lecture Flashcards
(255 cards)
what is the definition for Pavlovian classical conditioning?
a behavioural change caused by a predictive relationship between a signal (controlled stimulus) and a biologically importat stimulus (unconditioned stimulus or reinforcer)
what was meant by ‘insight’ when observing the mentality of apes by Kohler?
claimed to observe ‘insight’:
changes in behaviour from trial to trial not explicable in terms of observable trial and error or reinforcement
adoption of a more cognitive approach to psychology over behaviourism
however, his account of monkeys stacking banana crates on top of each other to reach for a banana hanging from the ceiling is firstly anecdotal and secondly, the crates had been there for weeks and the monkeys had stacked them before
so may not be insightful problem solving
describe Skinner and his approach to animal cognition of radical behaviourism?
why initially successful?
weaknesses?
suggested that all we can observe is behaviour so psychology should only be about behaviour
performed box studies with rats: key concepts of operant response and reinforcement and key procedure of shaping
this operant conditioning (reward vs punishment) was applied through ‘behavioural modification’ to clinical etc. settings
initially successful:
- replacing unsolvable theoretical arguments with directly observable ‘control over behaviour’
- synthesising cognitive effects by using operant conditioning procedures
failed:
- denial of an ‘inside story’ incorrect
- attempt to account for language was mocked by Chomsky (showed that humans have a predisposed ability to pick up language from birth, which Skinner argued against)
- experiments on operant conditioning in humans showed differences from animal research
what is meant by the dual process theory in human cognition?
human mental life is understood in terms of a combination of associative ad more cognitive (rule-based) principles
give some examples of human cognition being applied to animals?
(as opposed to usually the other way around)
Sutherland & Mackintosh - ideas about attention from human studies used to explain discrimination learning
Olton - demonstrations of powerful spatial learning seemed to call for animal concepts of memory
describe social co-operative learning in pigeons?
- example of being wary when imputing our more cognitive abilities to other animals and should instead but focusing on the associative (complex over simpler)
one pigeon ‘the sender’ can see two lights
other pigeon ‘the receiver’ can see right hand or left hand response keys
both get reward if coordinate red light with left and green light with right
can solve problem after a lot of training
but not what most people would view as ‘communication’
- communication?
receiver develops a position habit by staying on either right or left hand side due to getting food 50% of time
sender notices that gets food when pecks certain light compared to other, due to receiver pigeon staying in same place and also either can or can’t see pigeon so using spatial information to get grain
more like conditioning than communication
describe imitation in the rat?
- example of being wary when imputing our more cognitive abilities to other animals and should instead but focusing on the associative (complex over simpler)
Heyes et al
rats observed a demonstrator rat pushing joystick to demonstrators right
then transferred to demonstrators chamber to push it in either direction
majority pushed in same direction of demonstrator, despite both directions releasing food (so this not primary motive)
is this imitation? no as pushing joystick with snout will leave one side scent marked, making it the preferred side for the observer
as shown trhough when joystick replaced with unscented one, preference for ‘imitated’ side disappears
describe self-awareness in chimpanzees?
- example of being wary when imputing our more cognitive abilities to other animals and should instead but focusing on the associative (complex over simpler)
- Gallup, 1970
Gallup, 1970
reactions of chimpanzees and macaques to their mirror reflections (mirror self-recognition experiment (MSR)):
over time, chimpanzees showed increase in no. of self-directed behaviours that relied on the use of the mirror e.g to groom parts of body usually visually inaccessible and picking bits of food from teeth with aid of mirror
macaques (monkeys) however reacted to mirror socially, as if treating it as a conspecific (which the chimpanzees did during first couple of days)
the mark test:
bright red marks put on visually inaccessible locations on body
when re-exposed to mirror, chimpanzees touched mark more than other body parts
macaques didn’t touch marks more than other parts
(also found in dolphins using mirror to look at marked parts)
- self-awareness/concept? perhaps not as e.g when shaving, able to use mirror as feedback to guide shaving without explicitly recognising it as yourself, so these 2 events don’t necessarily happen together so chimpanzees don’t necessarily need to know that its them using the mirror to use it to guide their actions
describe self-awareness in chimpanzees?
- example of being wary when imputing our more cognitive abilities to other animals and should instead but focusing on the associative (complex over simpler)
- Chang, 2015
Chang et al, 2015
rhesus monkeys trained to touch an irritant light spot on their head using a mirror
after 2-5 weeks, could touch non-irritant light spot or dye in front of mirror
5/7 showed mirror-induced self-directed behaviours like touching mark and smelling/looking at fingers and using to explore unseen body parts
4 monkeys did same thing but without light spot irritant (visual-somatosensory training) didn’t pass mark test or show any mirror-induced self-directed behaviours
- showing not clear divide between macaques and chimpanzees as after a while they stop treating mirror image as conspecific and start eprforming mirror-induced self-directed behaviours
suggestion about the need for conscious awareness in Pavlovian conditioning?
(McLaren et al, 1994 textbook chapter)
suggested that successful Pavlovian conditioning in humans relies on their conscious awareness of contingencies between the unconditioned stimulus and the conditioned stimulus
and no evidence of conditioning shown when unaware of the contingencies
what are the different interpretations of the meaning explicit and implicit learning?
(McLaren et al, 1994 textbook chapter)
explicit = conscious and implicit = unconscious (so recall could be either depending on whether consciously retreiving something or not)
explicit = declarative knowledge enabling verbal report and implicit = tacit (understood without being stated) knowledge of abstract rules underlying
processing distinction: explicit = hypothesis-testing processing when problem-solving and implicit = automaticity in processing
explicit = involving both cognitive and associative processes (dual process theory to understand human mental life) and implicit = merely learning through association
which approach is predominantly used to describe animal learning theory?
and examples where this may not be true?
(McLaren et al, 1994 textbook chapter)
associationist approach to learning
whereby animals solely learn through associations (implicit learning)
characterised in terms of the establishment of links between representations e.g Pavlovian conditioning
habituation and sensitisation may be non-associative precursors to associative learning
suggestions of underlying cognitive processes unerpinning learning may be found in some animals
explain the Overtraining Reversal Effect (ORE)?
McLaren et al, 1994 textbook chapter
in rats, overtraining of discrimination between black and white cards (through treating the former), they will learn reversal of this discrimination faster than those who were just trained
due to in overtrained, black card a good predictor of reinforcement to follow and a relevant cue (between colours not positions etc.), so higher associability, so entering into new associations more rapidly as hypothesis test this cue first to gain treat before others
whereas in just trained to criterion, not as good a predictor and associability of relevant cue not as high (compared to other irrelevant cues), so reversal of discrimination learning is slower due to testing other cues as well
therefore seems a better example of associative over cognitive learning
describe the cognitive and associative account to explaining the effects of ‘blocking’ on animal learning?
(McLaren et al, 1994 textbook chapter)
blocking is a method employed where initially pair stimulus (e.g light) with reinforcer (e.g food) but then in second trial a second stimulus (e.g a tone) will co-occur with the first stimulus with the same reinforcer
animal will learn little about relationship between the second stimulus (tone) and reinforcer (food) due to being ‘blocked’ by the previous relationship of the 1st stimulus (light) with the reinforcer
- will be disrupted when the affective characteristics of the 2 US’s presented one on each training session are different but e.g food in 1st and water 2nd will enable blocking to occur as both appetitive
cognitive explanation - light becomes a good predictor of food, whereas tone is more ambiguous when compared to the light, so wait for further info about whether tone good predictor (playing it without the light)
associative explanation - blocked stimulus (tone) with decrease in associability compared to the first stimulus, due to being a poor predictor of reward
- better supported through animals being slower to learn that tone predicts food when tone played separately to the light, having been blocked (cognitive account would predict that learning would be fast as ‘wait for info about tone as predictor in isolation’)
describe the double dissociation between implicit and explicit learning in the serial reaction time tasks in humans?
(McLaren et al, 1994 textbook chapter)
lights flash and have to respond to it by pressing correct key
in experimental group, lights flash in a certain pattern, enabling prediction of future flashes
implicit - when faster reaction time due to continguency compared to controls, in absense of explicit processes
explicit - when verbally able to predict future flashes or when able to verbally explain the contingencies between flashes (relying on working memory and episodic memory in the long term)
both potentially explained through associative learning as implicit learning of contingencies and gain a ‘feeling’ regarding which flash will appear next
indeed found that pigeons show positive transfer from sequence production (faster RT) to sequence discrimination (predictions) (both elements of ^^^)
what was Tolman’s view on understanding human cognition?
claimed that decisions made by rats in a maze setting can tell you all you need to know about human cognition
bar social psychology and language learning
what is the key difference between instrumental (operant) and classical conditioning?
in classical conditioning (Pavlov), the animal/human doesn’t have to do anything to learn
in instrumental/operant conditioning the human/animal has to perform actions and learns from the consequences
what is meant by the law of effect and what were the findings prompting this?
Thorndike, 1898
placed cats in a puzzle box and gave them incentive to escape
once they found the correct thing to press to escape, time taken to escape would reduce
leading to the ‘law of effect’ whereby any behaviour followed by positive consequences was likely to be repeated but followd by unpleasant consequences is likely to be stopped, so reinforcement establishes link between the stimulus and response
(led to theory of operant conditioning)
issue: reduced process in animal to mere stimulus-response connections, with no place for expectancy of reward/punishment hence unable to explain findings like increased errors in a maze when reward decreases in quality compared to a control group - as were expecting a better quality reward
what is meant by scala naturae of mental function, proposed by Romanes?
suggested that at one end of the ‘ladder of nature’ is amoeba (least intelligent) and at the other is humans (most intelligent)
and that all animals can be placed on a scale within this regarding level of mental function
e.g rats and pigeons in middle and humans, chimpanzees, parrots and dolphins at the top
however, cannot assume that there is this
what is Morgan’s Canon regarding human and animal behaviour?
that humans tend to see animals doing something amazing and think ‘wow that’s exactly what i would’ve done’ and infer that they have the same mental functions
but instead, should use the simplest principles to explain that behaviour and only explain using complex principles when explicit and undeniable evidence for it
give an example of natural non-associative exposure learning in the male white crown sparrow?
Marler
learn their song in a critical period early in life but if this is missed then an impoverished song is produced
e.g in isolation experiments, these birds will show deficiencies in their own song upon maturation (no access to intact adult song) but does still contain some valid elements
young birds reared in presence of taped songs will learn and present that song, even if from another species (little difficulty for song sparrow to learn swamp sparrow song)
give an example of natural non-associative exposure learning in the aplysia (marine sea snail)?
very simple organism so enables direct manipulation of neurons to study basic learning processes
Kandel
when siphon or mantle or gill (under their body) stimulated (touched) then contract
show habituation - (reduced response over repeated presentations without reinforcement) when usually respond to touching siphon by withdrawing gill and siphon but after many trials this response mainly disappears
the connection strength of siphon sensory neuron synapses on motor neurons for the siphon and gill weakens during habituation due to tiring out the synapse and reduced levels of neurotransmitter release as overuse of the pathway
show sensitisation - after aversive shock to the tail, initially weak response to touch by withdrawing gill and siphon becomes more vigorous
connection of siphon sensory neuron synapses on motor neurons for siphon and gill strengthen due to facilitation by interneuron (transmitting impulse from tail sensory neurons to synapse between siphon sensory and motor neurons) and shown by increased motor neuron activity
what is meant by habituation?
can this effect occur the other way round?
- form of exposure learning
response to a stimulus that is repeatedly presented which is not rewarding or aversive will often decline over a number of presentations
e.g responding to noise by turning round and looking at it but if repeated then response will decline or being in a bad smelling environment but not noticing after a while
studied using
- startle repsonse - a rat will move head from side to side and move around when noise presented
- orienting response - rat rears up to inspect a presented light source
also, response to a stimulus can increase over a number of presentations e.g increased reaction to mildly painful stimulus (electric shock) (sensitisation)
suggested that habituation depends on the animals ability to remember stimuli for short periods of time i.e if a distractor then may dishabituate (no decrease in level of response) due to removing memory trace of first stimulus
what is the issue regarding sensitisation and the existence of conditioning?
and solution for this, found by who?
- form of exposure learning
if sensitisation occurs (increase response with repetition) then the increase in responding after pairing a CS and US may be sensitisation and not conditioning at all
Rescorla, 1967 argued that a random control (CS and US occur randomly) would generate the same amount of sensitisation, so conditioning should only be attributed to CS-US pairings if it led to greater responding than this control group (as if same response then sensitisation)
CS-US pairings have specific effect over and above any sensitisation that may occur (much lower suppression ratio meaning higher conditioning when probability of shock when CS presented than when equal in both conditions or high probabilitywhen CS not presented) (Rescorla, 1968)