Aba Test 1

Front 1

classical conditioning/pavlovian conditioning (Type S/1)

Back 1

method by which organisms learn to predict important events

Front 2

operant conditioning/insturmental conditioning (Type R/2)

Back 2

method by which organisms learn about the consequences of behavior

Front 3

Acquisition

Back 3

phase during which the cs and us are presented and the cr is established

Front 4

extinction

Back 4

reduction of the cr resulting from presentation of the cs alone

Front 5

spontaneous recovery

Back 5

during or after extinction, return of the conditioned respodning to a higher level following a period of rest

Front 6

reinforcer

Back 6

us

Front 7

reinforcement

Back 7

strengthenig process inferred to occur with presentation of us

Front 8

stimulus generalization

Back 8

crs are elicited not only by the specific cs, but also by similar stimulus
aka semantic generalization

Front 9

discrimiation

Back 9

reduction of the generalization gradiant, produced by reinforcing the cr to the cs, but withholding reinforcement to other stimuli

Front 10

Second Signal System

Back 10

=Language...pavlov assumed that the same procedures could be used to explain language as were used to explain simple motor conditioning, classical conditioning plays a role in language learning due to emotional responses to words, but LAD also involved
First single system-simple motor learning

Front 11

nature of association in classical conditioning

Back 11

S-S. evidence from US-devaluation and US-inflation, once the cs-us association has been established, presentation of the cs in s-r learning actiovates a representation of US

Front 12

Robert Whytt

Back 12

physic secretion

Front 13

Erasmus Darwin

Back 13

neural processes conditioned

Front 14

Ivan Michailovich

Back 14

father of Russian physiology, ideas preceded Pavlol, reflex basic unit for studying behavior, all processes involve either the selective inhibition (thinking) or augmentation (emotion) of reflexes

Front 15

Bekhterev

Back 15

-neurologist/anatomitist
-first psychobiologist
-wants to develop psychology based on physiology/conditioning
-Objective Psychology-book, study of conditioning of behavior
-new conditioning situations, leg flex, cardiac/respiratort
-thinking could be studied objectively is subvocal speech

Front 16

Ivan Pavlov

Back 16

-Pavlovian Conditioning aka Classical/Respondent Cond
-digestive system, brillan surgeon
-Pavlovian Puch-externalizastion of stomach pouch
-surgical rerouting of salivary glands

Front 17

US

Back 17

Stimulus such as food powder that elicits the response of interest without prior training
US-UR connection is unlearned/innate

Front 18

UR

Back 18

salivation

Front 19

CS

Back 19

bell, stimulus can be anything that does not elicit response. CS presented before US.

Front 20

appetitive conditioning

Back 20

us is a desirable or appetitive stimulus like food

Front 21

aversive conidtioning

Back 21

unpleasant or aversive event as us

Front 22

A+

Back 22

cs + us (light peck and food)

Front 23

A-

Back 23

CS by itself (light peck-becomes signal for food)
-after a number of trials, turning on the light elicits approach and pecking responses
-often a test trial to see if stimulus is effective as a CS.

Front 24

sign tracking

Back 24

light becomes a signal for food and the pigeons go where the light is located

Front 25

autoshaping

Back 25

pigeons peck at response key without elaborate intervention by experimenters, example of appetitive conditioning, occurs in skinner box

Front 26

sig of autoshaping

Back 26

-stimuli, events and messages occur contiguously in time
-our brains are automatic associating mechanisms so the things or events often become associated, then we behave towards one as if it was signaled, predicted or even caused the other. behave towards key as if it predicted arrival of food (superstitous behaviors formed this way)

Front 27

autoshaping and confirmation bias

Back 27

brains make quick and easy associations b/w events. must support these commitments by believing in connection

Front 28

conditioned suppression

Back 28

-variant of fear conditioning,
-rat presses lever to get food. cs of tone paired with shock. rat comes to supress lever pushing when it hears the tone. cs of tone leads to decrease in behavior due to fear. averseive conidtioning of cs

Front 29

phases of conditioned supression

Back 29

1)establish a baseline of operant performance (lever press on VR schedule)
2)either on or off the baseline, pair a cs with an aversive us (tone-shock)
3)during baseline task, present cs alone and observe supression

Front 30

examples of conditioned supression

Back 30

anxiety provoking news-death of a loved one. inability to go on as usual, ongoing behavior is supressed

Front 31

differences between conditioned and unconditioned responses

Back 31

conditioned response and unconditioned response not the same. most conditioning involves skeletal muscles. shock vs. freezing as responses to stimulus

Front 32

behavior systems

Back 32

-us activates behavior system relevant to that us (feeding sysetm , defensive system) the conditioned response that develops depends on how the cs becomes incorporated into th ebehavior system activated by the us, depends where the cs comes incorporate din the system

Front 33

s-r learning

Back 33

cs elicits the cr directly

Front 34

ss learning

Back 34

cs activates a representation of the us, which in turn leads to the cr, what it will do when stimulated to think about the us will depend on its motivation to respond to the us-must be motivated to respond to the us

Front 35

US devaluation

Back 35

motivation to respond to us reduced

Front 36

quail experiment

Back 36

quails conditioned to sexually copulate with female after exposure to a light cs. 2 groups of quails in experiment, one groups sexual drive was reduced. in this group cr declined because they were not sexually motivated. normal sex drive birds still had normal conditioning.

Front 37

us inflation

Back 37

increased conditioned responding by increasing motivation to respond to us, sodium deficiency increases value of salt and this in turn increased response to the salt associated quinine flavor

Front 38

latent inhibition

Back 38

habituation of stimulus reduces the effectivness of this stimulus when it is later used as a CS.
CS preexposure phase when CS is presented by itself, this phase retards the subsequent development of conditioned responding to the stimlus.

Front 39

rapid conditioning vs retarded conditioning

Back 39

rapid conditioning-predictible manner without preexposure (sit-A+)
retarded conditioning-conditoning beings 100s of trials later. (A-....A+)

Front 40

attentional responses

Back 40

-CS preexposure phase reduces subjects attention to tone or stimulus and this in turn distrupts subseuent pav cond
-first learn that stimulus means nothing so it takes more time to learn that it does mean something

Front 41

difference between latent inhibition and conditioned inhibition

Back 41

LI is more related to overshadowing and blocking, more of a passive form of inhibition

Front 42

more on latent

Back 42

after preexposure, A predicts a period without any US, thus the individual learns to ignore A. When a US is introduced during the conditioning phase, the previous association has to be extinguished and a new one established. learning between A and US is severly retarded due to preexposure

Front 43

Garcia and Koelling

Back 43

CS-US relevance or selective association-the effectiveness of a conditiponed stimulus depends selectively on the us stimulus used-behavior systems are characterized by enhanced reactivity to a distinctive set of stimuli.

Front 44

Taste Aversion Learning

Back 44

novel taste followed by illness, organism learns aversion to taste as a result. from experiment rats do not easily learn an aversion to an auditory or visual cue paired with illness nor do they easily learn an aversion to a taste cue paired with shock. disposition to make certain kind of connections

Front 45

tatse aversions learning 2

Back 45

-occurs rapidly, single trial
-occurs with very long CS (ingestion)-UR (nausea) interval,often more then 1hr

Front 46

random control procedure

Back 46

cs and us both presented repeatedly but at random time sin relation to each other, random timing of cs and us presentations is intended to prevent the formation of an associatin between them withot interfering with sensitization processes

Front 47

simultaneous conditioning

Back 47

presentation of CS and US at same time, perfect temporal contigency between CS and US.
-no conditioning takes place

Front 48

Delayed Conditioning

Back 48

conditioned stimulus presented slightly before US, no gap, best for possible conditioning

Front 49

Trace Conditioning

Back 49

gap between CS and US. CS onset and offset followed by a brief delay then US onset.

Front 50

Trace Interval

Back 50

gap between conditioned stimulus and US, introducing this gap can dramatically decrease amount of conditioning that takes place., gap of 1/2 second causes less conditioning to take place then no gap. trace conditioning involves a different memory system.

Front 51

effect of CS-US interval

Back 51

as it bcomes longer evidence of learning declines
seconds:nictitating membrane response
minutes:conditioned suppression
hours:taste aversion(long delay learning-represents learning with CS-US interbals that are a great deal longer than the intervals that support other conditioning

Front 52

Temporal Coding

Back 52

passage of time becomes the conditioned stimulus, pavlovian conditioning results inthe establishment of a temporal code for when the US occurs in relation to CS, once learned temporal code activated whenever the CS present and enable sthe organism o predict the precise point in tim ewhen the US will occur.

Front 53

signal relation

Back 53

informational relation between CS and US. conditioned responding develops more rapidly with procedures in which the CS provides reliable info about the occureence of the US

Front 54

Blocking Effect

Back 54

present the CS with another cue which already predicts the US, the CS will be redundant and little conditioned responding will develop. shrimp and veg-->will not get taste aversion to veg if shrimp was previously conditioned to illness

Front 55

Blocking-ex group

Back 55

A+.....AB+......B-
little or no conditioning to B. A blocks conditioning to B

Front 56

Blocking-c group

Back 56

Sit.....AB+.......B-
good conditioning to B

Front 57

example of blocking

Back 57

flashing red light in place for many years, warning passerbys of danger (A+)
then a large danger sign(B) is installed (AB+) initially most passerbys will not learn to respond t othe sign, thus if something happens to the flahsing light there are likley to be more accidents

Front 58

interpetation of blocking

Back 58

A predicts US so well that B provides no further info. Thus B inthe AB+ complex is a redundant predictor, little or no associative strength acrues to B

Front 59

Conditioned Inhibition

Back 59

CS becomes a signal for the absence of the US, for successful conditioning the absence of the US has to be made a salient event, US=absent, but expected, absence of US made salient by excitatory conditioning rgar creates a postive expectataion. both A and B are signals for options you have in doing something, a-one direction, b-other direction

Front 60

A+

Back 60

a by itself with US (conditioning)

Front 61

AB-

Back 61

stimulus B presented with stimulus B and US is omitted, conditioning inhibition to stimulus B
-presence of A on AB- trials created the expectation that Us will occur, makes the absence of US psychologically meaningful and serves to condition inhibitory properties to stimulus B.

Front 62

neutral stimulus b

Back 62

whenever paired with excitatoryt stimulus and that unionn is not reinforced by US then that previously neutral stimulus will inhibit responding
a+....AB-......C+

Front 63

overshadowing

Back 63

presence of an intense stimulus interferes with the control of behavior by a weaker cue. in the experiment the experimental group recieved noise and light while the control group recieved noise alone, for the exp group they were no longer conditione dto the noise due to the addition of the light, conditioning of light interferred with conditioning of the noise cs

Front 64

phase 1
ab+

Back 64

a is more salient stimulus then B

Front 65

phase 2
a-
b-

Back 65

a-get crs
b-no or few crs
result-a has overshadowed B

Front 66

driving signs

Back 66

results are important, frequent and pretty obvious-curve sign (A) and curve (B)- AB+, drivers learn to respnd to signs not road conditions, roads with curves and no signs have more accidents on them once the sign is taken away.

Front 67

Watson & Rayner

Back 67

-most fear conditioning situations contain many stimuli, but the far CR becomes condiioned only to the most salient of these.
-the white rat became the CS that generated fear, but not other stimuli present at the time (room cues, toys) because the rat=salient stimulus and generalization of stimulus with similar features.

Front 68

occassion setting/conditioned facilitation

Back 68

stimulus B occurs on trials when A is reinforced (AB-->US or AB+) and B is absent on trials when A is not reinforced (A-->noUS or A-) particpant responds to A when B is present but does not respond to A when B is absent. NEED B FOR US. A-->US only when B is present-discriminatory learning (road, wetness and danger

Front 69

A

Back 69

CSE excitatory stimulus

Front 70

B

Back 70

CSf facilitator or occassion setter

Front 71

conditioned phase

Back 71

A- AB+ CS

Front 72

test phase

Back 72

A- (elicits few if any stimulus when presented alone)
AB- elicits many crs

Front 73

facilitator or occassion setter

Back 73

B. it does not function as an excitatory stimulus but responding to the excitatory stimulus A is higher when accompianed by B then when by itself,

Front 74

reverse of conditione dinhibition

Back 74

in the cl the conditioning phase consists of A+ AB_ presentations and B becomes an inhbitory, here conditioning is A_ AB+ and instead of being an inhbitor the B is a facilitatr!!!

Front 75

random control procedure

Back 75

solves CS-alone and US-alone problems (there are some control problems for researchers) CS and US presented repeatdly but at random times in relation to each other, random timimg prevents formation of association between them without interfering with the sensititzation process.

Front 76

contingency

Back 76

contingency between two events refers to the extent of which the presence of ne stimulus can serve as the basis for predicting the other. defined in terms of probability

Front 77

summation testproblem of measuring conditioned inhibition (rabbits who dont blink alot)

Back 77

elevate th ebaseline of responding

Front 78

summation test

Back 78

condition another stimulus as a conditioned excitatory cue (CS+) baseline
CS- and CS+ presented togther to test for CS-

Front 79

CS0

Back 79

neutral stimulus (with no history of excitatory or inhibitory) to test for responding to CS+, to see whether CS_ may just be a distraction or really effective at inhibiting

Front 80

results

Back 80

CS+ with CS- (dramatic decrease in conditioned responding, proves inhibitory effects)
CS+ with CS (some decrease but proves it is only a distraction factor)

Front 81

Retardation-of-acquisition test

Back 81

conditioned inhibitory properties will interfere with the acquisition of excitatory properties to that stimuli for ex group tone is trained as a conditined inhibitory
control-tone is neutral
if inhibitory conditioning was successful in th efirst stage of the experiment then excitatory conditioning responding should occur more slowly for ex, compare rates of excitatory conditioning for two grous