Classical/instrumental interactions Flashcards
1
Q
how are classical and instrumental conditioning paired?
A
- in a classical conditioning task where a stimulus predicts food the animal may learn they are responding to get food which is instrumental
- in a instrumental conditioning task where a response predicts food, the animal may learn that the stimuli present predicts food
2
Q
Can animals ever do rational instrumental conditioning?
- omission training, Holland (1979) Experiment 1
A
- trained rats using the classical light room → food association
- light predicts food but also magazine approach conditioned response prevents food ( Light → food BUT Light + magazine entry no food)
- light paired with food is classical conditioning and is measured by magazine behaviour
- omission occurs every time a rat made magazine response in conditioned stimulus i.e. food cancelled
- same number CS-US pairings but the group omission has magazine responding punished
- if magazine responding is classical conditioning, they should persist
- if magazine responding is operant conditioning, they should stop
3
Q
what is omission?
A
people prefer omission (inaction) over commission (action) and people tend to judge harm as a result of commission more negatively than harm as a result of omission
4
Q
Can animals ever do rational instrumental conditioning?
- omission training, Holland (1979) Experiment 2
A
- Rats in Groups Omission, Yoked and Unpaired run in triplets
- Group Omission: 10s light paired with food unless rat responded. This is the master rat.
- Group Yoked: 10s light paired with food every time its partner in Group Omission didn’t respond
- Group Unpaired: as many foods as its partner in Group Omission, but unpaired with light
- Group Control: 10s light always paired with food.
- yoked had the same number of USs as Omission group regardless of their behaviour
- Omission training eliminated
magazine behaviour - this is purely instrumental
5
Q
rearing behaviour, Holland, (1979)
A
- Experiment 2 does it all over again, but puts omission schedule on rearing behaviour
- Light predicts food but also rearing CR prevents food
- Light → food, Light + rear → no food
- Light paired with food is classical conditioning; measured rearin
- Found omission training reduced but did not eliminate
rearing behaviour - mostly classical (but partly instrumental)
6
Q
confirming evidence of instrumental conditioning, Grindley (1932)
A
- Guinea-pigs were taught to turn their heads to one side in response to the sound of a buzzer, with a food reward.
- The habit could be reversed by rewarding the animal for turning its head, on the sound of the buzzer, to the other side.
- It is difficult to explain these results in terms of Pavlov’s theory of conditioned reflexes
7
Q
confirming evidence of instrumental conditioning, Heyes and Dawson (1990)
A
- Hungry rats observed a demonstrator pushing a joystick, to the right or to the left for food reward and were then allowed access to the joystick from a different orientation.
- These results provide evidence that rats are capable of learning a response, or a response–reinforcer contingency, through conspecific observation.
8
Q
Training animals to avoid shocks
A
- training rats to do different things to avoid shock; running is a lot easier than standing!
- the stronger the hard-wired UR to e.g. shock, the harder it is to train animals to escape or avoid it
- to train an operant response you may need to work with their classical CRs
9
Q
Breland & Breland racoon study
A
- trained racoons to deposit ‘money’ into a bank slot.
- The raccoons were initially very successful , but over time and as the reinforcement schedule was spaced out, the raccoons began to dip the coins in and out of the bank and rub them with their paws rather than depositing them.
- They concluded this was an instinct that was interfering with the raccoons’ performance on the task. In nature, raccoons dip their food in water several times in order to wash it.
- This is an instinct which was seemingly triggered by the similar action sequence involved in retrieving and depositing coins into a bank.
10
Q
How can classically conditioned stimuli affect instrumental performance?
A
- Avoidance responses rewarded by removing aversive USs
(e.g. shock) before they’ve begun - for example in a rat chamber the buzzer comes on followed by a shock
- but if a rat responds during the buzzer the shock is cancelled
- the buzzer is classically conditioning the conditioned stimulus (CS acts as a warning stimuli that predicts the shock)
- one reason for avoidance responding is the presence of a signal for fear
11
Q
two-process theory, Rescorla and solomon (1967)
A
- If responding is motivated by something nice, CSs predicting something nice → respond more
- If responding is motivated by something nice, CSs predicting something nasty →respond less
- If responding is motivated something nasty, a CS predicting something nasty → respond more
- If responding is motivated something nasty, a CS predicting something nice → respond less
boosting relevant motivational state boosts responding
and because you can’t feel happy and sad at the same time
12
Q
General Pavlovian – Instrumental transfer, Estes (1948)
A
- rats trained that a tone signals food
- then trained to press a lever for food
- finally allowed to press the lever but this stopped food deliveries
- the lever was occasionally present with the food-paired tone
- in every case introduction of the tone was followed by
a temporary increase in the rate of responding”
13
Q
General Pavlovian – Instrumental transfer, Rescorla and LoLordo (1965)
A
- Dogs trained to jump a barrier to avoid shock on Sidman avoidance
schedule – no explicit signals for shock, only time - then trained seperately on a stimulus which caused a shock (CS+) which is nasty and another stimulus which signalled the absence of shock (CS-) which is nice
- the rate of avoidance responding increased by signal shock (CS+) and decreased by inhibitor for shock (CS-)
14
Q
what two rewards are involved in specific Pavlovian-Instrumental transfer (PIT)
A
- congruent rewarding: a stimulus predicting one reward elevates performance of responding for the same reward
- incongruent responding: more than responding for the other
14
Q
How is PIT relevant to addiction?
A
- the reward of drinking or smoking becomes associated with the sight of beer and cigarettes, and hence their packaging
- so seeing a picture of a beer bottle can make you want to have a beer (but not a cigarette)
- this is why cigarette displays are restricted in the UK, and packets no longer have branding
