Learning Approach (APPROACHES 1/6) Flashcards

Behaviourism (classical and operant conditioning) and social learning theory

1
Q

three theories

A

behaviourist approach
- classical conditioning (Pavlov)
- operant conditioning (Skinner)

social learning theory (Bandura)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

assumptions

A

behaviour influenced by nurture, not nature
should study observable behaviours only
born as ‘blank states’ with the capacity to learn - genetics and biology do not affect behaviour
humans are only animals and should not be treated as more complex (animal research relevant)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

classical conditioning

A

Pavlov, 1927
learn through association of stimuli in environment
consciously or sub-consciously learn to produce a reflex to a stimulus that would not normally cause this response

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Pavlov’s research aims

A

originally investigating dogs’ digestive system
turned to investigating whether reflex response of salivation could be conditioned

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Pavlov’s procedure

A

lab experiment on 35 dogs of different breeds
in sealed, sound-proof lab to prevent other stimuli
collected saliva - number of drops was measured
paired neutral stimulus, metronome, with unconditioned stimulus of food around 20 times

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Pavlov’s results

A

found that neutral stimulus did not initially elicit a salivation response whereas the unconditioned stimulus of food did so immediately
salivation commenced 9 seconds after the metronome sounded, 45 drops of saliva collected

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Pavlov’s conclusions

A

environmental stimuli, through repeated pairing could trigger a salivation reflex response
through process of association, the conditioned stimulus (metronome), leads to conditioned response (salivation)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Pavlov’s research strengths

A

controlling sounds and extraneous variables increases internal validity (IV had effect on DV)
sure that it was the metronome rather than other prompts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Pavlov’s research weaknesses

A

unethical
harness limited movement, limits credibility
reduced ecological validity, unnatural behaviour in artificial environment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

before conditioning

A

dogs see food - UCS
naturally causes automatic response of salivation - UCR
metronome has no significance to the dog and so does not cause a response - NS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

during conditioning

A

conditioning the dog to learn that food will immediately be presented after a metronome
NS and UCS repeatedly paired together or associated
dog’s salivation is still UCR - pairing of two stimuli means we can’t be sure that the metronome alone caused salivation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

after conditioning

A

metronome is no longer neutral - has meaning to the dog - become conditioned stimulus
salivation has become a learned response to conditioned stimulus, and is now a conditioned response

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

unconditioned –> conditioned

A

unconditioned stimulus (food) –> unconditioned response (salivation)

neutral stimulus (metronome) + unconditioned stimulus (food) –> unconditioned response (salivation)

conditioned stimulus (metronome) –> conditioned response (salivation)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

UCS

A

unconditioned stimulus
original stimulus that causes a reflexive reaction
naturally occurring and unlearned

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

UCR

A

unconditioned response
the original reflex action

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

NS

A

neutral stimulus
a stimulus that causes no reaction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

CS

A

conditioned stimulus
a NS causing a learned, reflex reaction after associated with the UCS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

CR

A

conditioned response
the learned response elicited by the CS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

stimulus

A

any change in the environment that we register

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

reflex

A

an automatic response to a stimulus
immediate with no thought
can be learned and conditioned

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

response

A

changes in our behaviour due to a stimulus

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

extinction

A

if the CS is not paired with the UCS occasionally after conditioning then the CR will die out

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

stimulus generalisation

A

classical conditioning response seen with other stimuli similar to the original CS
the more similar, the stronger the response

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

spontaneous recovery

A

occurs after extinction
CR returns when there is no pairing of the NS and UCS and soon becomes extinct again

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Watson and Rayner's research - Little Albert
study using classical conditioning principles to see if they could cause a human baby to develop a fear he did not have previously test whether classical conditioning worked with humans
26
Watson and Rayner's research aims
whether they could condition fear of an animal by simultaneously presenting the animal and striking a steel bar to make a loud noise to frighten the child whether fear would be transferred to other animals and objects the effect of time on the conditioned response
27
operant conditioning study
Thorndike conducted an experiment where he put a cat in a cage with a latch on the door and a piece of salmon outside the cage cat accidentally hit latch and door opened with repetition, amount of time and effort spent reaching and scrabbling decreased and the latch was released earlier analysis of behaviour - learning puzzle as consequence of food which was reinforcement first took 5 mins --> after 10 trials became 5 seconds trial and error learning law of effect - of effect is desirable, behaviour is learnt and repeated learning takes place because of what happens after the action
28
operant conditioning
law of effect enabled Skinner to develop the theory of operant conditioning, which explains hoe we learn new voluntary and complex behaviour and is known as 'learning through consequence' if we are rewarded/reinforced for a behaviour then we are more likely to repeat that behaviour, and if we are punished, then we are less likely to repeat it
29
reinforcement
reward to encourage repetition of behaviour POSITIVE - receiving something we want primary satisfies a basic need (hunger, thirst) secondary - receiving something that allows us to get an object that will satisfy a basic need (money) NEGATIVE - something undesirable is taken away sometimes reinforcement is unintentional - lead to odd or undesirable behaviour
30
punishment
does not teach new behaviour weakens or stops undesirable behaviour POSITIVE - presents something unpleasant or painful whenever behaviour is shown NEGATIVE - removing something pleasant
31
behaviour shaping
used to develop complex unnatural behaviours by reinforcing behaviour resembling target behaviour reinforcement becomes more selective (successive approximations) until desired response achieved behaviour broken into stages, reinforcement at each one until complex behaviour has been achieved
32
Skinner's box
recorded behaviour of animals in response to different consequences contained lever for an animal to press for food had speaker and lights used to trigger a behaviour shock generator deliver punishment
33
Skinner's box positive reinforcement
rewarded with food pellets after pressing lever to encourage behaviour
34
Skinner's box negative reinforcement
subjected rats to electric shock but rewarded them by removing it if they pressed the lever would sometimes switch a light on before an electric shock - learnt to press lever when light was on to avoid shock
35
Skinner's box punishment
punished with electric shocks if they pressed the lever, so they learned not to press it, behaviour weakened
36
Skinner's box strengths standardised procedure good applicability
standardised procedure - all rewarded and punished in the same way, all confined to same Skinner box other researchers can replicate easily check for consistency reliable good applicability applied in schools and amongst parents to encourage positive behaviours in children and discourage others useful in many real life settings and simply - giving children sweets to encourage repetition) increase understanding of how we learn and can be used for greater good in society
37
Skinner's box weaknesses ecological validity generalisability
lacks ecological validity unfamiliar and artificial environment - not accurate representation of natural behaviour, don't know if rewards and punishment are relevant in a natural environment findings difficult to generalise to humans - rats have smaller and less complex brains - difficult to make comparisons cannot assume humans will learn in the same way - limits usefulness of findings
38
social learning theory
Bandura learn through observation and imitation of role models behaviour is not random and do not wait for rewards to determine whether we will continue a behaviour observational learning - two way process with environment and individual interacting (reciprocal determinism)
39
imitation
acquired through imitation of behaviour and attitudes modelled by parents and significant others - quicker than conditioning
40
determinants of imitation
characteristics of model observer's percieved ability to perform that behaviour observed consequences of behaviour
41
identification
refers to extent of which individual relates to a model and feels that they are similar enough to experience same outcomes increases likelihood of imitating behaviour
42
characteristics increasing imitation
same sex similar age or older admired/respected/high status
43
modelling
someone must model (carry out) behaviour for it to be learned live models - parents, teachers, peers symbolic models - characters on TV, people on media behave in certain way and this can be observed by an individual and later reproduced (imitation)
44
vicarious reinforcement / punishment
children more likely to imitate a model if they were rewarded for behaviour and less likely to imitate the model if they are punished
45
mediational processes between observation and imitation
observer forms mental representations of behaviour displayed by model and thinks about probable consequences suggests there is more conscious thought as to whether to perform a behaviour
46
four mediational processes (ARRM)
ATTENTION - observer must carefully watch the model perform a behaviour and consequences by paying attention RETENTION - observer must retain what they have observer to be able to later repeat it - imitation is not always immediate REPRODUCTION - only imitated if observer has ability to carry it out MOTIVATION - rewards and punishment that follow behaviour are observed (intrinsic - how it makes you feel, extrinsic - physical reward) if percieved rewards outweigh costs, more likely behaviour is imitated
47
skinner's research strengths
high reliability standardised procedure - specific controls in Skinner box rewarded and punished each rat in the same way for performing the same behaviours increases replicability easily check for consistency - whether rats continue to press lever when rewarded and whether they stop when punished good applicability findings applied in schools and amongst parents to encourage more positive behaviours and eliminate negative ones in children useful in many settings and in simplistic ways increase our understanding of how we learn used for greater good in society
48
Skinner's research weaknesses
poor generalisability used rats and pigeons - different brain structure and conscious awareness/decision-making to humans can't generalise to humans and suggest that humans learn through rewards and punishment in the same way humans have different motivations to animals, so performing same procedure on humans might not yield same results low ecological validity Skinner box in a lab environment with strict controls and conditions can't be sure that they would repeat desirable behaviour in a more natural environment lack validity - only know how behaviour is in an artificial environment
49
social learning theory strengths (supporting evidence) | aggression, dogs, monkeys
support by Bandura, Ross and Ross found that children were more aggressive after observing an aggressive role model, which supports that people learn through observation and imitation - theory is accurate and valid support for idea of learning through observation - Kubinyi found that when pet dogs watched their owners push the handle of a box to release a ball, dogs were able to reproduce this behaviour after observing 10 times. findings cannot be fully generalised to humans, as typical characteristics of role models are hard to apply to animals and dogs may not go through same cognitive processes observation, imitation and modelling support by Cook and Mineka research where monkeys were made to to watch a video of another monkey reacting to a real snake and a toy snake. After multiple exposures, the monkeys demonstrated a fear of snakes after watching the model monkey show fear. supports the idea of vicarious punishment - experiencing model monkey's punishment as fear due to being exposed to snakes and imitating this behaviour.
50
social learning theory weaknesses
limitations in testing theory as behaviour observed may not be reproduced immediately e.g. a child observing someone being scared of a plane may not display this fear until they themselves go on a plane. difficult to test for observational learning experiments only show specific behaviours at a specific time, so results are limited, and lack of validity in findings at the time the study is carried out. issues in claiming that observational learning shown by animals is also true of humans e.g. dogs in Kubinyi quickly imitated behaviour of their owners; this does not mean that humans learn through imitation in the same way or as quickly as dogs did. humans have a greater understanding of moral and social norms meaning that greater thought process used in making a decision whether to reproduce the observed behaviour, not likely to be the case with animals, limiting generalisability
51
social learning theory weaknesses (different theory)
SLT involves cognitions (unobservable thought processes) - mediational processes refers to attention and retention moves away from behaviourism which only studies observable behaviours theory less scientific and more based on inferences lacks credibility, not based on scientific methods
52
social learning theory strengths (application)
useful in explaining behaviour such as aggression and gender development and can be applied as a therapy observational learning used alongside rewards - if OCD patient observed someone they trusted carrying out a more desirable behaviour with no unpleasant consequences, they may be inclined to imitate e.g. washing hands after touching things has good applicability to real world encouraging sufferers to improve mental health
53
Bandura, Ross and Ross aims
transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models aims to investigate whether exposure to a real-life aggressive model increased aggression in children
54
Bandura, Ross and Ross hypotheses
children exposed to aggressive models would imitate the aggression shown children exposed to non-aggressive models would not show high levels of aggression there would be a gender difference - boys expected to show more imitative aggression than girls
55
Bandura, Ross and Ross method
tested 72 children (36 male, 36 female, between ages of 3 and 5) a male adult and a female adult acted as models and one female experimenter conducted the study participants divided into 8 experimental groups of 6 children, with remaining 24 forming a control group AGGRESSIVE MODEL CONDITION 6 boys - male model 6 boys - female model 6 girls - male model 6 girls - female model NON-AGGRESSIVE MODEL CONDITION 6 boys- male model 6 boys - female model 6 girls - male model 6 girls - female model children matched for physical and verbal aggression from ratings - groups were on similar terms of aggression individually brought in to a room with the model the child sat at a table, where were shown how to design a picture model was taken to opposite corner containing a table, chair, tinker toy, mallet and inflatable bobo doll the child watched the model and could not play with the toys
56
Bandura, Ross and Ross aggressive conditions
model played with tinker toy for a minute then began to act aggressively towards the bobo doll for 9 mins e.g. (repeated 3 times) - laid the doll, sat on it, punched on the nose - raised the doll, struck on head with mallet - tossed it up and kicked around the room verbal statements used between behaviours - 'sock him in the nose' - 'hit him down' - 'throw him in the air' - 'kick him' - 'pow' non-aggressive comments - 'he keeps coming back for more' - 'he sure is a tough fella'
57
Bandura, Ross and Ross non-aggressive conditions
model sat in the corner, quietly playing with the tinker toys and ignoring the bobo doll
58
Bandura, Ross and Ross after 10 minutes
child was taken to another room and given toys to play with for 2 mins toys were taken away as a control to provoke mild aggression arousal and ensured they were in a equally frustrated mood before being observed
59
Bandura, Ross and Ross after 2 minutes
child taken to final experimental room, allowed to play with aggressive and non-aggressive toys - aggressive toys: bobo doll, mallet and peg board, dart guns, tether ball - non-aggressive toys: tea set, crayons, ball, dolls, bears, cars, plastic animals had 20 mins of free play whilst being observed through a one-way mirror
60
Bandura, Ross and Ross behavioural categories
behaviour observed at regular time intervals and scored according to three types of imitative behaviour - imitative physical aggression - acts displayed by model - imitative verbal aggression - repeating model's phrases - imitative non-aggressive verbal responses other categories imitated essential components of model's behaviour but did not perform complete act or was aggressive to another toy - scored as partially imitative behaviour e.g. mallet aggression, non-imitative physical and verbal aggression, aggressive gun play
61
Bandura, Ross and Ross results
children exposed to an aggressive model displayed significantly more aggression than children exposed to non-aggressive model boys and girls displayed more imitative aggression after observing aggressive model this effect was stronger after watching a same-sex aggressive model most aggressive group was male children who watched an aggressive male model least aggressive was female children who watched a non-aggressive male model watching an aggressive model had a greater effect on boys than girls male models copied most by male children boys were not more aggressive in all instances - females exposed to a female models were more aggressive than boys exposed to a female model
62
Bandura, Ross and Ross conclusion
boys are more influenced than girls when watching a male model girls are more influenced by verbal aggression than physical observing aggression incites both imitative and non-imitative aggression girls more likely to copy aggression from a male model than a female model - boys were more influenced by a same sex model
63
Bandura, Ross and Ross strengths
good generalisability large sample size of 72 children findings generalised to target population of children sample limited as children were aged 3-5, cannot generalise to adults and whether they imitate aggression easily good population validity high validity covert experiment, no demand characteristics, one way mirror participants wouldn't adjust behaviour, unaware they are being observed highly reliable used standardised procedure - all children observed for 10 mins, played for 20, same toys lab setting with controlled conditions, easily replicated for consistency
64
Bandura, Ross and Ross weaknesses
ethnocentrism (carried out in 1 country) cannot be sure findings can be applied to children in other parts of the world lacks generalisability lacks ethical credibility limited protection from harm as children should not have been exposed to aggression removed toys to anger children - distressing lacks ecological validity strange and unusual setting - big room alone, one way mirror results invalid as not accurate representation of behaviour in an everyday setting