lesson 8 Flashcards
(60 cards)
In Lesson 2 we noted the four ways that we can arrange an operant and an outcome: the operant can either increase or decrease the probability of the outcome, and that outcome can be either good or bad. We called these positive reinforcement, punishment, omission training, and avoidance learning. Which of those is the superstition about breaking mirrors based on? Refresh your memory of these terms from Lesson 2, and then press the button to see my answer.
The mirror-breaking superstition can be seen in two ways. We can consider it a belief that breaking a mirror (the operant) causes (increases the probability of) bad luck (an aversive reinforcer); this would be an example of punishment (the operant causes something bad to happen). Alternatively, we could see it as a belief that not breaking mirrors prevents bad things from happening, which would be an example of avoidance learning. Note that, in this case, the operant is the absence of an action (not breaking mirrors), which makes the second explanation a bit of a stretch.
A few weeks ago, Jimmy walked under a ladder and, shortly after that, someone stole his car. Jimmy now believes that walking under ladders is dangerous (so is not locking your car, but he isn’t focused on that). Which of the following events is most likely to strengthen Jimmy’s superstitious belief?
Jimmy walks under another ladder and the following day he wins the lottery
Jimmy avoids walking under a ladder and the following day his pet hamster dies
Jimmy walks under another ladder and the following day his pet hamster dies
Jimmy avoids walking under a ladder and the following day nothing happens
Jimmy walks under another ladder and the following day his pet hamster dies
Jimmy is a polite Canadian and whenever he sneezes he says “excuse me”. One day, he sneezes while alone in his apartment. He still says “excuse me”, though. This is evidence that:
Jimmy has learned the rule that you must always apologize after sneezing, whether anyone is present to hear it or not
Jimmy has been shaped to apologize when sneezing, without understanding the communicative value of the response
Jimmy is hallucinating that there are other people in the room with him
Saying “excuse me” is a fixed action pattern that always happens after sneezing, innately
Jimmy has been shaped to apologize when sneezing, without understanding the communicative value of the response
Operant Conditioning (Instrumental Conditioning)
A type of learning where animals (and humans) learn associations between their own actions (responses) and the consequences (outcomes) of those actions.
Law of Effect (Thorndike)
Any behavior that is followed by reinforcement (satisfaction) will be performed more often in the future. (Some also include that behaviors followed by lack of reinforcement will be performed less often).
Shaping
A process used in operant conditioning to train complex behaviors by rewarding successive approximations of the desired response.
Skinner’s Superstitious Pigeons (1948) - Experiment
Setup: Pigeons in operant boxes received food at random intervals, regardless of their behavior.
Observation: Pigeons developed specific, idiosyncratic behaviors that they repeated, as if these behaviors caused the food delivery.
Skinner’s Superstitious Pigeons - Interpretation
Skinner’s Claim: The random reinforcement accidentally strengthened whatever behavior the pigeon was engaged in at the moment of food delivery, leading to a “superstitious” belief in a non-existent contingency.
Replication Issues with Superstitious Pigeons
Subsequent attempts to replicate Skinner’s findings have often failed, suggesting the effect might be less robust than initially claimed or dependent on specific conditions.
Skinner’s Attempt to Explain Language via Operant Conditioning
Complex behaviors like language could arise from the reinforcement of successive approximations of verbal responses.
“Jack and Jill” Pigeon Conversation Experiment (Epstein, Lanza & Skinner, 1980)
Setup: Two pigeons in adjacent boxes were trained to perform a sequence of pecks on text-labeled buttons to “communicate” the color of a light and receive rewards.
Skinner’s Point: To demonstrate that complex-looking behavior could be built through operant conditioning without the need for understanding.
Key Difference Between Operant and Pavlovian Conditioning
Locus of Control: In operant conditioning, the animal’s own behavior controls the outcome. In Pavlovian conditioning, the experimenter controls the presentation of both the CS and the US, independent of the animal’s actions.
Free Operant Paradigm
Definition: An operant conditioning procedure where the animal can perform the response repeatedly at its own rate without discrete trials imposed by the experimenter.
Importance of Trying Behaviors for Learning (Wittgenstein Quote)
Concept: Exploring different actions is necessary to discover their consequences and learn new contingencies.
Choice in Operant Conditioning
Reason: Because the animal controls its behavior, even with a single operant, it always has the choice to perform it or do something else, making operant procedures useful for studying decision-making.
Role of Stimuli in Operant Conditioning
Function: External stimuli can act as occasion setters, indicating what types of response-outcome contingencies are currently in effect.
Term: Contingency (in Operant Conditioning)
Definition: The probability of a particular outcome occurring given a specific response by the subject.
Stimulus Control
When an operant behavior is more likely to occur in the presence of a specific stimulus because that stimulus signals the availability of reinforcement for that behavior.
Terminology Difference (Operant vs. Pavlovian)
US (Pavlovian) ↔ Reinforcer/Outcome (Operant)
Appetitive/Aversive (Pavlovian) ↔ Positive/Negative (Operant)
Positive Reinforcer
An appetitive event that, when presented after a behavior, increases the likelihood of that behavior occurring again.
Negative Reinforcer
An aversive event that, when removed or avoided after a behavior, increases the likelihood of that behavior occurring again.
Reflection Point: Similarities and Differences Between Pavlovian and Operant Conditioning
Similarities:
Both involve learning associations.
Both are influenced by factors like contingency, contiguity, and salience.
Both can involve appetitive and aversive outcomes.
Extinction occurs in both.
Stimuli can play a role (CSs in Pavlovian, occasion setters in Operant).
Differences:
Locus of Control: Outcome is independent of behavior in Pavlovian; dependent on behavior in Operant.
Type of Association Learned: CS-US in Pavlovian; Response-Outcome in Operant.
Behavior Elicited: Reflexive/involuntary responses (CR) in Pavlovian; voluntary/emitted behaviors (operant response) in Operant.
Procedure: Experimenter controls trial progression in Pavlovian; subject often has more control in Operant (especially in free operant).
Terminology: Different terms for the events and their valence.
Trial-and-Error Learning (Thorndike)
Learning occurs through random attempts at behaviors; successful behaviors (those followed by reinforcement) are strengthened, while unsuccessful ones are gradually eliminated. No conscious understanding of the solution is required
insight Learning (Köhler)
A sudden understanding or “aha!” moment where the solution to a problem appears all at once, not gradually through trial and error. Often characterized by a sudden drop in errors.