoidance
2-way shuttle avoidance
rat jumps back and forth

If animal crosses quickly=avoids shock
If animal does not cross=gets shock
1-way shuttle avoidance
have to pick animal up and put back

animal only learns to jump one way
Two-Process theory of avoidance
assumes that 2 mechanisms involved in avoidance learning
1) Classical conditioning of fear to some CS
Ex) 2 way shuttle avoidance-->learn tone paired with shock, tone becomes aversive

2) Instrumental negative reinforcement of the avoidance response (eg. shuttle response) through fear reduction due to termination of CS

Ex) shuttling on later trials reinforced by turning off of CS because CS has become aversive (due to its being paired with shock)

Ex) Studying for test reduces anxiety caused by fear of failure
Experimental testing of the two-process theory
Acquired drive experiments
Acquired drive experiments
1) pure CC of fear to CS-->animal's beh has no effect on outcome, just a CS-US pairing (tone and shock)

2) subjects can shuttle to turn off tone (CS), subjects not shocked so shock not motivating behavior

Results: animals increased shuttling to turn off CS