Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
PSCL 353 - Exam #2
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Thorndike’s Law of Effect | responses in a situation folloed by satisfaction will become stronger. Responses followed by discomfort will become weaker. |
| Cats in a Puzzle Box | random trial + error behavior gradual change behavior |
| Law of Effect doubts | do animals really know what to expect? - contrast effects do animals always show behavior change? - kohler and insight in apes |
| contrast effects | negative (switch from large to small reinforcement) positive (switch from small to large reinforcement) |
| Skinner Box | aka operant chamber - small aparatus with way for subject to make responses and experimenter to deliver reinforcement - rats + levers, piegons + keys |
| shaping | reinforcement of successive approximations to a desired behavior |
| chaining | constructing a sequence of behaviors with reinforcement only occurring after the final response in the sequence |
| extinction | response eliminated when reinforcement is withheld |
| extinction burst | temporary increase of nonreinforced behavior when extinction starts |
| spontaneous recovery | extinction fades away as a passage of time - not only way for extinguished responses to occur |
| resurgence | recovery of an extinguished response after extinction of a competing behavior |
| typical resurgence procedure | rats in skinner box, 2 levers -- phase1: L1 = food, L2 = no effect -- phase2: extinguish L1 (no food) -- phase3: L2 = food, L1 = no effect -- phase4: extinguish L2 (no food) result --> rats will resume pressing L1 (resurgence) even in absence of food |
| partial reinforcement extinction effect | slows down acquisition of response BUT increase resistance to extinction |
| discrimination hypothesis | more difficult to distinguish between acquisition phase and extinction phase |
| frustration hypothesis | responding while frusterated becomes associated with reinforcement |
| sequential hypothesis | memory of sequence of nonrewarded trials becomes associated with reinforcement |
| schedules of partial reinforcement | fixed interval, variable interval, fixed ratio, variable ratio |
| fixed-interval | reinforcement is given for the first response that occurs after a set period of time |
| variable-interval | reinforcement is given for the first response that occurs after a changing period of time |
| fixed-ratio | reinforcement is given for a set number of responses |
| variable-ratio | reinforcement is given for a changing number of responses |
| pauses after reinforcement on | fixed schedules, esp interval |
| greater responding on | ratio schedules than interval |
| greatest total number of responses on what schedule | variable-ratio |
| matching law | responses are distributed to reflect the distribution of reinforcements |
| example of matching law | - 2 subjects in operant (variable-interval) experiments simultaneously - proportion of responses that a subject makes of a certain kind matches the proportion of reinforcement that is received from those responses |
| probability matching | a related pattern is found in human cognition. the probability of choosing an option tends the match the probability of that option succeeding. |
| example of probability matching | subjects predict 2 lights will come on. if one comes on 80% of the time and the other 20%, they'll pick first one 80% of time. This does not maximize successes. - should pick most probable every time |
| basic idea of the ephemeral rewards task (ERT) | choice doesn't always seem rational |
| in the ERT, what goes down | subjects given a choice between two responses on each trial, each leading to identical rewards. If A - reward given, trial ends. If B, reward given, but A still available. |
| So what are the ERT results | Optimal strategy should be to always first make the response that will keep the other response available (B) and get 2 reinforcements. BUT animals + some primates choose A/B 50/50. |
| what happens with humans and ERT | many humans also pick suboptimally after going thru 60 trials to earn points. They report being confused by this. |
| self control | one type of choice, NOT a moral judgement --> behavioral phenomenon |
| how to study self control | behaviorally by choice between immediate small reward vs larger delayed reward |
| discounting | future rewards not valued as highly as immediate rewards. future punishments not feared as much as immediate. |
| why does discounting make sense | life is inherently uncertain, cannot rely on the future |
| what does keynes say | do not just focus on the long run bc we are all dead then |
| how do pigeons test discounting | put em in a skinner box 1 interaction = less but instant food 2 interaction = more but delayed food pigeons have a lot of discounting poor self control |
| who did hundreds of experiments about discounting | mischel |
| what were the mischel experiments | child waiting to eat candy so they can get two pieces - older child, more likely to wait - something else to do helps - ironic processess - reflects long term personality characteristics |
| Pleasant: the response produces reinforcing outcome | Reward Training (positive reinforcement) - Response INC |
| Unpleasant: the response produces reinforcing outcome | Punishment Response DEC |
| Pleasant: the response prevents reinforcing outcome | Omission, Extinction, Time Out Response DEC |
| Unpleasant: the response prevents reinforcing outcome | Escape, Avoidance (Negative reinforcement) - Response INC |
| when does punishment work? | consistency, delay, intensity factors |
| side effects of punishment? | conditioned fear, aggression |
| omission training | don't do something - good outcome occurs -- ex: time out |
| escape | learn to avoid punishment - two process theory |
| two-process theory | classical conditioning of fear to warning signal + reduction of fear as reinforcement - once learned will always avoid |
| evidence against the two process theory | SIDMAN AVOIDANCE PROCEDURE - no warning signal - animals still find ways to avoid |
| cognitive theory of avoidance | subject develops expectations (e.g. no shock if I respond, shock if I don't) - expectations of circumstance, subject's knowledge/cognitions |
| instrumental learning is sort of | the subject learning how to control the world |
| learned helplessness | learning that there is a lack of contingency between responses and an aversive outcome |
| example of learned helplessness | forcing a dog to be shocked, they stop struggling/trying to escape eventually |
| how do bad events relate to learned helplessness | sometimes when bad things happen, you take it as something that you could fix --> no excuse? bam LH if you learn you cannot fix things, you will not look for the opportunity to fix them |
| learned helplessness has served as a model for what | depression |
| long term learned helplessness effects: emotional | depressed effect, loss of appetite and sex drive, psychosomatic illness |
| long term learned helplessness effects: motivational | lack of initiative to respond |
| long term learned helplessness effects: cognitive | develop "external locus of control" attributional style; fail to recognize situations where they could exert control |
| social defeat approach | psychological and behavioral effects of the losing party in a confrontation among animals of the same species |
| what criticism does social defeat come from | learned helplessness research with animals is often using artifical negative stimuli - social defeat a more realistic manipulation |
| resident-intruder task | animal placed in cage of another animal(s) of same species in a manner that allows non-lethal conflict. - documented to produce anxiety-like and depressive-like symptoms in mice |
| animals allowed to fight on a single occassion | acute stress |
| animals allowed to fight on several occasions | chronic stress |
| after the defeat/interval between social defeat fights | subordinate animal may be exposed to threats from the dominant one - nearby cage - visual/olfactory cues |
| classical conditioning | learning about ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN EXTERNAL EVENTS (out in the world), theories emphasize STIMULUS-STIMULUS associations |
| instrumental conditioning | learning about associations between OUR OWN BEHAVIOR and EXTERNAL events (reinforcement) - our behavior can alter likelihood of outcome |
| who's in charge CC | experimenters determine trials by presenting CS + US |
| who's in charge IC | the subject must make the response |
| nature of response CC | usually involuntary (blinking, salivating, etc) |
| nature of response IC | usually voluntary (pushing a lever) |
| biofeedback | an exception to IC - instrumentally controlling an autonomic response through the use of biofeedback: procedure of giving an individual info about the activity of an internal response |
| drive-reduction theory | positive reinforcers reduce drives, and negative reinforcers increase drives - complete actions to reduce uncomfortable "drive" - brain stimulation as reinforcement - chimpanzees prefer african or indian music to silence |
| if drive-reduction is about bio needs, is it always needed? | no! hull says it's sometimes wrong for ex: ppl love diet coke, but it costs money, bad for health, water is necessary and free |
| what does drive-reduction not take into account | pleasure! |
| incentive motivation | reinforcers are incentives that elicit responding - food! (hunger + pleasure) |
| reinforcer priming | exposure to reinforcer may enforce responding |
| relative reinforcement | anything can be a reinforcement depending on what alternatives are |
| premark principle | a higher probability activity will reinforce a lower probability activity - higher-prob more favorable, more likely to do - if what the subject most wants to do is able to be done, it can serve as reinforcement for other things |
| response deprivation theory | reinforcer is an opportunity to move closer to bliss point - if you are deprived of something more likely to work to be able to increase doing that thing |
| bliss point | ideal distribution of time and effort across all points |
| secondary reinforcement | neural stimuli that have been paired with reinforcers and have acquired the capacity to reinforce on their own - money! |
| social reinforcement | in many species (including humans) attention + physical contact may serve as reinforcement - theorists differ if this is primary or secondary reinforcement |
| what actually is reinforcement? | watson/skinner: - if subjects will inc response to get access to something, that is positive reinforcement - if subjects inc response to having something taken away, that is negative reinforcement |
| ecological validity of punishment | only effective in certain circumstances negative side effects (ex: avoidance, aggression) |
| ecological validity of reward | token economies |
| token economies | clients earned tokens for participating in predetermined target behaviors which can be exchanged for reinforcements - inpatient units, correctional facilities, schools |
| goal of token economies | generalize behavior to other settings BUT may not generalize, depends |
| potential limitations of token economies | lab closed economy, world an open one goal gradient hypothesis |
| goal gradient hypothesis | effect of a reward is weaker further the behavior from the reward |
| how do rewards punish us? | kohn - yes rewards change behavior, but negative consequences good sometimes - rewards may reduce creativity - ppl may focus on reward targets instead of thinking outside of the box ----- reduction of INTRINSIC motivation |
| stimulus control | conditioning a response to occur more often in the presence of a specific stimulus than in its absence |
| discriminative stimulus (S^D) | yes, if you make the response now you will get reinforcement |
| how is stimulus control not CC | you still need to DO the response (pull lever) to be reinforced |
| generalization | responding similarly to similar stimuli. to get a sense of similarity for a subject, a generalization gradient can be formed. |
| generalization gradient | - condition to respond in presence of S^D, not respond in absence (variable interval sched) - test for responses to different stimuli. plot # of responses as Fn of similarity to S^D - gradient is symmetric, centered on S^D |
| what do we do stimulus control for | to study generalization |
| discrimination training | responses in the presence of one stimulus (S^D) would be reinforced, while responses in presence of another stimulus (Sdelta) are not. - learn WHEN to make responses and when not - focus not on training, but what subject does after figuring out rules |
| what happens after discrimination training | subjects are tested on a range of stimuli. discrimination training typically results in generalization gradient that is narrower w/ a higher peak. the peak of responding is moved away for Sdelta |
| behavioral contrast | a phenomenon where changing a reinforcement schedule in one setting causes a behavior to change in the opposite direction in an unchanged setting |
| peak shift | peak becomes higher, narrower, shifted |
| continuity approach | discrimination is achieved by gradual association of one stimulus w/ award (excitation) and one nonreward (inhibition). these associations spread to similar stimuli. - natural explanation of peak shift, excitation/inhibition spread |
| non-continuity approach | discrimination is achieved by attention to particular dimensions + hypothesis testing. behavior can change drastically from one trial to another as different hypotheses are tested. - often tested on multidimensional stimuli |
| mackintosh cnon-ontinuity study | some animals focus on one dimension, some focus on another, and some on compound ex: SD: red circle, Sdelta: blue triangle pigion shown circle, triangle, red, blue then? indv animals focus on diff aspects color, shape, etc |
| testing subjects on stimuli varying on two dimensions | after one discrimination is mastered, which kind of shift is more easily learned? ex: see red/blue circles + triangles p1: S^D blue, Sdelta red - blue circle: respond - blue triangle: respond - red circle: no respond - red traingle: no respond |
| reversal shift | essentially change what is going on to every stimulus. some dimension matters (S^D red, Sdelta blue) -- BC = BT = no response, RC + RT = response. Just keep paying attn to color |
| nonreversal shift | change dimension (S^D circle, Sdelta triangle) -- BC + RC = response, BT + RT = no response |
| what is a tool to study concept learning in animals? | discrimination training |
| hernstein on discrimination training | train pigeons with S^D a class of stimuli and Sdelta anything not in that class. after training test two slides. pigeons capable of learning open-ended categories: - trees vs non trees, indv vs others, dish vs nonfish, humans vs nonhumans |
| errorless | telling people answer so fast they don't even have the option to mess it up |
| errorless discrimination | discrimination can be a long and seemingly frustrating process for subjects with freq responses to Sdelta |
| terrace's errorless DT | begin training w/ Sdelta very far away from S^D. gradually, move Sdelta closer and closer to S^D (stimulus fading) |
| preparedness | relative preparedness defined by the number of learning experiences one must occur before behavior change is reliable |
| conditioned taste aversion | avoidance of food as reponse to illness - long delay - one-trial learning - only certain aspects |
| preparedness and phobia | early evidence on phobias and conditioning: Watson and Rayner Little Albert |
| prepared fear module: ohman and mineka | - responds to simuli that are threatening in species' history - responding is automatic and involuntary - fear response is relatively unaffected by other modules (cog) - specialized neural circuts (amygdala) |
| what happened when skinner noticed tha animal behavior in an operant chamber was surprisingly complex | pigeons pecking at light for food but wtf they are also flapping wings?? - superstitious behaviors!! |
| superstitious behaviors | pigeons did external activities bc they were accidentally reinforced - THIS IS WRONG |
| staddon and simmelhag were like let's observe these pigeons | not random! diff pigeons tended to show same behaviors - interim and terminal activities |
| interim activities | some activities regularly done right after food delivery |
| terminal activities | activities that occurred as time for the next food delivery approached |
| instinctive drift | over time, innate behavior dominates conditioned behavior |
| species-specific defensive reactions | innate response primed in dnagerous situations |
| autoshaping | responding (pecking) in the absence of a relationship with reinforcement |
| negative autoshaping | responding (pecking) in an omission training design |
| behavior system | a behavior system is a related set of perceptual, behavioral, and motivational elements that move together like a unit |
| example of a behavior system | activation of the food system predisposes sensitivity to food-related stimuli, food-searching responses, and food-related reinforcers |
| what do behavior systems emphasize | role of innate, complex behavior in both simple experiments and everyday life |
| viewing learning as stimulus-response association is much too simple | reinforcement is activating a complex structure based on heredity |
| persistance | the voluntary, motivated continuation of goal-directed behavior despite obstacles, challenges, or fatigue |
| approach-avoidance conflict | occurs when a single goal or object holds both positive (desirable) and negative (avoidant) characteristics, causing simultaneous urges to approach and avoid it |
Created by:
atallarida