Innate Knowledge (what an organism is born with) Experience leads to changes in knowledge

1. Innate Knowledge (what an organism is born with) Experience leads to changes in knowledge and behavior Learning refers to the process of adaptation Of behavior to experience. Memory refers to the permanent records that Underlie this adaptation.

2. How experience changes an organism Learning Perspective EVENT Change in Behavior Memory (Cognitive) Perspective EVENT Change in what organism knows

3. Learning vs Cognitive (Memory) Perspectives Learning focuses on simple tasks Pavlovian Conditioning built-in food salivation reflex US UR CStone food salivation tone salivation new learned association

4. Operant Conditioning Animal makes random response then accidentally presses bar R Re (response) (reward or reinforcement) Animal is more likely to press bar Memory perspective focuses on complex tasks Recall Present a list of words(STUDY) (wait) Write down all the words(TEST)

5. Word Completion • S M T O • What’s the word? • Question answering • What is the red pigment that carries • oxygen in the blood called? • The Learning Perspective uses Animals as • Subjects • can control environment • belief that laws of learning apply to all animals

6. The memory perspective uses humans • we care more about humans • language stimuli • The learning perspective takes an Associationistic • Approach • Mind is a collection of innate reflexes and learned • associations stored in the brain • Complex behavior is gradually built up out of • simple associations

7. Memory perspective adopts the information processing approach The brain is a computer • It has software or programming called the mind • It has a “programming language” • Experience constantly adds to the program • It has a “central processor” • (innate knowledge) • It has a large “hard disk” • (long-term store)

8. 42 unconditioned stimulus (US) “forty-two” unconditioned response (UR) NID Experiment Learning “It’s a conditioning study!” NID 42 “forty-two” conditioned stimulus (CS) after learningNID “forty-two” Memory “It’s a memory experiment” cue item-to-be-recalled studyNID 42 testNID ? cued recall

9. food US air in eye shock salivation UR blink “ouch!” . . . . . . . . . . . . Pavlovian Conditioning Definitions US is paired with CS CS US tone food salivation tone salivation CR conditioned response Sometimes the CR is like the UR Sometimes the CR tries to compensate for US Example: If US is shock, CR is fear and behavior that compensates for pain

10. Forgetting Conditioning Acquisition Extinction Strength of CR US is paired with CS CS never paired with US Extinction Is it because conditioning is gone? OR because conditioning is inhibited?

11. Inhibition Hypothesis + CS US CS US acquisitioninhibition extinction Loss Hypothesis + CS US CS US CS US acquisitionextinction Evidence Favors Inhibition Hypothesis 1.Spontaneous Recovery prob. of CR wait a while time Suggests that the original learning was not lost

12. 2. Disinhibition Effect External Inhibition light food salivation light salivation light sali …TONE! (salivation stops) light food salivation light salivation light sali extinction light sa light nothing light TONE! salivation starts again Tone inhibits the inhibition from extinction Shows extinction is due to inhibition, not loss

13. 3. Stimulus-compounding experiments (Rescorla, 1979) Experimental Control Group Group Phase 1 Tone Shock(same) Tone  Fear Phase 2 Tone + Light - 0 Tone - 0 Extinction no shockLight - 0 stimulus compound Phase 3 Light + Buzzer - Shock Test to seeExperimental group develops if lightfear more slowly is inhibited The light became a conditioned inhibitor of fear Extinction leads to inhibition

14. What is learned in Pavlovian Conditioning? S-R viewORS-S view tone CS tone CS food  salivation food  salivation US R US R Which one is right?

15. Sensory Pre-conditioning Experiment Phase 1 Buzzer . . . Light CS2 CS1 Phase 2 Light . . . Food Salivation US Light Salivation Phase 3 (test) Buzzer . . . ? What happens? S-R view predicts no salivation S-S view predicts salivation Results show salivation supporting S-S view

16. Sensory pre-conditioning shows S-S association is learned Buzzer Light Food predicts buzzer S-S Salivation causes salivation Buzzer Light Food predicts buzzer S-R Salivation does not cause salivation Conclude: at least some of the learning is S-S

17. Konorski’s (1948) second-order conditioning experiment Phase 1 light . . . food  salivation Phase 2 buzzer . . . light  salivation buzzer salivation This is second-order conditioning Phase 3 light . . . shock  leg withdrawal Test phase buzzer . . . What happens? salivation or leg withdrawal

18. S-S view light foodsalivation buzzer S-S S-S

19. buzzer S-S S-S

20. shockleg withdrawal Buzzer should lead to leg withdrawal S-S

21. S-R view foodsalivation light S-R

22. buzzer S-R

23. shock leg withdrawal Buzzer should lead to salivation S-R

24. Conclude: Both S-S and S-R learning occur

25. Conclude: Both S-S and S-R learning occur But why didn’t leg withdrawal occur in Konorski’s experiment? Phase 1 light food salivation S-S S-R

26. When do you get conditioning? Pavlov “If CS and US occur at around the same time” Temporal Contiguity View Modern View (Rescorla) “If the CS predicts whether the US will happen” Contingency View

27. Contingency Perfect positive contingency thunder no thunder lightning 20 0 no lightning 0 345 prob (thunderlightning) = 1.0 prob (thunderno lightning) = 0 Strong negative contingency sun no sun stars 1 200 no stars 200 60

28. Contiguity without Contingency 10 20 20 40 a b c d airplane no plane Stim 1 No Stim 1 no Stim 2 Stim2 no bird bird prob. (birdplane) = .33 prob. (birdno plane) = .33 bird and plane are paired A quick test for contingency a·d > c·b then positive a·d = c·b zero contingency a·d < c·b then negative

29. You can have a positive contingency even when pairing is the least frequent possibility Example: can you learn that and “cat” are associated? hear “cat” no “cat” 100 900 1,000 200 9,800 10,000 see no prob (“cat” ) = .10 prob (“cat”no ) = .02 positive contingency

30. Contingency and Conditioning shock no shock shock no shock perfect positive contingency perfect negative contingency tone no tone tone no tone 0 4 4 0 3 0 4 0 tone leads to fear Standard Experiment tone tone tone tone time shock shock shock shock Unpaired Experiment tone becomes a conditioned inhibitor of fear

31. Random Pairing shock no shock shock no shock zero contingency conditioning occurs tone no tone tone no tone 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 T T T T S S S S No conditioning occurs even though tone and shock are occasionally paired Partial positive contingency Conclude: contingency, not contiguity matters

32. shock no shock tone no tone 20 20 20 20 Random Pairing Experiment zero contingency no conditioning occurs Shows that there must be some contingency between CS and US to get conditioning. Contiguity is not enough.

33. Fear vs Anxiety • if tone predicts shock then animal becomes • afraid after tone • (like a phobia) • if tone does not predict shock (random pairing) • animal ignores the tone and experiences • something like anxiety (unfocused fear)

34. Blocking Effect phase 1tone shock 16 times phase 2tone+light shock 8 times phase 3light alone NO FEAR IS ELICITED! Shows that contingency alone doesn’t produce conditioning Get conditioning when (a) CS predicts US AND (b) CS tells something we didn’t already know

35. Explaining the Blocking Effect • trial 1 CS US • tone shock • CS is surprising • US is surprising • Process CS and US • Create association between CS & US • trial 2 tone stock • trial 3 • trial 8 • CSmemory of  fearUS • toneshockshock • Shock is not surprising any more so no • additional strengthening of association occurs

36. trial 3 trial 8 CS memory of shock  CR fear toneUS-shock Tone fully activates memory of US shock, so when shock comes it is not at all surprising. No additional learning occurs. no more learning rapid learning Strength of CS-US Association         1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

37. Phase 2 trial 9 CS1 CS2memory tone + lightof shock fear The light is surprising, so it is processed. But the tone completely predicts the shock US shock So the US shock is not processed, so no association is formed between light and shock. Explains blocking effect General Conclusion Stimuli are associated when they provide information that the organism doesn’t already know.

38. Modern view of conditioning and the blocking effect (1) Form association between stimuli only if they are actively processed or “rehearsed” together. (2) Stimuli are processed only if they are unexpected (3) As conditioning proceeds both the CS and US become less surprising. So they are processed less and, hence, less additional learning occurs.