Pavlovian Conditioning Paper

PURPOSE The main goal of experiment three was to test a rat’s ability to be conditioned to perform a behavior, and then relearn the same behavior after an extinction period. After ensuring that the rat was conditioned on a continuous reinforcement schedule (CRF), the next goal in the experiment was to extinct the previously learned behavior of lever pressing and receiving a food pellet. Once the behavior was extinct, the rat was reconditioned to lever press on a conditioned reinforcement schedule. The goal of the experiment was to demonstrate that a behavior could be learned, extinct, and then relearned.

as food and treats. When the dogs saw their food bowls and smelt their food which was served by

Reinforcement is the main contributing factor in operant conditioning. There is more than one way to go about establishing reinforcement, if a delay occurs between the response and the reinforcement the response may not become strengthened. It is likely that if the reinforcement occurs immediately after the response that there will be a definite strengthening of the response. Continuous reinforcement is when reinforcement occurs at every instance of the desired response. Intermittent reinforcement occurs when a response is reinforced some of the time. The different schedules of reinforcement influence patterns of response. Intermittent schedules offer greater resistance to extinction than continuous schedules.

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,

Stimulation in most sites in the brain was not reinforcing (ie, the rats did not regularly activate the electrode), but one site in particular was reinforcing: the reward pathway. Because of the positive effects felt when this pathway is stimulated, such behavior is reinforced.

Siegel, Hinson, Krank and McCully (1982) did a study to determine if environmental cues was a factor in heroin overdose in rats. They argued that conditioning may occur between environmental cues surrounding an organism and the time of drug administration, which in turn affects tolerance and overdose. In this study, they believed that the effect of heroin would be the unconditioned and the conditioned stimulus is the environmental cues associated with using heroin (was once the neutral stimulus before being paired with the effects of heroin). If a drug is administered frequently with the same environmental cues, an association is made between the NS and the CS. Once this association is made, a conditioned response of anticipatory physiological

I certify that the attached paper is my original work. I am familiar with, and acknowledge my responsibilities which are part of, the University of Phoenix Student Code of Academic Integrity. I affirm that any section of the paper which has been submitted previously is attributed and cited as such, and that this paper has not been submitted by anyone else. I have identified the sources of all information whether quoted verbatim or paraphrased, all images, and all quotations with citations and reference listings. Along with citations and reference listings, I have used quotation marks to identify quotations of fewer than 40 words

Classical conditioning has been around for some time in psychology. Now we are able to relate classical conditioning to nursing practice and education. Classical conditioning can be defined as a learning process when two stimuli are being paired together over and over. Nausea and vomiting are common in patients experiencing chemotherapy treatment. Patients with cancer are typically exposed to a very specific environment in the hospital. This setting would be the conditioned stimulus. The exposure to the hospital happens before the patient receives chemotherapy, which has nausea and vomiting as side effects. This would be the unconditioned stimulus. A patient being exposed over and over to the

Although classical conditioning is something that most people experience in a daily basis, it may also be the first thing someone remembers in a day. According to Olson and Hergenhahn (2009) classical conditioning is defined as a type of learning in which a neutral stimulus comes to elicit a response after being paired with a stimulus that naturally brings about that response. In this paper the subject is to describe the theory of classical conditioning as well as describing a scenario in which one could apply classical conditioning theory to, and bring forth the scenario by showing illustrations of how this could be used

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

In our meeting, I found Mr Pavlov to be direct, matter-of-fact, personable, and authoritative. I would expect that he would build rapport with customers, based on his reliability, technical knowledge and credibility.

Pavlovian Conditioning paradigms (PC) is a learning process used to model the emergent behavioral, neural and cognitive associations that form as a result of presentation of two types of stimuli: the conditioned stimulus (CS), which is a stimulus without inherent rewarding properties, and the unconditioned stimulus (US), a stimulus with inherent rewarding properties1. Previous studies in rats have revealed that PC can activate the limbic and prefrontal cortex regions in the brain2-4. In addition, the amygdala and nucleus accumbens, which form part of the limbic circuits, play an important role in Pavlovian reward learning2-5. Interestingly, the PC model offers a way to eliminate associations through extinction, whereby the presentation of the

Generally, there is a pre-existing unconditioned stimulus (UCS) that elicits an unconditioned response (UCR) from the organism without it having to be learnt (Ormrod, 2016). For learning to occur, a neutral stimulus (NS) that the organism does not already respond to is introduced (Ormrod, 2016). This NS is repeatedly paired with the UCS until it elicits a response, typically, one that is similar to the UCR; however, it can also be different to the UCR (Ormrod, 2016). The NS then becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) that elicits a learned, conditioned response (CR) (Ormrod, 2016). Sometimes, the CR can also be elicited by a stimulus similar to the CS due to generalisation (Ormrod, 2016). However, stimulus discrimination can be used to teach organisms to differentiate such similar stimuli, by presenting them in the absence of the UCS (Spencer, Hartstone, Carter, & Grivas, 2007). Learning through classical conditioning can occur rapidly, and is most effective when the NS is presented immediately before the UCS (Ormrod, 2016). Moreover, associative bias suggests that associations are more likely to be made between stimuli that reflect a true cause-and-effect relationship (Ormrod, 2016). Additionally, extinction of the CR will occur if the CS is repeatedly presented without the UCS (Spencer et al., 2007). Nonetheless, spontaneous recovery can occur, wherein, after extinction, the CR reappears, albeit, weaker (Ormrod, 2016). Thus, in eliminating

All three groups were to run through a complicated maze. Group A was rewarded food daily when they were able to get to the end of the maze. Group B did not receive any food and group C was rewarded food on their 11th trial. Group A showed a much improvement in a short course of time (approximately seventeen days) due to the reinforcement. Group B and C, however, showed little improvement over the course of 10 days. After the 11th trial, group C showed a drastic improvement and even exceeded group A. Tolman determined that the rats in group C have been learning the maze just as much as group A. The motivation of the reward seemed to increase group C’s potential. He termed this as latent learning, which is dormant knowledge that an organism has, but does not express until it is needed. Later on in the study of psychology, cognitive factors were integrated into the study of conditioning.