Classical Conditioning II - Vocabulary Flashcards
Factors Influencing Conditioning Effectiveness
Contiguity
Contiguity refers to the temporal proximity of the CS and US.
Example: "When Thunder Roars, Go Indoors!" - illustrating a clear temporal relationship.
CS Pre-exposure
Group Ctrl: X leads to CR (Conditioned Response).
Group Exp: X leads to no CR (weaker conditioned response).
CS pre-exposure reduces attention to the CS, resulting in weaker responding at test.
The table represents the contingency:
Outcome (US) Present: a
Outcome Absent: c
CS Present: b
CS Absent: d
Before, During, After: x x
Contingency (Necessity). Better contingency=better conditioning
US Pre-exposure
Group Ctrl: X leads to CR.
Group Exp: X leads to no CR (weakened conditioned response).
US pre-exposure habituates the subject to the US, weakening responding to the CS at test.
The table represents the contingency:
Outcome (US) Present: a
Outcome Absent: c
CS Present: b
CS Absent: d
Before, During, After: x x
Contingency (Necessity).
Partial Reinforcement
Group Ctrl: X leads to CR.
Group Exp: X leads to no CR.
Note: The total number of US presentations must be equal for both groups.
Group Exp experiences partial extinction on CS- trials, resulting in weaker responding to the CS at test.
The table represents the contingency:
Outcome (US) Present: a
Outcome Absent: c
CS Present: b
CS Absent: d
Before, During, After: x x
Contingency (Necessity).
Degraded Contingency
Group Ctrl: X leads to CR.
Group Exp: X leads to no CR.
Note: The total number of US presentations must be equal for both groups.
Group Exp habituates to the US, weakening responding to the CS at test.
The table represents the contingency:
Outcome (US) Present: a
Outcome Absent: c
CS Present: b
CS Absent: d
Before, During, After: x x
Contingency (Necessity).
CS Post-exposure
Group Ctrl: X leads to CR.
Group Exp: X leads to no CR.
Group Exp undergoes procedural extinction, leading to weaker responding to the CS at test.
The table represents the contingency:
Outcome (US) Present: a
Outcome Absent: c
CS Present: b
CS Absent: d
Before, During, After: x x
Contingency (Necessity).
US Post-exposure
Group Ctrl: X leads to CR.
Group Exp: X leads to no CR.
Group Exp experiences retroactive interference (repeated presentations of US alone interferes with original learned CS-US) = weakened responding to the CS at test.
The table represents the contingency:
Outcome (US) Present: a
Outcome Absent: c
CS Present: b
CS Absent: d
Before, During, After: x x
Contingency (Necessity of one for the other).
Overshadowing
Demonstrates reduced responding despite perfect contiguity and contingency with US.
Group OV: AX+ leads to X elicits little cr.
Group Ctrl: X+ leads to X elicits CR.
Salience: Intensity, physical characteristics, biological relevance, naturalistic of stimuli.
Blocking (learning is being blocked)
Challenges the notion of contiguity alone being necessary and sufficient for learning.
Group Exp: Phase 1 (A+), Phase 2 (AX+), Test (X leads to little cr). X is seen as a neutral stimulus as A overshadows or blocks x when put together
Group Acq Ctrl: Phase 1 (A+), Phase 2 (X+), Test (X leads to CR).
Surprisingness: Is there any new information to learn about?
Latent Inhibition (CS-pre-exposure) and US pre-exposure
Latent inhibition is context specific.
Group LI: Pre-exposure (X-), Acquisition (X+), Test (X leads to little cr).
Group Ctrl: Pre-exposure (A-), Acquisition (X+), Test (X leads to CR).
Group US-Pre: Pre-exposure (+), Acquisition (X+), Test (X leads to little cr).
Group Ctrl: Pre-exposure (-), Acquisition (X+), Test (X leads to CR).
Group LI-Diff: Pre-exposure ((X-)1), Acquisition ((X+)2), Test ((X)2 leads to CR).
Group LI-Same: Pre-exposure ((X-)2), Acquisition ((X+)2), Test ((X)2 leads to little cr).
Novelty.
Latent Inhibition (CS-preexposure) and US Preexposure
Not truly inhibitory.
The CS does not pass negative summation test (but does pass retardation test).
Attention deficit explanation.
Protective benefit from irrelevant stimuli and later acquisition of phobias.
Group NegSum: Preexposure (X-), Acquisition (B+), Test (XB leads to CR).
Group NegSumCtrl: Preexposure (X-), Acquisition (B+), Test (B leads to CR).
Group Ret: Preexposure (X-), Acquisition (X+), Test (X leads to little cr).
Group RetCtrl: Preexposure (A-), Acquisition (X+), Test (X leads to CR).
Novelty
Garcia and Koelling’s bright and noisy (and flavored) water experiment
Phobias and fear conditioning.
Evolutionarily based genetic predispositions.
Conditioning Test:
Flavor + audiovisual -----> shock: Audiovisual yields greater CR.
Flavor+ audiovisual -----> sickness: Flavor yields greater CR.
CS-US Relevance or Belongingness.
Factors Influencing the Nature of the CR
The US Identity
Pavlov’s Stimulus Substitution Model described by Preexisting neural connections, pathway established by conditioning and response pathway.
The CS Identity
Timberlake & Grant (1975):
Does not fit with stimulus-substitution model.
CS-US Interval
The time between the CS and US presentation affects the strength and type of CR.
Higher-Order Conditioning
Higher-Order Conditioning
Learning without a direct CS-US experience.
Second-order conditioning:
Metronome (CS) followed by Black square (Second-order stimulus).
Black square (Second-order stimulus) followed by Food (US).
Metronome (CS) elicits Salivation (CR).
Black square (Second-order stimulus) elicits Salivation (CR).
Second Order Conditioning
Group SOC: First Order Cond (A+), Second Order Cond (X- à A-), Test (X leads to CR).
Group Ctrl: First Order Cond (A+), Second Order Cond (X- / A-), Test (X leads to little cr).
What causes responding to the second order conditioning (SOC) CS?
Stimulus-Response (S-R): response is elicited directly by the CS; reflexive learning (response occurs without needing a US to be present).
Stimulus-Stimulus (S-S): response is elicited by the activation of the US representation (response occurs in anticipation of an outcome or US).
Differentiate between learning mechanisms by US devaluation.
Holland & Rescorla (1975)
Group Ctrl: Phase 1 (T à Food), Rotation, Test 1 (T à CR), Phase 6 (--), Test 2 (T à CR)
Group Exp: Phase 1 (Food à Rotation), T à little cr, Food alone, T à CR
Weakened the contingency.
US Devaluation.
Holland & Rescorla (1975)
Group Ctrl: Phase 1 (T à Food), Food deprived, Test 1 (T à CR), Phase 3 (Food deprived), Test 2 (T à CR)
Group Exp: Phase 1(Satiated ), Test 1 (T à little cr), Test 2 (T à CR)
Made food valued again.
US Devaluation.
Holland & Rescorla (1975)
Group Phase 1 Phase 2 Test 1 Phase 3 Test 2
Ctrl T à Food Rotation T à CR -- T à CR
Exp Food à Rotation T à little cr Food alone T à CR
Group Phase 1 Phase 2 Test 1 Phase 3 Test 2
Ctrl T à Food Food deprived T à CR Food deprived T à CR
Exp Satiated T à little cr T à CR
Evidence of S-S learning. But not all instances of CC involve S-S learning. There are some cases of S-R learning.
Returning to SOC, what causes responding to the second order conditioned stimulus that was never directly paired with the US?
Chaining of two S-S associations:
SOC CS -> FOC CS -> US -> CR (S-S, S-S)
Single S-S association:
SOC CS -> FOC CS -> US -> CR
Single S-R association:
SOC CS -> FOC CS -> US -> CR
Extinction US devaluation
SOC CS -> FOC CS -> US -> CR
Two papers by Holland & Rescorla (1975) investigated extinction and US habituation in SOC.
Extinguishing the first-order stimulus had no effect on responding to the second-order stimulus.
Group Exp: Phase 1 (L+), Phase 2 (T à L), Phase 3 (L-), Test (T à CR).
Group Ctrl: Phase 1 (--), Phase 2 (T à CR).
Second-order conditioning
Second-order conditioning was observed early in training, but after many nonreinforced compound presentations, conditioned inhibition was observed.
Group Exp Phase 1 L+, Phase 2 T à L
Group Ctrl --
US devaluation had no effect on responding to the second-order stimulus.
Group 1-Ctrl: Phase 1 (L à Food), Phase 2 (T à Food), Rotation, Test (T à CR).
Group 1-Exp: Phase 1 Food à Rotation, Test (T à little cr).
Group 2-Ctrl: Phase 1 (T à L), Rotation, Test (T à CR).
Group 2-Exp: Phase 1 Food à Rotation, Test (T à CR).
SOC is the result of a simple S-R association.
Group SOC: First Order Cond (A+), Second Order Cond (X à A), Test (X à CR).
Group Ctrl: First Order Cond (A+), Second Order Cond (X / A), Test (X à little cr).
Sensory Preconditioning
Same as SOC but Phases 1 and 2 are switched.
Second-order stimulus: Black Square
Conditioned stimulus (CS): Metronome
Unconditioned stimulus (US): Food
Sensory preconditioning: Black square is followed by Metronome.
Metronome is followed by Food which elicits Salivation (CR).
Black square elicits Salivation (CR).
Rizley & Rescorla (1972)
Showed that extinction of the first-order stimulus does affect responding to the second-ordered stimulus.
This suggests that sensory preconditioning (SPC) works through S-S associations rather than an S-R association, which means that these two seemingly similar procedures operate through different learning mechanisms.
SPC and SOC offer potential reason for likes and dislikes with no apparent reason.
Group SPC: First Order Cond (X- à A-), Second Order Cond (A+), Test (X à CR).
Group Ctrl: First Order Cond (X- / A-), Second Order Cond (A+), Test (X à little cr).
Control by Conditional Relations
Conditional Relations
Involve a third event, a modulator, to modulate the validity of an association between two events.
In Classical Conditioning, modulation also called occasion setter/occasion setting.
Occasion Setting
Refers to the ability of an event (occasion setter) to modulate the association between a CS-US pair.
Conditioned Stimulus (CS)
Unconditioned Stimulus (US)
Occasion Setter
Occasion Setting
Positive occasion setting (OS): A--X+ / X-
Occasion Setting
Negative OS: A-X-/X+
Control by Conditional Relations
OS are not simply conditioned stimuli.
OS do not necessarily have direct (excitatory or inhibitory) associations with the US.
OS can have direct association with the US independent of its modulatory properties.
The direct conditioned association can be of opposite valence of its modulatory potential – orthogonality.
Stimulus Control by Contextual Cues
Discrete cues
Are stimuli that have a clear beginning and end and can be easily characterized.
Examples: tones, lights.
Contextual cues
Are diffuse with no clear beginning or end.
Examples: visual, auditory, or olfactory features of a room or place where the discrete discriminative stimuli are presented.
Conditioning contextual cues does not refer to one characteristic in particular, but rather the overall composition and arrangement of the features of a physical space.
Stimulus Control by Contextual Cues
Contextual cues are often critical in determining whether or not to produce an instrumental or Pavlovian conditioned response.
Contextual cues can control behavior in the same way as discrete cues.
Stimulus Control by Contextual Cues
Contextual cues can become conditioned excitors.
Common in drug-conditioned place preference studies in which the contextual cues form a direct association with the US.
Stimulus Control by Contextual Cues
Contextual cues can become conditioned inhibitors.
Polack, Laborda, & Miller trained Context B as a conditioned inhibitor:
(X+)D | (Z+)A | (Z-)B
Test 1 negative summation in ext ctx, (X)B versus in neutral ctx, (X)C
Test 2 retardation of behavioral control in ext ctx (+)B versus neutral ctx (+)C
Stimulus Control by Contextual Cues
Contexts can serve as conditioned excitors and conditioned inhibitors that can pass retardation and summation tests.
Contextual cues do not have to directly signal reinforcement/non-reinforcement to gain behavioral control.
They can also control behaviour through occasion setting, just like a discrete cue.
Summary
Variables important for training efficacy include contiguity, contingency, salience, novelty, informative value, evolutionary predispositions.
Variables important for determining behavior include the CS, the US, and the CS-US interval.
Higher-order conditioning (SOC, SPC) will also affect behaviour.
Higher-order conditioning can also take the form of modulation or occasion setting in which a third stimulus (or context) modulates the associative validity between a CS and the US.