Please read sections 3.1 and 3.2.
Please respond to the following questions and try to use the terms and concepts from the current sections as well as the terms and concepts you have learned so far as you respond to the following questions.
Which section did you like the most? Why? Which section did you like the least? Why? What do you think is the most useful piece of information from section 2.5? Why? Most useful from the handout? Why?
Prior to reading these sections, what did you think about behavior modification? Why? What are three things you will remember from what you read in the sections? Why? How has reading the sections changed what you originally thought about behavior modification? How so?
Finally indicate two topics or concepts that you would like me to cover in more depth in class.
Include a list of the terms and concepts you used in your post. (example - Terms: positive reinforcer, extinction, reinforcer, discriminative stimulus...)
I found section 3.2 to be more interesting than section 3.1. I found 3.2 to be interesting in the fact of the Pavlov Pouch. I found it quite interesting how he created and performed that surgery. How he inserted a tube into the dog’s saliva ducts to see when the dog salivated as a reaction to something. He did this procedure to study how a conditioned reflex occurs. A conditioned reflex is a reflex that occurs due to some stimulus. I feel the most important information from this section is that you can classically condition an animal or person to a stimulus. Classically conditioning something is when you create a reaction from the animal or person from a certain stimulus.
I found section 3.1 to be interesting as well, but just not as interesting as 3.2. I really did find the puzzle boxes to be interesting from section 3.1. It was intriguing how Thorndike created these boxes to test the learning and associations of cats. This section showed how people and animals can learn through trial and error. The most useful information I will take from this section is that humans and animals create associations with unsuccessful attempts and successful attempts and how we stamp in the successful ones and stamp out the unsuccessful attempts.
I feel that three things that I will really take away from these sections are the conditions that are needed for a neutral stimulus to work. First a neutral stimulus has to be salient, which is it has to be noticed in the environment. Second, a neutral stimulus has to have regularity in its presentation. The neutral stimulus needs to be associated with the unconditioned reflex. Third the neutral stimulus must be present a sufficient number of times before the association occurs. In order for the reflex to be associated with the stimulus, there needs to be a relationship developed thorough occurrence of the stimulus and the reflex. These sections, especially 3.2 have helped me understand more how learning takes place and how we can learn a lot quicker now due to such things as classical learning and operant conditioning.
Two things I would like to go over more is the topical and functional similarities between the conditioned and unconditioned stimulus. I was a bit confused by that section.
Terms: Pavlov Pouch, conditioned reflex, classical conditioning, trial and error learning, neutral stimulus, conditioned and unconditioned response, operant conditioning unconditioned reflex, topographical, functional
I also found section 3.2 to be a lot more interesting than section 3.1. What was really interesting about 3.2 was Pavlov's Pouch and all the information about his research on conditioned reflexes and classical conditioning. I also found it intriguing that Pavlov just accidentally found out that during testing he developed the theory of experimental neuroses in his process of classical conditioning. When Pavlov tested the dogs with the different shapes to elicit salivation to food, he found that some dogs would become agitated and some would barely emit any behavior when the shape testing became more difficult. He came to the conclusion that the testing was directly effecting the neurons in the dog's brain.
What I didn't like about 3.1 was that it seemed very short and just skimmed the surface of Thorndike's contributions to Behavior Modification. I thought that it would go a little more in depth into what he concluded from his tests and how he developed the idea for his testing like section 3.2 did.
The three things that I need to take away from both of these section combined is that Thorndike developed a theory called The Law of Effect which theorizes a trial and error procedure every animal and even humans go through. Furthermore, he believed that the associations to what worked when the cat tried to escape the box is what was stamped into the brain so that next time the procedure could be repeated, and that the unsuccessful attempts and procedures to trying to escape were stamped out from the cats brain because they did not help the animal to escape the situation. Secondly, Pavlov is most known for his theory on Classical Conditioning where he created the Pavlov Pouch to record a dog's saliva output when testing the animal. Furthermore, he believed that if we could understand the theory of conditioned reflex, then we can get a bit closer in understanding the human mind. Thirdly, he also developed something called learned helplessness, conditioned responses, unconditioned responses, conditioned responses, and unconditioned responses.
Before reading these two sections I only had a brief understanding of Thorndike and Pavlov from my Intro to Psych class but after reading this I now understand their theories more fully.
I would like to go over Thorndike a little bit more and talk about CS,CR,US,UR, a little bit more.
TERMS:learned helplessness, conditioned responses, unconditioned responses, conditioned responses,unconditioned responses, classical conditioning,conditioned reflexes,experimental neuroses,The Law of Effect,associations,Pavlov Pouch conditioned reflex
This section that I liked the most would have to be 3.2. I liked the material out of it about Pavlov and learning his work. Some of the material in this section I didn’t know (especially about his earlier work before). Well, I guess the section that I like the least would be 3.1. Both the sections were very interesting to learn about but I don’t think there was as much material/information in this section as much as there was in 3.2. That’s the only reason why I didn’t like it as much as the other one. Overall, they were both interesting to read about.
The most useful piece of information from section 3.1 would have to be about the puzzle boxes and how he created them to test cats and their intelligence on how to get out of them. I thought there was a lot good information in this sections but I thought this really was very useful to learn about. Also, I thought the information about the Law of Effect was very useful, which I will explain more about later in the post. What I thought was most useful in 3.2 was about the Unconditioned Response, Conditioned response, unconditioned stimulus and conditioned stimulus. I thought it was very useful in this section.
Prior to reading sections 3.1 and 3.2, I didn’t really know some of the history that went into behavior modification. I knew of the people that we learned more about in the sections but I learned a little more about them. I didn’t really think about the history of bmod before reading these two sections.
Combining the two sections together, there is a lot of information that I will remember. One thing that I will remember is about the Law of Effect. This states that when behaviors or responses are followed by positive outcomes, that association is stamped in or it is strengthened. Also, it states when behaviors that are unsuccessful, and are not followed by positive outcomes (or aversive) will be stamped out, or unlearned. From this he did go on to develop two additional laws of learning which are Law of Recency (the most recent response is the most likely to reoccur) and the Law of Exercise (through repetition the association are strengthened). Another thing that I will remember from the sections that I read is about Pavlovian conditioning or also known as classical conditioning. This is seen as stimulus/response relationship where the presence of a stimulus a response occurs which is different from response stimulus relationship or behavior followed by consequences. I will also remember about the UR, CR, US, and CS, and about necessary conditions which is making a neutral stimulus become the conditioned stimulus. I thought it was really interesting to learn about and it really helped doing the examples supplied at the end of this section.
Reading this hasn’t really changed my thoughts just more helped me understand bmod a little more and knowing the history is very important when learning about any topic.
I would like to go over my examples of the UR, CR, US, and CS. The examples at the end helped me but I would like to cover it more. Another topic was the Laws that Thorndike developed.
Terms: Pavlov/puzzle boxes/Laws of Effect/UR, CR, US, CS/ Law of Recency/Law of Exercise/classical conditioning/Thorndike
While in class this week we learned about the 6 different types of Differential Reinforcement and I thought I would explain them more this week because this is the week we learned them.
Differential reinforcement is the reinforcement of one behavior and not the other. They are Differential reinforcement of other, DRO, DRH (High), DRL (Low), DRA (Alternate), DRI (Incompatible), and DRC (Communicative). Every differential reinforcement must have a good target behavior. I will explain each of them individually.
Differential Reinforcement of other or DRO is when one ignores problem behavior and reinforce any appropriate behavior. An example of this would be if a student disrupts class and the teacher says if they can be quite for 10 minutes (and they do) they will get computer time. This reinforcement is to decrease the behavior.
Differential reinforcement of high or DRH is when one reinforces when appropriate behavior is at high levels. An example of this is if your mother wants you to make your bed more, because you never make it. So she says if you make your bed at least four times a week you can play your X-Box for 2 hours on the weekend. This is used to increase a behavior.
Differential Reinforcement of low (DRL) is when one reinforces when target behavior reaches low level of responding. The example of this is when a family is out shopping and the kids ask several times during the shopping trip if they are able to eat out and they don’t get to because they asked to much. The next time they go out shopping the children only ask once and they get to pick where they want to eat at next. This is used to decrease a certain behavior.
Differential Reinforcement of alternate, (DRA) which is when one reinforces alternate behavior to the inappropriate behavior. This is used to decrease a behavior. An example of this is when a student will get out of there seat constantly and the teacher will ignore this behavior, but when he is in his seat he will receive a smile from the teacher.
Differential Reinforcement of incompatible (DRI) is when one reinforces an incompatible behavior with appropriate behavior. If a student taps on his desk because he is bored and it is disruptive in class the teacher might give the student a stress ball to play with instead and is praised for the quiet behavior. This form of reinforcement is used to decrease a behavior.
The last form of differential reinforcement is differential reinforcement of communicative (DRC). This is used to decrease a behavior. It is when one ignores inappropriate behavior and reinforce communication behavior. If a shy child doesn’t ask for what he wants from his parents and only points to want he wants the parents might ignore this behavior until he verbally asks for what he wants.
The section I found most interesting was 3.1 because it was newer information that I wasn’t as knowlegable about, It was about thorndike and his laws and how he studied learning. I read about it in history class but I don’t think the book explained his laws as well as this section did. He gathered information about learning by placing a cat in a “puzzle box” and observing it’s attempts to get out, which he graphed. He came up with two laws 1st was the law of effect-- The Law of Effect basically states when behaviors or responses followed by positive outcome, that association is “stamped in”or strengthened. IT also states that when the behaviors that are unsuccessful are
not followed by positive outcomes, or followed by aversive outcomes they will be “stamped out” or otherwise, unlearned. Also The Law of Recency states that the most recent response is the most likely to reoccur, and the Law of Exercise states that
through repetition the associations are strengthened.
I have learned about Pavlov many times before—which is why it was a little less interesting to read.
The first thing I’ll remember from these sections would be the three sufficient conditions that a situation must have for it to be learned. IT must be salient—meaning it must be noticeable in a way, there must be regularity in it’s presentation, and it must happen a sufficient number of times.
I’ll also remember pavlov’s theory about experimental neurosis.’ This was the theory behind the dog’s behaviors when they were under the influence of the stimuli. He believed that the aggressive
Dogs (who would get angry and tear at their harnesses) were under the control of excitatory neurons while the unresponsive dogs (who would just sit there and wait)
were under the control of inhibitory neurons.
I will also remember titchener’s three laws.
Two things I would like to learn more about would be the “Pavlov pouch” and the “Fistula”
I found section 3.2 a bit more interesting than 3.1 mostly because it had fun examples and little quizes implemented into it to test our knowledge. It's not that I really dislike section 3.1. Both sections were sort of a review since I have learned these concepts in many other psychology courses I have taken.
Before taking this class i had regularly thought of Pavlovs structure of S-->R. Stimuli creates a response. This class has kept me focused on the R-->S aspect of behavior though. SO I havn't thought much about how these two are different. These sections definately reminded me of those differences.
I think I'll take away from these sections mostly that there is little topographically similarity between the conditioned stimulus and unconditioned stimulus, but that they are functionally similar because they elicit the same repsonse. Pretty much the US becomes the CS. I will also that Nuetral Stimuli has to be salient(detectable in it's environment), presented regularly(so it become conditioned), and presented numerous times in order to become the conditioned stimulus. Thirdly, I will remember that Pavlov came to these terms, and learning ideas after doing research on dog digestive tracks.
I think just reviewing the key concepts from these sections will be helpful. Nothing specific sticks out as difficult to me at this time.
Terms: Salient, Nuetral Stimuli, conditioned stimulus, pavlov, Topographic, functional, elicit, Stimuli, response, unconditioned responses.
I enjoyed reading section 3.1 on the law of effect. I had multiple examples come to mind while reading this. One is the radio in my old car wouldn’t work sometimes. I tried numerous things like hitting it, turning it off and on, etc, and sometimes it would work, sometimes it wouldn’t. I would notice that when someone was with me it almost always worked, but when I was alone, it rarely worked. After a certain amount of time I found out that it was when the passenger door was slammed that it would work. I found this out by someone getting out of my car when I was still in it with the car running. I noticed it before and didn’t get it at first, but after 2 times of it happening I realized I had to slam the passenger door shut to turn on the radio. Luckily I don’t have that car anymore;) I also remember seeing this happen a lot when my daughter was younger, figuring out her toys, how to make the music play, or the toy talk, she went from just hitting them all over, to specifically pressing the button after numerous times. Its was always kinda fun to watch her learn specific things like this. She would realize that hitting a certain button made it do a certain thing. She would be amazed. In reading section 3.2, I enjoyed reading about Pavlov’s dogs, and got a good understanding of a salient stimulus, such as a loud bell that was heard, or a door bell ringing to answer the door. I do want to talk more in class about the CR, UR, and CS. I understand them from reading, but will get it all much better when we talk in class.
Now that we have talked about it in class, I understand the CR, CS, UR, US better. If for example we were speaking of Pavlov's dogs salivatiing, The Conditioned stimulus (CS) would be the clicking sound made, the Unconditioned stimulus (US) would be the food, both would eventually elicit salivating, which is the conditioned response (CR) and the Unconditioned Response (UR)
That sounds almost like superstition, you having to slam your door for the radio to turn on! I've had cars that I've had to pull these little tricks in too. It's crazy.
Section 3.2 definitely fascinated me the most and caught my attention, mostly because all that stomach surgery just to scientifically measure dog spit? Ew... In the name of science, it's a great idea. But yuck. Poor dogs. I also thought the part about the experimental neurosis was really neat. The dogs behaved exactly how people would behave, or so I think. People act very differently in situations of confusion and unsureness of what to do. Some naturally respond with anger and frustration, while others just shut down and wait for a stimulus that they can recognize. Section 3.1 was a good introduction to the behavioral research section. It went over a lot of the stuff from Intro. really well.
The difference between neutral stimuli and unconditioned stimuli as something I always had a hard time with, so for me that was the most useful. Neutral stimuli (like bananas) are things that don't elicit a response on their own unless paired with an unconditioned stimulus (say you ate a banana and found a slug in it) that causes the organism to emit an unconditioned response (throwing up said banana). Sometimes the correlation only need to occur once for the response to become a conditioned response to the previously-neutral stimulus, which has become the conditioned stimulus. In other cases, the correlation needs to be made regularly for any sort of connection between the NS and the UR to occur. Now I think I've got it. Keeping all the stimuli separate is something I'll definitely make myself memorize from this section. I'll also remember that the NS has to be salient for it to count. You can't correlate two things if you don't notice one of them.
I'll also take the stamping out/stamping in thing away from section 3.1. It sounds like "stamping out" decreases a behavior without actually punishing it. Unless the lack of reinforcement is a punishment in itself?
I've never really though of classical conditioning as a behavior modification technique, partly because the behavior has to be something naturally-occurring in order for anything to get accomplished. Like, you can't reward a dog for salivating and get it to salivate more if it's not something that naturally occurs.
One thing I don't quite know is, does punishment/reinforcement, extinction and extinction bursts, and all that stuff we've learned so far apply to stimulus-response learning in the same way as it does to response-stimulus learning?
Terms: reinforcement, punishment, extinction, extinction burst, conditioned response, conditioned stimulus, unconditioned response & stimulus, neutral stimulus, stamping out/stamping in, experimental neurosis.
The section that I enjoyed the most was section 3.2 because I felt that it provided the most in depth and detailed information. The section that I liked the least was section 3.1 because I felt that it didn’t provide as much information as section 3.2. The most useful information from section 3.1 was the information regarding the different laws. Section 3.1 introduced three laws: law of effect, law of recency, and law of exercise. The law of effect was defined as when behaviors or responses are followed by a positive outcome, the association is stamped in or strengthened and behaviors that are unsuccessful will be stamped out. For example, an individual is more likely to remember behaviors that led to positive outcomes, making them more likely to reoccur. The law of recency was described by stating that the most recent response is the most likely to reoccur. For example, if a behavior you emitted resulted in a positive consequence, you’re likely to associate the last behavior that you emitted with the positive outcome, making the behavior more likely to reoccur. The law of exercise states that associations are strengthened through repetition. In order to strengthen an association, you need to emit the behavior more than once to determine if there’s a correlation between the two variables. The most useful information from section 3.2 was the information regarding classical conditioning. The section mentioned that classical conditioning is a stimulus response correlation rather than a response-stimulus correlation. The reading encouraged individuals to ask whether the stimulus or behavior came first to determine if classical conditioning was used. The reading then stated that there are three conditions which must be met in order to make the neutral stimulus become the conditioned stimulus. The first condition that must be met is stimulus salience (must be noticed in the environment). For example, an ambulance can be heard in the environment and signals people to move out of the way. Another example could be a tornado siren, which you can hear clearly over background noise. The second condition that must be met is regularity of presentations, meaning that a stimulus must be presented regularly so the individual can clearly identify the association. The third condition is the number of presentations, which relates to the idea that you must have enough presentations to clearly identify that there’s an association. The reading provides an example of a bell to further explain the concept of a neutral stimulus becoming a conditioned stimulus. The bell was a neutral stimulus before conditioning because the bell didn’t have an effect on the response. However, after the three mentioned conditions were met, the bell started to become the conditioned stimulus because it began to elicit the conditioned response.
Prior to reading the sections I had no idea how precise behavior modification could be. I had no idea how easily a neutral stimulus could change into a conditioned stimulus. Three things that I will remember after reading the sections are the conditions that make the neutral stimulus become a conditioned stimulus. The three conditions are: stimulus salience, regularity of presentations, and the number of presentations. After reading the sections I know understand how precise the language of behavior modification is and can better understand how to distinguish between a US, neutral, CS, UR, and CR. For instance, you must look at what stimulus elicited the behavior to tell whether the response is UR or CR. I would like more examples provided in class to identify the US, neutral, CS, UR, and CR.
Terms: Law of effect, law of recency, law of exercise, stimulus salience, emit, elicit, conditioned stimulus, classical conditioning, and neutral stimulus
I was also like to mention that I found Thorndike's puzzle box exoeriment interesting. Thorndike studies how cats could learn to escape from a wooden cage, know as a puzzle box. Thorndike studied how the cats learned to manipulate the strings and levers in the puzzle box, eventually allowing the door to open, freeing the cat. Thorndike believed that the cat should open the door faster and faster every time, because the time to escape measure how much the cat had learned ( methodological construct). Thorndike also created the laws of effect, recency, and exercise.
I enjoyed reading section 3.1 better than 3.2, simply because I have not learned as much about Thorndike as I have Pavlov in the past. It was a lot of information in both sections and even though I want to say that I have learned a lot about Pavlov, I found myself getting somewhat confused. It was just a lot to follow, so I think that also contributed to why I liked section 3.1 better.
The most useful piece of information from section 3.1 would have to be the part about the puzzle box. I really enjoyed reading about this. I think another reason why I liked this section better, is because Thorndike's work seemed to lead to Pavlov's work. Thorndike wanted to learn about animal intelligence. Through his work, he came up with the Law of Effect. This states that when a behavior or response is followed by a positive outcome, that association is essentially "stamped in." In other words, the association is strengthened. When the cats figured out how to get out of the box to retrieve the food, the behavior of how to do it was "stamped in." The more they did the behavior, the faster they were at getting out to get the reward. The Law of Effect also takes into account those behaviors that are not followed by a positive outcome- they will become "stamped out." Thorndike also went on to develop two more laws: Law of Recency (the most recent response is the most likely to reoccur) and the Law of Exercise (through repetition, the associations are strengthened.)
The most interesting thing about section 3.2 was the piece about the dogs salivating. I've always enjoyed hearing about what he did. Another useful thing from this section was necessary conditions to make the neutral stimulus become the conditioned stimulus. The three conditions are: 1. stimulus salience 2. the regularity of presentations and 3. the number of presentations. Salience refers to the fact that it has to be noticeable in the environment. A car honking at the car in front of them is salient, a child screaming at home is salient. There has to be regularity when the neutral response occurs, otherwise the association between the neutral stimulus and the unconditioned reflex will not occur. Finally, the neutral stimulus must presented a number of times for the association to occur.
Three things I will remember from these two sections are that classical conditioning is also Pavlovian conditioning, salient means being able to hear or recognize something over the environment, and Thorndike's Law and Effect states that those behaviors or responses that are followed by a positive outcome are likely to be stamped in, and those that are not followed by a positive outcome are stamped out.
I would like to go over the differences between the conditioned stimulus, unconditioned stimulus, conditioned response, and unconditioned response with the examples given. I was getting lost with the examples, so that is something that I would like to go over more.
I wanted to add a little bit about Skinner and his contributions. Skinner thought that we could predict people's behavior by creating the right environment. In class we talked about his book, Walden Two. I have never read this, but the discussion about it was very interesting! What I remember from that discussion was that Skinner had created a society where people could take their children to be watched over. It wasn't necessarily like a daycare, because people could leave their children their and other people would take care of them for them. The children are raised in a collectivist way where everyone takes care of them...if they want to. This was a very controversial book and really rubbed some people the wrong way. Skinner was also responsible for what is called operant conditioning. This is similar to classical conditioning where the stimulus comes before the response. However, operant conditioning has the response coming first and then the stimulus where the response is voluntary. He created what is today known as the Skinner Box. In this, he was able to train rats to perform a certain behavior. Whenever the animal did the target behavior, the mechanism he developed would release food or a reinforcer. Likewise, if the animal did a wrong behavior, the box would release a punisher.
After reading 3.1 and 3.2 I found 3.1 more interesting. This is because I have never heard of Edward Thorndike while I have heard of Pavlov and Skinner. Having a cat figure out how to get out of a box is something that not many would think of. I thought that Edward really did think outside of the box. The Laws that he made with science and behavior I found to be very helpful in so many ways. Also his laws were very to the point and made complete sense.
I really liked how short chapter 3.1 was along with the easiness to read without getting confused. I really enjoyed how things were defined and explained. I was also able to see how he did his graphs. This allows me to know what I have to do when I am needed to make my own graph. I felt that this chapter was very informative and helped me understand the Laws within detail! I also felt that this chapter allowed me to emit the behavior of understanding the chapter. I emitted behaviors that I felt were never emitted before. This is because I wanted to know more and read more.
The one thing I did not like about this chapter was how short it was. This is because I was emitting the behavior of wanting to know more. I felt that I was left shorthanded and wanted to know more about the graphs and what was going to be expected and what we are going to be graphing in the future.
What I liked about 3.2 was the fact that this chapter was very informative compared to the previous chapter. I was reading and liking what I was learning. I felt that my behavior was very pleasurable. I felt that getting more information every time I read was my continuous stimulus. The information was my stimulus and reading it was my response. I did like how my information was presented in all aspects. Along with the vocabulary that was well defined. I also liked the detailed information about Pavlov.
What I did not like about 3.2 was how when something was told about a vocabulary word it was dragged on forever. The more that I read that more I got confused and no longer was able to understand what you were trying to inform me of. I also did not like how Pavlov’s research was not all able to be seen by the Americans. I felt like all of it should have been able to be looked at and preformed again if needed. I wish that we would have been able to know all of it this way we could learn from what all he did for research.
What I would like to know more about is anything to deal with neutral stimulus.
Terms used. Pleasurable, emmited, continuous stimulus
I enjoyed reading both of these sections but section 3.2 was my favorite because it was full of a lot of good information and terminology. I didn't really have a least favorite section. I found the information on Pavlov and Thorndike equally interesting and informative, I tend to like stuff on behavioral psychology and animal behavior studies.
The most important information from section 3.1 was probably about Thorndikes cat studies with the puzzle box. His studies were very helpful in the area of animal behaviors and intellegence. His discovery of the law of effect saying subjects will learn through methodological construct and "trial and error" where also very helpful. He also came up with the idea of the law of recency which states, the most recent response is most likely to reoccur. Finally, the law of exercise which states, through repetition associations are strengthened.
The most important information from section 3.2 was in my opinion, the distinctions between US, UR, CS, and CR... US - the stimulus which naturally evokes the response, UR - the response that is naturally evoked by the US, CS - the stimulus that is paired with the US, CR - the response now evoked by the CS. Also the distiction of UR and CR being both topographically and functionally similar making them difficult to distinguish between.
Prior to reading these sections I was familiar with both Thorndike and Pavlov and there research and theories and their importance to behavior modification. Three things I will take away from these readings are,
1) the terms:
US - the stimulus which naturally evokes the response
UR - the response that is naturally evoked by the US
CS - the stimulus that is paired with the US
CR - the response now evoked by the CS
2) Neutral stimulus has to be salient
3) UR and CR are both topographically and functionally similar.
After reading these sections I now have a much better understanding of classical conditioning and the theories of both Pavlov and Thorndike. In class I would like to go over neutral stimuli and The differences between UR, CR, US, and CS.
Terms:Law of Effect, methodological construct, law of recency, law of exercise, US, CS, UR, CR, topographically, functional, neutral stimulus, salient, classical conditioning
I particularly enjoy section 3.2 because I like to learn about conditioning and the way the dogs learned to salivate before they were presented with food. Although most psychology students have learned about this in most other psychology courses, there are always new ideas to construe. Before I ever took any classes that went over Pavlov’s work with conditioning dogs, I had never thought twice about the way conditioning works or what it even was. I find it rather interesting that someone actually took initiative to learn about something that from the outside does not seem that intriguing. When I go to the grocery store when all I can think about is what I am going to eat for supper I have the hardest time buying food because I just want to eat everything that looks good to my eye. This is because whenever I am hungry and I see food I automatically think I can eat it, unless I haven’t purchased it yet. This reminds me of going to the drive through at my favorite fast food place called B-Bops. You can smell the grilled burgers from a mile away and when I pull into the drive-threw my stomach acts as though it hasn’t seen food for days. The smell of the burgers elicits a nagging hungry behavior so I must emit the behavior in purchasing a quarter pounder. Yum ☺. Because of my conditioning, my stomach growls and my mouth gets a little watery when I smell the food or even so much as think about the food I get to eat. The discriminative stimulus in this case is following the sign that says “ drive threw→” because I am then positively reinforced with my yummy greasy meal. Pavlov’s classical conditioning is an amazing concept to learn about and I enjoy thinking about things in my life that Pavlov would apply this to.
I would like to go over neutral stimuli and experimental neurosis. Some terms I used are discriminative stimulus, positive reinforcement, emitted, elicited, and conditioning.
In the start of this study, Pavlov wanted to study salivary glands and digestion and his surgical technique made me realize that the dogs were salivating before the arrival of the food. They would begin salivating at the sound of the researcher's footsteps which he referred to as psychic secretion. He thought that understanding all of this about dogs would help him understand the human mind. Beyond the use of dogs as study subjects, Pavlov discovered the functions of neurons. When done working with the dogs and creating the knowledge of the conditioned reflex, his work began to be referred to as classical conditioning. In classical conditioning the stimulus and the response start off as biologically relevant. This is where US, UR, CS, and CR come into play.
That was good Addie:) May I also add that Pavlov inserted Pavlov's pouch into each dog so that the ingested food would not enter and contaminate the saliva. Because well, at first he thought it was all because of digestion.
I liked section 3.1 the most, because I thought it was neat to see the Law of Effect as a precursor to operant conditioning: "The Law of Effect basically states when behaviors or responses are followed by positive outcome, that association...is strengthened." Essentially, Thorndike was talking about reinforcement, and I thought that was pretty cool.
I didn't like section 3.2 as much as 3.1. It wasn't uninteresting or anything, but I thought the part of section 3.1 about the Law of Effect was more interesting.
The most useful piece of information from the readings was the distinction between classical conditioning and operant conditioning as explained in 3.2, because it's fairly easy to confuse the two.
I was surprised to learn that the first animals to be studied using the Law of Effect were cats. We tend to think of cats as being really independent animals, and I wonder how successful attempts at more complicated operant conditioning would be on cats.
I hope to remember the distinction between classical and operant conditioning, the classical conditioning process, and the Law of Effect and how it relates to operant conditioning. I definitely would like to talk about these in class.
Terms: Law of Effect, operant conditioning, classical conditioning, reinforcement
I like section 3.2 the most out of the two sections. I found it topics on Pavlov’s unconditioned response, uncontrolled stimulus, controlled stimulus, and controlled response to be very important in determining if a behavior is being controlled or uncontrolled.
Section I didn’t like as much was section 3.1. I thought that the part on the law of effect was good but other than that I felt it didn’t present as much information as chapter 3.2. I think if it had gone into more detail on the all of the topics it would have been better.
I think the most useful piece of information of section 3.1 was the part about the law of effect. Law of effect basically says that responses that show a positive effect are more likely to be repeated than responses that have an adverse effect. I think this was important because it was one of the first theories showing how people respond to certain situations.
The most useful information in section 3.2 was learning about UC, UR, CR, and CS . The part where we had to break down a certain using those terms was helpful in understanding what term is used in what situation. Like in the example of throwing up to the rotten food because you ate it when you were drunk on tequila, the neutral stimulus is the smell of tequila, the controlled stimulus is the smell of tequila after its associated with tequila, the uncontrolled stimulus rotten food, the controlled response is getting sick once associated with tequila, and the uncontrolled response is getting sick.
Prior to reading these sections I didn’t really know the history behind behavior modification. I now know some of the roots of b-mod and how Pavlov and Thorndike helped pave the way for studying behavior modification by discovering important parts like the law of effect and uncontrolled vs. controlled. Three things I will remember from reading these sections are Law of effects, law of recency, law of exercise, stimulus/response conditioning, and response/stimulus conditioning. I’ll remember these topics because it’s really the basis on which both sections were about. And also I can associate these topics/terms now with either Pavlov or Thorndike.
Two Topics I would like covered more in class would be CS, US, CR, UR.
Terms: CS, CR, UR, US, stimulus, response, adverse, reinforcement, law of effect, law of recency, law of exercise, Pavlov, Thorndike.
I liked section 3.1 the most because it shows us how we often learn- by trial and error. Skinner created his box and learned the Law of Effect. This is when you are rewarded by a positive consequence you associate it with what behavior you just emitted. The part I didn't are for was part of 3.2 where it talks about the different behavior the dogs may emit when Pavlov would alter shapes of objects and watch the dogs try to differentiate between them. I just didn't like it because I thought the experimental neurosis that was occurring was mean. Some dogs acted helpless (learned helplessness) while others were aggressive. The most interesting part from section 3.1 would be that cats were able to emit the behavior of swatting the lock open and then elict the action of getting out. The positive consequence of their behavior allowed them to get better each time. The most interesting part of 3.2 would be that the initial condition stimuli come naturally and are then altered and eventually become conditioned by another variable.
Prior to this reading I had already learned about Pavlov and Skinner, but I now can see it from a behaviorist's point of view. Three things I will remember are:
1. The UR and CR are typically similar.
2. The Law of Recency states that the most recent response is the most likely to reoccur.
3. The Law of Exercise states that through repetition the associations are strengthened.
Reading these sections have not changed my thoughts too much on this process because I have already spent a lot of time learning about these two psychologists.
Words: emit elict consequence experimental neurosis reward positive altered
A Russian physiologist who received a Nobel Prize for his study of digestive processes
-invention of the Pavlov pouch which allowed him to isolate a section of the dogs stomach so that ingested food wouldn’t enter and contaminate the saliva
Wanted to study salivary glands
-used a surgical process by cutting a small incision in the dogs cheek and rerouting the duct to the exterior (isolation of the saliva ducts)
-attached a small test tube to collect, measure, and analyze the salivation
Realized that the dogs were salivating before the arrival of food
“psychic secretion” dogs would even salivate when they heard the footsteps of the researcher
It was later referred to as conditioned reflex- believed understanding this would assist in understanding the human mind
-believed the procedure was directly affecting the neurons in an animals’ brain
-some dogs would become highly agitated and others would hardly emit a single behavior
Excitatory neurons and inhibitory neurons
Referred to as experimental neurosis and emotional response that occurs after training a discrimination between the two stimuli then make it so similar to be discriminated
Trained the dogs to discriminate between a circle shape or square shape
-discrimination the ability to distinguish between two stimuli
Work was reffered to as classical conditioning (stimulus/response relationship) in the presence of a stimulus a response occurs
-stimulus and response start off as biologically relevant ex a puff of air is blown into an eye and it blinks-natural response, unlearned. Puff of air = unconditioned stimulus (any stimulus that produces a specific reflex) Blink = unconditioned response (a response that is unlearned)
Found the stimulus could be conditioned to elict the eye blink reflex under necessary conditions = conditioned stimulus
These necessary conditions include stimulus salience, regularity of presentations and the number of presentations
-salient has to be noticed in the environment (door bell--we hear it, we answer the door)
Regularity of presentations- there must be predictability for when a neutral stimulus occurs
Number of presentations- must be presented a sufficient number of ties for an association to be made and strengthened
-the conditioned response is then the resulting reflex of the conditioning
Classical conditioning- stimulus comes before the response and the response is more reflective in nature
Operant conditioning- stimulus comes after the response and the response is more voluntary
I liked section 3.2 the best. It was very informative. However, I really liked both. I have taken a few psychology courses that covered the history of psych and briefly went over these psychologists, but never in as much detail. I liked the fact that section 3.1 went over Thorndikes contributions because he has never been the topic of any class I have taken. I enjoyed learning about the law of effect, meaning unsuccessful behaviors are unlearned. The law of recency, meaning the most recent response is most likely to reoccur, and the law of exercise, meaning that associations are strengthened through repetition. I also liked the section in 3.1 that talked about being able to generalize research on animals to a higher order of species. This relates to my biological psychology course. Generalizing simply means the degree to which you can apply the same information to other situations. I expected this section to be longer, but I think I got a lot out of it considering how short it was, this section was to the point.
Section 3.2 was my favorite because I have learned about Pavlov in many other classes but only briefly and once we learned it, we never spoke of it again. I thought this section was very neccessary and concise. I have always been confused about discriminating between CR, CS, US, UR, and the neutral stimulus. I can't promise that I am a master at it now but the examples helped out alot.
My favorite example was when someone flushes the toilet for the first time while someone is taking a shower, the water gets hot so they jump back. The flush was neutral and becomes the CS, the shower was US and the jump back was to UR and became the CR. I also liked how the UR and the CR were related to topographically and functionally similar. The example of mushrooms having the same topography and different functions (satiation, death, and high) and coffee cups being opposite of that will stick with me.
The response stimulus (R-S) has become familiar to me considering that is what we started off learning, but the stimulus response (S-R)is easier to understand because whenever I think of psychology, classical conditioning is the first thing that pops into my head. The dogs salivating BEFORE the food, instead of the other way around, which is the way everyone percieved it to be.
I will remember that the UR and the CR are essentially the same, other the the stimulus that elicited the behavior. Was it the US or the CS that elicited the behavior? Also , Pavlov was more intriguing than I thought. I didn't know he was a surgical expert in his time, I always thought that his classical conditioning was kind of common sense with a few difficult definitions. Such as the psychic secretion simply refers to salivating before the arrival of food.
I would just like to go over more examples in class that relate to the CR, CS, US, UR
Terms: Law of effect, Law of recency, Law of exercise, generalize, discriminate, CR, CS, US, UR, Neutral stimulus, topographically similar, functionally similar, satiation, stimulus response, response stimulus, classical conditioning, elicit, psychic secretion
I thought that section 3.2 was more interested than section 3.1 because 3.2 went more indepth with Pavlov's study. I never knew the complexity of the study until just now! The thing I liked most about 3.2 was the further description of CR, CS, US, and UR. A conditioned response is something that naturally occurs after introducing conditioned stimulus. The conditioned response and unconditioned response are always going to be the same with any experiment. The unconditioned stimuli is the introduction of a reinforcer that allows the target behavior to keep occuring. However, as I was thinking about these concepts, I was wondering if it was possible to have an extinction burst occur and that if the target behavior was reached without any reinforcement would it then allow the behavior to decrease? Or is it already conditioned enough within the organism that it's an unconcious response that happens without thought? Another important thing when talking about responses/stimuli is the idea that the nuetral stimulous must have regularity in its presentation and needs to be presented a sufficient number of times so that the correlation between the neutral stimuli and US is able to be easily associated. Another important thing about the neutral stimuli is that it has to be salient! Meaning that it ha d to be noticed in the environment.
The most interesting thing I learned from section 3.1 was the law of effect which stated that when behaviors or responses are followed by a positive outcome, tha associated is stamped in. It also states that behaviors that are unsuccessful and followed by aversive/no outcomes will be stamped out. I found this to be interesting because, although it's obviously true, I've never thought about it like that. If you study hard for a test and get a good grade, you're more likely to remember that behavior than if you would have gotten an average grade...if that relates.
What I liked the least about section 3.1 was the shortness and lack of further explanation for Thorndike experiment. I really enjoyed all of section 3.2 so I have no complaints there!
I guess the three things I found interesting would be: UR CR US CS, law of effect, and the fact that topography of the US and UR are different, however they are functionally similar. But the UR and CR share the same topography.
Terms: extinction burst, topograpy, functionally, US, CR, UR, CS, law of effect, neutral stimuli, conditioned stimuli
may I also add that the neutral stimuli can eventually become the conditioned stimuli and that it has the ablility to elicit an unconditioned response by pairing the NS with an US
Another thing worth mentioning for week seven is differential reinforcement. Differential reinforcement is the reinforcement of one behavior but not the other, it is also a behavior under one condition an not another. There are 6 different types of differential reinforcement: DRO(high), DRH (high), DRL (low), DRA (alternative), DRI (incompatible), and DRC (communicative). DRO, DRI, DRA, DRL & DRC all decrease a behavior while DRH increases a behavior. DRA define the alternative behavior and DRI define the incompatible behavior. Here are some examples for differential reinforcement:
DRO-ignore the problem behavior and reinforce any appropriate behavior
-student disrupts class, if student is quite then they'll get extra recess time.
DRH-reinforce when appropriate behavior is at high levels
-if student does not participate in class, if they then participate 5 times, they can have free time
DRL- reinforce when target behavior reaches low level of responding
-student disrupts class by talking, if only talk 1 time in an hour they will get more free time
DRA- reinforce when alternate behavior to the appropriate behavior
-student is constantly moving around, teacher ignores when this behavior happens, when student stops moving about the teacher reinforces him with a smile
DRI-reinforce an incompatible behavior with an appropriate behavior
-student taps on test to release stress, student is given a stress ball, when uses the stress ball instead of taping then he is praised
DRC-ignore inappropriate behavior and reinforce communication behavior
-if a child has tantrums rather than asking for something, when the child speaks and then asks instead of throwing tantrums, the child is then giving what he asks for but not given it if he throws a tantrum
Yes, I've replied to this one a bunch but there is much more to add! Thorndike was interested in animal intelligence! One such study he did involved a cat and how it learned to manipulate strings and evers built into the box allowing the door to open. Thorndike found that as the cat learned how to manipulate the door, the cat would be able to do this faster and faster and escape! This was called methodological construct for intelligence. This then led to the law of effect.
I enjoyed reading section 3.2 the most. I liked it because Pavlov’s research has always interested me, but I learned a lot more about his research that I had not known before. I remember learning about both of these psychologists in History of Psychology. Ivan Pavlov was a Russian physiologist who was studying digestive processes in which in won a Nobel Prize for. But most people do not remember him for being the Nobel prize winner for the Pavlov pouch, but they remember him as a psychologist who discovered classical conditioning. The Pavlov pouch is gross. Ivan Pavlov would isolate a section of a dog’s stomach so that the food would not enter and contaminate the saliva that Ivan Pavlov was trying to study. Gross. The picture of the fistula (tube made from small intestine and attached to abdominal wall) was even more disturbing. I feel sorry for these poor dogs, but I guess they were well fed. During his research he noticed that the dogs would start salivation before the food was even there, but when the dogs could hear the researchers footsteps. He named this phenomenon “psychic footsteps”. In 1927 Pavlov’s research was finally translated into English, but American psychologists only paid attention to research that agreed with their previous findings. Pavlov started ringing a bell(CS) to be associated with food (US) and eventually the bell would be the only thing needed to get the dogs to salivate (UR & CR). Researchers during this time were also making discoveries about neurons. Some neurons would excite and some neurons would inhibit subsequent neurons. He attributed these neurons as the reason why some dogs would go crazy well the bell rang and some would just do absolutely nothing (learned helplessness). I thought it was interesting that Pavlov classically conditioned dogs to tell shapes apart and then he would eventually make the shapes that they were supposed to be able to discriminate look the same. Sounds kind of cruel to me, an impossible task. The necessary conditions to make a neutral stimulus become a conditioned stimulus are three things: (1) stimulus salience, (2) regularity in presentation and (3) presented sufficient number of times. Stimulus salience is that the stimulus has to be noticeable, for example a bell needs to be able to be heard in order to be effective. Regularity in presentation means that there needs to be a “rhyme or reason” for the stimulus. It cannot just happen whenever or the neutral stimulus will never become the conditioned stimulus. For example, If the bell rang at variable intervals with food being present sometimes to cause the salivation, it will not work. And lastly, the stimulus needs to be presented a sufficient number of times for the associated to be noticed. It the stimulus only happens once and never again the unconditioned stimulus will never become a conditioned stimulus. I have always been good at differentiating between US, UR, CS, and CR and have known for quite some time that the UR and the CR are always the same. Is there ever a situation where it is not the exact same? I would like to know.
The section that I like the least then by default is 3.1 and I did not dislike this section at all, but I think most, if not all people who have owned a pet in their life, have put their pet in a some sort of situation just to see what they would do. I think Thorndike was just having some fun, putting cats in boxes and see how they get themselves out. It is also pretty amazing that behavior research has spanned seventy years. I would think there would not be much left to research or how do psychologist come up with new things to research. Thorndike research was to learn about animal intelligence and being able to compare his results to human’s aka comparative psychology. I have always been on the fence about comparative psychology, because obviously humans are a lot different than animals in a lot of way, and yet the same in other ways. Thorndike would basically put cats in strange wooden contraptions and see how long it would take the cat to figure how to get themselves the heck out of the box. He would do this multiple times with the cat and used reduction in the time getting out of the box as the methodological construct for intelligence (operational definition of intelligence). Is methodological construct and operational definition the same thing? I am pretty positive that Pavlov would not being able to do his research now because of organizations like PETA and I think they would probably be against Thorndike’s research as well. Thorndike’s research led to the Law of Effect which states that when a behavior or a response is followed by a positive outcome the association is stamped in and strengthened. Thorndike also came up with the Law of Recency and Law of Exercise. The Law of Recency states that the most recent response is the response most likely to reoccur. If a behavior you emitted resulted in a positive outcome, you are more likely to associate the recent behavior that you emitted with the positive outcome which makes that recent behavior likely to reoccur. The Law of Exercise states that through repetition associations are strengthened (you need to emit a certain behavior more than once to see if there is a correlation between the behavior and the positive outcome). This makes me think of superstitious behaviors and how some people can wrongly attribute their most recent behavior with a positive outcome, when in reality the recent behavior has absolutely nothing to do with the positive outcome.
I would like to learn more about the Laws that Thorndike developed. Before reading these sections I had no idea how extensive Pavlov’s research was. I had no idea about his experiment with the shapes. I will definitely remember Pavlov’s disgusting research into the digestive juices of dogs. Gross. I will also remember about Thorndike’s puzzle boxes.
Terms Used: US UR CS CR, law of effect, law of recency, law of exercise, emit, thorndike, pavlov, conditioning
3.1 Thorndike used studied intelligence by observing how cats learned to escape puzzle box. He measured the reduction in length of time it took the cat the pulls levers and ropes to escape the puzzle as evidence for learning occurring. He developed the law of effect, The Law of recency, and the law of exercise. The law of Effect states that good consequences “stamp in” behavior and bad consequences “stamp out” behavior. The law of recency states that the most recent behavior is the most likely to reoccur. The Law of Exercise states that through repetition, the associations between behavior and consequence are strengthened. Like most early psychologists, Thorndike invented his own equipment.
3.2 Ivan Pavlov was a Russian physicist who had already won a Nobel Prize for the creation of his “dog pouches.” This was a surgical procedure in which Pavlov would isolate a salivary duct and run it to the outside of the cheek, into a test tube that could measure salivation. He was measuring the dogs’ salivation around different food stimuli. This study would eventual become more about conditioning behavioral responses. Pavlov began to notice that the dogs would salivate when they heard the researcher’s footsteps, anticipating food would come next. Pavlov referred to this as “psychic secretion” and took precautions to control the environment by sound proofing the rooms and wearing soft soled shoes. He realized and experimented with conditioned and unconditioned responses and stimuli. He developed Classical conditioning. Classical conditioning uses different stimuli and responses to shape behaviors. There are conditioned and unconditioned responses and stimuli. Unconditioned stimuli trigger an unconditioned response. These occur naturally. An example would be touching a hot pan which proceeded to burn you (US) and quickly removing your hand and yelping with pain (UR). These are reflexive in nature. Conditioned responses and stimuli are learned when paired with US or UR. The CR and the UR often appear the same topographically, but do not serve the same function. For example, Pavlov’s dogs’ UR to food (US) is to salivate. However, the pairing of the footsteps preceding the food over time developed a CR to salivate when heard, and the dog is anticipating food. He then worked with the dogs on discriminate stimuli. He paired a square with food and a circle with no food. The dogs learned to differentiate between the shapes and salivated with the square and not with the circle. Going further, Pavlov started making the circle and square look more and more alike. When the dogs could no longer differentiate between the two shapes, they didn’t know what to expect. They acted out in two ways. Some became very aggressive while others retreated, demonstrating learned helplessness. He had finished his research on the conditioned reflex by the time it was published in English and distributed in the United States in the mid 1920’s.
Vocabulary: Methodological Construct, Laws of Effect, Recency, and Exercise, Consequence, Operant Behaviors, Differential stimuli, Elicit, Emit, Differential Response, Conditioned Reflex, Psychic secretions, Excitatory and Inhibitory Neurons, Experimental Neurosis, Classical or respondent conditioning, Discriminate conditioning, Target behaviors, Unresponsive and Aggressive, Learned Helplessness, S > R and R >S relationships, Neutral Stimulus, Salient, stimulus classes, topographical and functional, necessary conditions
Section 3.1 focused on Thorndike’s focus on animal intelligence and his puzzle box work with cat, it was a wooden box contraption that he used to study how a cat would learn how to manipulate the strings the box to open to the door to get out, the cat displayed “trial and error” behaviors until it finally learned which behavior to repeat to be able to escape the box in less time each time it was placed back in the box, Thorndike referred to this as “methodological construct of intelligence,” how it got out faster and faster. I found the most useful information in section 3.1 how he was able to use classic conditioning with the cats when he was able to create a reaction from the animal, it’s also interesting how we as human and animals create associations with attempts at what works and doesn’t work (behaviors in certain situations). I found section 3.2 was not interesting at all, it focused on Pavlov’s research with studying the digest system, mainly in dogs, and he studied the association with sounds, the display of food, before and after the how it affected their response with saliva. (classic conditioning)
I will remember how the dog’s behavior changed throughout the study, some became aggressive (and angry and would tear their harnesses) and some had no responses at all, his study with the bunnies and the relation between them and humans with the blinking response.
Terms :classic conditioning, behaviors
3.4 Watson
It was crazy how many things I remembered from this section. Not just from the reading that we had to do but because I was able to relate it back to my History and Systems of Psychology class that I took last year with Otto. In response to many of the writing prompts I was able to recall from memory what the significance of Watson’s Behaviorist Manifesto. First, I remembered that he had first presented it at some big conference but he was generally ignored as being a part of some wing-ding psychologist theory. It is not as though his ideas in behaviorism swept the nation overnight, but in the end he did have a very large following. In addition to all of this I remembered that the big players at the time were the fundamentalists and the structurists. The fundamentalists were huge Darwin guys who sought to tie everything back to evolution and to find a purpose for psychological features this way. Structurists sought to break everything down to their very basic elements, like the elements in chemistry, and then build them up from there to clearly define human nature. Both of these sought to use introspection, which was an unreliable, unscientific form of research but it was all they had at the time, so that is what they used. Watson simply rejected all of this because, for him, it wasn’t scientific because it could rarely be replicated and physically observed. For Watson, humans were simply very complex animals in the way they behaved but ultimately they could be broken down into three simple emotions; fear, anger, and love. And of course, in addition to all of this I remembered the scandals that took place with Watson, from his torture of Little Albert to his affair and ultimately landing in the advertisement business.
One thing I liked from this section was the bit dedicated to systematic desentization and how that can work with phobias. My example dealt with clowns because I freaking hate clowns. With the makeup on you cannot really tell what emotion they are displaying or who they really are, and the fact that I have seen way too many horror movies probably doesn’t help at all. I am not brave enough to follow the plans for systematic desentization to clowns so I will simply live with my irrational fear because, like in the case of fearing F-5 tornados in Cali is survivable because you don’t deal with them, I don’t deal with clowns on an everyday basis…or do I?
Well, I’m just assuming that I’m jumping on the bandwagon with really not liking Watson’s lack of a moral compass. This just goes to show that people, no matter their great contributions to society are still at their very basics, human, and thus imperfect. Clearly if he were to propose his Little Albert study to the ethical board he would be stripped of his license and hopefully banned from being within a ½ mile of any children. Interestingly, though sad, is the fact that if he lived in the 21st century and was involved in an affair with a research assistant it would simply be shrugged off as just another one for the tallies, a dime a dozen. Man, we live in a corrupt society.