L&C - Avoidance and Punishment (9)

aversive stimuli

unpleasant, or even painful stimuli, that we prefer not to be exposed to and that are in our everyday lives

errorless discrimination training

a gradual training procedure that minimizes the number of errors (i.e., non-reinforced responses to the S∆) and reduces many aversive effects associated with discrimination training)

avoidance

engaging in a desired behaviour to prevent the exposure to an aversive stimuli that we are about to be exposed to (this reinforces the behaviour)

escape

engaging in a behaviour to get rid of an aversive stimuli that we have already been exposed to (now we are more likely to engage in this behaviour; reinforcement)

two factor theory

in order for avoidance learning to take place, 2 major processes must occur:

1. classical conditioning: we learn that in room A, green light ON = shock so green light on its own causes fear/aversion

2. operant conditioning: we run away from room A to room B and our fear dissipates (this means the green light is reinforcing)

one factor theory

operant conditioning is what is needed to understand avoidance (e.g., run away —> avoid shock; this explains why we avoid and persist); no sufficient explanation for this theory

cognitive theory

our expectations and beliefs maintain avoidance behaviours—as learning progresses, we will develop 2 major expectations based on our experiences:

1. room A — green light ON = shock

2. room B — nothing happens (no shock)

as long as these expectations are upkept, the behaviour (i.e., running from A to B when light is on) is maintained

safety signal hypothesis

in this theory, we don’t just run away from threat, we are also running towards safety; these two factors act as a double reinforcer for avoidance behaviour and shields this behaviour from extinction

three factor theory

3 major processes must occur in a sequence for avoidance behaviour to occur:

1. classical conditioning: green light = shock, this triggers defensive reactions (ex. freezing)

2. operant conditioning: helps us engaged in defensive action (i.e., we get out of freeze mode and run)

3. habit: with enough repetition, the behaviour becomes more automatic and reinforcement is no longer needed for behaviour to continue since the habit is disconnected from outcome

punishment

we engage in a behaviour that produces a consequence so the behaviour is less likely to repeat

positive punishment

we engage in a behaviour that produces a consequence that exposes us to something aversive/unpleasant so the behaviour is less likely to occur (ex. put finger in socket, get shocked)

negative punishment

we engage in a behaviour that produces a consequence where something we desire/find pleasant gets taken away so the behaviour is less likely to occur (ex. get phone taken away)

punisher

a consequence that makes a behaviour less likely to repeat

unconditioned punisher

a punisher that is naturally/innately aversive/unpleasant (ex. going outside without a jacket when it’s cold out)

conditioned punisher

stimuli that are innately neutral but when paired with a well established punisher, they become punishers themselves (ex. parking ticket)

generalized conditioned punisher

a conditioned punisher that functions as a punisher for more than one situation (ex. fines)

intrinsic punisher

behaviour itself inherently creates the punisher; a natural consequence (ex. walking up the stairs with arthritis is painful)

extrinsic punisher

a punisher that is not naturally derived by the behaviour itself, it is created by ourselves or others (ex. hit sister, get video games taken away)

contingency

the degree to which the delivery of the punisher is dependent on us engaging in the behaviour of interest (ex. only shocked when pressing a blue button vs. whenever)

contiguity

how soon we will be punished after performing a behaviour

motivating operations

our own needs and motivations can affect punishment effectiveness (e.g., motivated by a behaviour = punishment effectiveness decreases)

discriminative stimulus for punishment (SDp)

stimulus that let’s us know that we are likely to be punished if we engage in a behaviour

extinction

an alternative to punishment where we identify the reinforcers that reinforce a behaviour and stop reinforcement so the behaviour fades away (ex. unrequited crushes)

response prevention

an alternative to punishment where we take measures to prevent the unwanted behaviour from occuring

differential reinforcement

an alternative to punishment where all the effort is put into reinforcing/rewarding the desired behaviour instead of punishing the undesirable behaviour; eventually, the strength of the reinforced behaviour will be stronger and replace the undesirable one (ex. reward a child when they get an A and ignore when they get a bad grade)

minimizing and maximizing

minimize the conditions that lead to the undesirable behaviour and maximize the conditions that lead to the desirable behaviour

stimulus satiation

when it’s hard for us to remove the reinforcer, so we flood the subject with the reinforcer so they desire it less (ex. kid wants candy — give all the candy they want — they get sick — stops begging for candy)

negative law of effect

if a behaviour produces an annoying state of affairs, it is less likely to be repeated

conditioned emotional response theory

punishment works not just by suppressing behaviour directly, but by creating an association between the behaviour and an unpleasant emotional state, such as fear or anxiety which leads to a nervous system response (i.e., fight, flight, freeze)

avoidance theory

both the CC and OC play a role in punishment and behaviour suppression”

CC: CS becomes aversive to the rat (so it doesn’t engage in a behaviour that leads to it)

OC: if the stimulus is aversive, the rat will try to escape/avoid it, so the rat engages in behaviours that are incompatible with the behaviour that leads to its exposure; now the rat is more likely to engage in these alternative behaviours (negative reinforcement)

Premack principle

using a low probability behaviour as a ticket to access a high probability behaviour (ex. if the child wants to play games, he must study for 30 minutes)