This site is 100% ad supported. Please add an exception to adblock for this site.

psych9achap6part1

Terms

undefined, object
copy deck
Habituation
Very simple type of learning. Doesn't explain most of what we learn. Nonassocative learning. The gradual decrease in the size of response to a stimulus due to repeated exposure to that stimulus. EX: ticking clock; overhead traffic
Dishabituation
when an organism begins to respond more intensely to a stimulus to which it has previously habituated. EX: listening to a lecture, and you hear a hammer outside, you'll habituate. If the stimulus changes somehow, you'll dishabituate and start paying attention to the stimulus again.
Associative Learning
Learning that two events occur together. Most of our learning is down through association.
Classical Conditioning
type of learning in which an organism comes to associate stimuli, and thus to anticipate events.
Ivan Pavlov
Work led to understanding of classical conditioning.
Ivan Pavlov's Experiment
Pair a neutral stimulus with food presentation. Will the dog associate the two stimuli (neutral stimulus and good)? Will the neutral stimulus make the dof salivate in anticipation of food?
Unconditioned Stimulus
A stimulus that produced UCR with no training. EX: Food
Conditioned Stimulus
Neutral stimulus becomes conditioned stimulus because it is associated with UCS and produced CR. EX: Tone (after conditioning)
Unconditioned Response
Response to a UCS that has not been learned. EX: Salivation
Conditioned Response
Response to a new, neutral stimulus that is associated with UCS. EX: Salivation
Neutral Stimulus
A stimulus that produces no response, unless associated with UCS. EX: Tone (before and during conditioning.)
Acquisition
The initial learning of a stimulus-response relationship. Before conditioning, NS doesn't produce a CR. Through pairing of NS and US, NS becomes a CS producing a CR. Strength of CR gradually grows until it gets to be as strong as the UR. Once the CR is established, other stimuli that become associated with CS can become conditioned stimuli themselves.
Higher-Order conditioning
Occurs when a NS is paired with an existing CS, eventually causing same CR EX: dog salivating to tone.
Extinction
the diminishing of a conditioned response
Spontaneous Recovery
The reappearance, after a pause, of an extinguised conditioned response.
Reconditioning
The further presentation of learning traits At any point during extinction (or after extinction), reconditioning will leard to a quick relearnig (quicker than original learning)
Generalization
The tendency to respond to a stimuli similar to the conditioned stimulus. EX: dog conditioned to salivate to "middle c" tone. The farther you get from middle C, the weaker the response.
Discrimination
The learned ability to distinguish between a CS and other irrelevant stimuli. EX: Dog salivating to "middle C"(CS+) but not other tones. (CS-) CS- is not associated with food, and becomes associated with absence of food.
Temporal Relationship Between Stimili During Acquisition
The strength of a CR depends of the timing of the persentation of CS and US For a large range of situations, presenting the CS about a half-second before the US produces strongest repsonse Thinking of CS as a "signal" that US is about to occur.
Contiguity
Two stimuli occur close together in time Learning associations doesn't only depend on contiguity (although it plays a role) The first stimulus must be a good predictor of the second
Contingency
Predictability. EX: Rescorla (1968) Taught rats to press lever to obtain food; put in chamber and given a number of sessions where 2-minute tone and shock were presented; in between the 2-minute shock-tone pairing sessions were 8-minute intervals with no tones, but various possibilities of having shocks presented.
Results of Rescorla (1968)
-Group 0 (no shocks in between trials) *Tone is great predictor of upcoming shock -Group .40 (same pct of shocks in between trials) *Tone does NOT predict shock! -Conclusion: strength not based on contiguity, but on how wll the CS predicts subsequent appearance of US (contingency).
Respone suppression
-Fear tends to disrupt other activities -Measuring suppression of normal behavior when tone presented indicates strength of tone/shock association
Kamin (1969)
-Same setup of as Rescorla (rats press food lever, measure response suppression) -Control group *stimulus pairing: present noise and light together, followed by shock *Result of suppression test: rats stopped pressing bar when light turned on (i.e. strong association between light and shock) -Experimental group *Pretraining: paired only noise with shock -stimulus pairing: present noise and light together, followed by shock -results of suppression test: rats showed NO suppression when light turned on (i.e. NO association between light and shock)
Results of Kamin
-Conclusions *If condition depended only on contiguity, we'd expect the light to cause suppression in both groups -However, pairing noise and shock first caused blocking -The light caused suppression only if it predicted the shock -The experimental group learned during pretraining that the noise predicted the shock-adding the light didn't add any new information, so conditioning to the light didn't occur
Blocking
the prevention of conditioning of one stimulus pair (light-shock) by the prior conditioning of another pair (noise-shock)
compensatory response
Body compensates for action of drug (due to homeostasis) Ex: insulin -Sight of needle becomes signal that glucose level is about to drop, so the body tries to keep steady internal state by increasing glucose level -Patient gets benefit of insulin, but without large fluctuation of glucose level

Deck Info

27

lgripe

permalink