Paavlovian Prodition And Unconditioned Rating : Classical Conditioning Theory

He deciphered that dogs like humans salivate (reflex response) when they see food; it is a natural physiological reflex response. However he also demonstrated that a signal such as using a bell (stimulus) just before he gave the dog food would eventually lead the dog to salivate at the sound of the bell even if there was no food present. Pavlov verified by pairing or associating another stimulus (the bell) with food he could train the dogs to salivate. This theory could then be applied to people as well. According to Richard et al (2007) it was found that pairing one stimulus with another stimulus could also provoke a reflexive response in people. This is also called a stimulus – response theory of learning.

Classical conditioning is a type of associative learning which occurs when two stimuli are paired together repetitively and therefore become associated with each other eventually producing the same response. Classical conditioning was developed from the findings of Ivan Pavlov to account for associations between neutral stimuli and reflexive behavior such as salivation. Pavlov (1927) accidently discovered that dogs began to salivate before they had tasted their food. To support his theory, he carried out experiments using dogs which involved measuring the amount of saliva they produced. In his experiments, food started off as an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) which produced salivation, an unconditioned response (UCR). They are both unconditioned as they occur naturally without being learned. The dogs were presented with a bell (NS), this provided no salivation. The bell and food were presented together and after many trails an

Background (key works): Reinforcement theory is rooted in theory of operant conditioning based primarily on the work of the American behavior scientist B.F. Skinner (Borkowski, 2011). In contrast to Ivan Pavlov’ respondent conditioning controlled by

Skinner (1948) was also influenced by Thorndike’s (1898) operant conditioning of cats and went on to use similar techniques to study conditioning in rats. Skinner studied how behaviour that is rewarded will be repeated, unlike behaviour that has a negative consequence. Skinner (1948) placed hungry rats in a ‘skinner box’ with a lever, when the lever was pressed, food was released and the rats soon learned that when they pressed the lever they would be rewarded. Skinner (1948) then placed rats in another box and administered them with an electric current. If the rats pressed the lever in this box it would stop the discomfort of the current. After repeating the rats quickly learnt to press the lever. Skinner (1948) argued that all human behaviour can be learned through operant conditioning (McLeod 2015).

This lab tests different forms of conditioning on a virtual rat named Sniffy. In this experiment we began with the virtual rat completely unconditioned and then worked towards getting Sniffy to pull the lever and get food on his own. We went through many steps to complete this task starting with getting Sniffy to notice the food chamber, the lever, and finally having Sniffy realize he can obtain food whenever he wanted by pressing the lever. Then, pushing it further, we made him press the level two, three, four and then five times to receive one pellet. All of these steps tested the idea that receiving the food as a reward will allow Sniffy to realize the benefits of learning and conditioning himself to do things that have a positive outcome more.

A virtual rat, Sniffy, was used for this experiment. Sniffy the Virtual Rat, Pro Version 3.0 allows for the demonstration of Pavlovian and operant conditioning of a virtual rat. Tom Alloway, Greg Wilson, and Jeff Graham, authors of Sniffy the Virtual Rat designed this program to be an affordable alternative for students to gain “access to the main phenomena of classical and operant conditioning that courses on the psychology of learning typically discuss” (Jakubow, 2007). The program allows for simulations for Pavlovian conditioning such as acquisition, extinction, spontaneous recovery, stimulus-intensity effects, compound conditioning, blocking, overshadowing, overexpectation, inhibition, sensory preconditioning,

Rescorla advances original theory by acknowledging a previous flaw of Pavlovian Conditioning and attempts to express a more ‘modern’ view by illustrating the circumstances producing learning in animals, the context of learning and the manner it effects behaviour. Thus suggesting that Pavlovian Conditioning is a form of associative learning, rather than reflex tradition as previously suggested. Furthermore, Rescorla emphasised how Pavlovian Conditioning still plays a fundamental role in modern psychology. However, it must be considered that this research is era dependent; being modern at the time of writing of 1988. Resultantly, one must consider if these arguments are still valid in 21st Century psychology, and if so, how. To further demonstrate

The dogs would start to salivate just by hearing the bell ringing, which normally would not produce this response. The first part of the process involves an unconditioned response, like blinking or salivating. The next part needed for classical conditioning is an unconditioned stimulus. The unconditioned stimulus is one that automatically produces the unconditioned response, such as the smell of food triggering salivation. During conditioning, the neutral stimulus, like the bell in Pavlov’s case, is repeatedly paired with the unconditioned stimulus, or the meat powder. After a while, the neutral stimulus becomes the conditioned stimulus. The conditioned stimulus then produces a conditioned response, since the subject of the experiment has associated the conditioned stimulus with the unconditioned response. Many interesting experiments have been conducted using classical conditioning. Another scientist that preformed an experiment with classical conditioning is John B. Watson. Watson used classical conditioned to make a young boy fear white fluffy objects. He scared the child by making loud noises every time the child was presented a white rat.

This is known as the unconditioned stimulus (UCS). Meat is the unconditioned stimulus because at the sight of the meat the dogs begin to salivate (Feldman, 2010).   The dog’s response to the meat educes salivation and is known as the unconditioned response (UCR). An unconditioned response is defined as a reflexive and natural response that is not connected to prior learning. Unconditioned responses always occur in the presence of the unconditioned stimulus (Feldman, 2010).   While conditioning the dogs, Pavlov would ring a bell right before the presentation of meat. Eventually, the dogs would associate the ringing of the bell with the meat. Therefore, the dogs would begin to salivate at the sound of the bell. At this point, Pavlov could state that he had classically conditioned his dogs. The bell which was a prior neutral stimulus had now become the conditioned stimulus (CS) that brought forth the conditioned response (CR) of salivation (Feldman, 2010). Moreover, we have to ask what would happen if these poor dogs were never again received food upon the ringing of the bell. This would lead to extinction. Extinction occurs when a prior conditioned response decreases in frequency and eventually disappears (Feldman, 2010).   In order for Pavlov to unconditioned his dogs he would have to break their association with the sound of the ringing bell and the presentation of food. To do so he

Pavlov’s theory is to show that there are some things that a dog does not need to learn. When food is shown to the dog, the dog starts to salivate which shows we have got a response, this is an unconditioned response because when he salivates he cannot control it. He then set up an experiment to find out if the dog could be trained to salivate at other stimuli such as ringing a bell when it is time for the dog to eat. When ringing the bell there was no conditioned response from the dog which then led him to ring the bell with the food to see if the dog would still salivate. When ringing the bell with the food the dog then had an unconditioned response and started salivating again. The fourth time he rang the bell and took the food away, which

The process of classical conditioning follows the procedure from Pavlov’s salivation experiment. Before conditioning, when a bowl of dog food is presented the dog would “naturally” salivate at the mouth “in response to food”. Because this response occurs “automatically” and “prior training” isn’t required for hunger, this reaction is called an unconditioned response (UCR) which “is the response that is naturally elicited by the [UCS]” (Powell et al., 2013, pp. 112-115). When referring to a natural response--one is referring to an elicited reaction that is characterized as “an unlearned or innate reaction to [a] stimulus” (Powell et al., 2013, p. 115). Furthermore, the dog food is considered an unconditioned stimulus (UCS), which “is a stimulus that naturally elicits a response” (Powell et al., 2013, p. 115). According to Pavlov’s experiment, when a bell chimes without the presentation of dog food, the dog will not instinctually salivate (Powell et al., 2013, p. 112). Since the bell didn’t initially “elicit salivation” naturally, it’s called a neutral stimulus (NS) (Powell et al., 2013, p. 112). However, through conditioning, as the bell tone pairs with dog food continuously, the dog begins to salivate. Finally, after the conditioning process is completed, the pairing of “food” and the bell “now elicits salivation” (Powell et al., 2013, p. 112). Since the dog’s salivation required some type of continual prompting or, “prior training”, it’s reaction is considered a conditioned response (CR) “and the [bell]” is the conditioned stimulus (CS). By definition, a conditioned stimulus “is any stimulus that, although initially neutral, comes to elicit a response because it has been associated with an unconditioned stimulus” (Powell et al., 2013, p. 115). Responses triggered by a

Classical conditioning was stumbled upon by a Russian physiologist, Ivan Pavlov. His unexpected discovery led him to win a rightfully earned Noble Prize. Classical conditioning is defined as “a form of learning in which reflex responses are associated with new stimuli (Coon & Mitterer, 2016, p. 201).” This form of learning is also called Pavlovian conditioning or respondent conditioning. He found a connection between the stimuli for his dogs’ salivation during his experiment. To begin explaining classical conditioning, it is best to explain how Pavlov conducted his research. He began his experiment by ringing a bell, which was a neutral stimulus (NS) for his dogs. A neutral stimulus is defined as “a stimulus that does not evoke a response (Coon & Mitterer, 2016, p. 201).” Directly after, he put meat

Briefly, Pavlov`s classical conditioning theory explain learning new behavior. He used dogs in his experiment. He explained three stages of classical conditioning. The unconditioned stimulus means that a stimulus in the environment has created a behavior (meat salivate the dog), Neutral stimulus that itself will not create a reaction (bell is ruining no salivate dog), conditioned stimulus means that neutral stimulus and the unconditioned stimulus together (meat and bell together salivate dog) and after conditioning means that neutral stimulus creates a conditioned response and becomes a conditioned stimulus(rang bell salivate

One limitation of Classical Conditioning is that when a behaviour stops being performed, it is very easy for these connections to be lost. This is known an extinction. In the example of Pavlov’s dogs, if the conditioned stimulus, the bell, is presented often enough without the unconditioned stimulus, the meat, the

To test which rats had received Pavlovian and which, instrumental conditioning would be to perform extinction. Extinction involves repeatedly presenting the conditioned stimulus without the unconditioned stimulus. Extinction that occurs in classical conditioning happens when a conditioned stimulus is no longer paired with an unconditioned stimulus. Therefore, for one group, you would remove the tone. In operant conditioning, the extinction can occur if the trained behavior is no longer reinforced. Thus, for another group, extinguish tone and food. By doing this, I would see that the classically conditioned rat’s behavior would decline quicker than the operant conditioned rats. Also, another way to test this is to look at the delay in behaviors. In classically conditioned rats, it uses short-delay conditioning in which the conditioned stimulus begins a second or so before the unconditioned stimulus. Thus, if you used long-delay conditioning, the classically conditioned rats’ behavior of turning around to receive the food would slowly decrease. This is because the classically conditioned rats are used to the short-delay and when the long delay is used the behavior will slowly decrease. In classically conditioned rats, you would see that the timing of the conditioned response will slowly decrease. With the operant conditioned rats, you would see that their responses will not decrease as quickly as the classically conditioned rats. This is because the operant conditioned rats