Chapter 5: Learned Motives: Classical, Instrumental, & Observational Learning

PSY 338: Motivation

Pavlov was a research physiologist, not a psychologistAt age 33, earns MDSpends next 20 years

studying the digestive system

Russia’s first Nobel Prize winner in 1904

Novel work done over the final 30 years of his life that earns him his place in scientific history

Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936)

In classical conditioning, the organism learns a connection between two stimuli In other words, the organism learns that one

stimulus predicts another stimulus A form of associative learning

Learning in which connections are formed between internal representations of events (e.g., stimuli and responses) during learning.

Procedure Classical conditioning is the presentation of two or

more events in an experimentally determined temporal relationship

Any change in responding to one of the events is seen as evidence of a learned association

Unconditioned stimulus (UCS) In classical conditioning, this is the stimulus that

elicits the unconditioned response (UR) without conditioning

Conditioned stimulus (CS) In classical conditioning, this is the stimulus

which comes to elicit a new response by virtue of pairings with the unconditioned stimulus

Unconditioned response (UCR) In classical conditioning, the automatic

(involuntary), unlearned reaction to a stimulus Conditioned response (CR)

A learned response elicited as a result of pairings between that NS and an UCS

Pavlov’s Paradigm

Pavlov’s Participants

UCS ---------------------------------------------- UCR  NS ----------------------------------------------- NO RESPONSE

NS + UCS -------------------------------------- UCR* This is repeated several times

CS ------------------------------------------------ CR

Extinction process is initiated:

CS ----------------------------------------------- CRCS ----------------------------------------------- CR (less response than before)CS ----------------------------------------------- CR (less response than before)CS ----------------------------------------------- CR (less response than before)

Eventually we get………..

NS --------------------------------------------- NO RESPONSE (bell) (no salivation)

 

Pavlov (1908)ProcedureStimulus discrimination procedureRewarded dogs when circle was presented (Figure A)Did not reward ellipse (Figure B)Eventually, gradually presentations of the ellipse were more and more similar to a circle Eventually, a very similar figure was presented (Figure C)

Experimental Neurosis

Results•After three weeks of testing between Figure A and Figure C, dogs behavior began to worsen and CR disappeared•Agitated behavior was seen among the dogs as they were being led to the lab

Interpretation•The strong motivation to avoid a frustrating situation witnessed in the dog’s behavior was classically conditioned•Pavlov felt the dog’s behavior was akin to neurotic behavior seen in humans responding to chronic frustration

Experimental NeurosisLiddell (1954)Procedure•Shocked sheep; then gave them a variety of difficult tasksResults•Later, sheep had problems out in the barn and pasture•Fast, irregular HR •Hypersensitive to external stimuli of any kindInterpretation•Neurosis developed in this animals

Experimental Neurosis

Liddell (1954)•Interesting note: If lambs were with mothers during procedures no ill effects were found

Experimental Neurosis

• Watson & Raynor (1920) • Behavioral psychologists John Watson

and grad assistant Rosalie Raynor taught an 11-month old infant to become afraid of a gentle white laboratory rat

• Conditioned phobia

Little Albert reacting to mask worn by John Watson

1878-1958

Elimination of Motivated Behaviors Through ConditioningJones (1924)Procedure•Brought a rabbit (CS that elicits anxiety) into the same room but far away from Peter while he was eating his cookies and milk snack (UCS)•Jones did this each day and gradually brought the rabbit closer and closer Results•No fear to the rabbitInterpretation•Classical conditioning can be used to reduce fears as well as

Elimination of Motivated Behaviors Through ConditioningWolpe (1958)Systematic Desensitization• Trained person to fall into deep relaxation (meditation)• Create hierarchy of fear eliciting stimuli• From least to most strong example of stimulus• Gradually (from least to most) pair each item of hierarchy with relaxation

• Did this without producing fear (because of deep relaxation)

• Exposure treatment combines counterconditioning, generalization, and extinction

Interoceptive ConditioningCS, UCS, or both applied directly to internal organs or mucosa1.Intero-exteroceptive - CS internal; UCS external

• A female dog had a rubber balloon, through which cool water could be irrigated, inserted into the uterus

• CS (cool water) was paired with UCS (food)• Conditioned in as little as 6 trials; btw - did not salivate to warm

water2.Intero-interoceptive - CS & UCS internal loops were formed in the intestines of dogs and then were manually distended

• CS (distentionsof intestional loops) was paired with UCS (delivery of carbon dioxide to lungs)

• Conditioned in as little as 3 trials; intestinal distension produced defensive breathing in the dogs

Razran (1961)

Interoceptive Conditioning

3. Extero-interoceptive - CS external; UCS internal• Human participants volunteered to have balloons inserted into their bladders

• Dials connected to the balloons; participants could tell when balloons were being inflated

• CS (dials) were paired with UCS (bladder distension)• Inflation of balloons (dial readings were high) lead to feelings of the need to urinate

• Even after disconnection of dials, participants felt the need to relieve themselves when they saw the dials were high (even though balloon inflation was absent)

Razran (1961)

Implications of Interoceptive Conditioning1. Usually unaware of interoceptive conditioning

when it occurs

2. Cannot be avoided

3. More resilient than external conditioning

4. Links to psychosomatic reactions

Learned AversionsGarcia & Koelling (1966)ProcedureRats drink flavored water from tubes that flashed light and made noise when the tubes were licked…

Group 1:○ Rats were given electric shocks to their feet two seconds

after beginning to drinkGroup 2:

○ Rats were exposed to X rays (which made them sick) while they drank

Later, both groups were tested with:A tube of unflavored water producing lights and noise A tube of flavored water that was not producing lights and

noise○ Rats are basically given a choice between these two tubes to

drink from

Learned AversionsResultsGroup 1 (rats that had been shocked) avoided the tube producing the lights and noise while Group 2 (rats that had been made sick) avoided only the flavored water

InterpretationEvidently, rats (and other species) have a built-in predisposition to associate illness mostly with what they have eaten or drunk (Group 2 rats) and to associate skin pain mostly with what they have seen or heard (Group 1 rats)This is an example of biopreparedness  

Garcia & Koelling (1966)

Instrumental Conditioning

E. L. Thorndike (1905) •Described the learning that was governed by his "law of effect" as instrumental conditioning because responses are strengthened when they are instrumental in producing rewards

Law of Effect•Responses that are rewarded are more likely to be repeated and responses that produce discomfort are less likely to be repeated

“Rewarded behaviors are more likely to recur”E. L. Thorndike

(1874-1949)

Instrumental ConditioningOperant Conditioning•A type of learning in which voluntary (controllable and non-reflexive) a response (behavior) is strengthened if it is reinforced and weakened if it is punished (or not reinforced)

B.F. Skinner(1904-1990)

Quantity, Quality, & Contrasts of ReinforcementCrespi (1942)ProcedureRats running for pellets• Group 1: Initial small reward; then switched from small reward to larger reward

• Group 2: initial large reward; then switched from large reward to smaller reward

• Group 3: served as a control (no change in reward)Results• Initially, Group 2 > Group 1• Group 1: Started running faster (positive contrast)• Group 2: Started running slower (negative contrast)

See next slide

Quantity, Quality, & Contrasts of Reinforcement

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 2 4 6 8

Trials

Run

ning

Spe

ed (

ft/s

ec)

256-16 Pellets16-16 Pellets1 - 16 Pellets

<---------- Preshift -------------> Postshift -------->

Interpretation•Contrast effect is a strong motivator

Crespi (1942)

Quantity, Quality, & Contrasts of Reinforcement

Large body of literature replicating and confirming Crespi (1942)•However, the intense and vigorous behavior does not equate to persistence•Large reinforcements actually lead animals to stop responding more quickly when reinforcement is withdrawn in extinction

Interpretation•Motivation effect of amount of reinforcer is short-lived; it increases performance as long as it is present, but behavior is quickly reduced in its absence

Quantity, Quality, & Contrasts of ReinforcementQuality of Reinforcement Effect

Simmons (1924)

Procedure•Rats running a maze

• Group 1: Rewarded with bread and milk• Group 2: Rewarded with sunflower seeds• Group 3: No reward

Results•Group 1 > Group 2 > Group 3

Interpretation•Contrast effect relating to quality is a strong reinforcer

Primary and Conditioned Reinforcement

Blodgett (1929)

Procedure•Rats running a maze•Group 1: Always rewarded •Group 2: Initially no reward; then rewarded

Results•Initially: Group 1 > Group 2•Later: Group 1 = Group 2

Interpretation•Group 2 was learning the maze; just weren’t motivated to demonstrate the learning until there was a reason (reinforcement); latent learning

Primary and Conditioned Reinforcement

Primary Reinforcers•Innately rewarding; no learning necessarySecondary Reinforcers•A consequence that is learned by pairing with a primary reinforcer and thus increases behavior

Token EconomiesIn this system, tokens are used as reinforcers for appropriate behavior and can later be exchanged for various reinforcers

Padgett, Garcia, & Pernice (1984)Procedure•Severely mentally challenged woman with 6-year history of wandering off pathways from one building to another at the institution where she lived•Reinforced for staying on path (gained tokens); punished for wandering (lost tokens)Results•In just two days wandering was reduced to zero and remained so during treatment period; follow-up six months after treatment – wandering still not a problemInterpretation•Secondary reinforcers like the tokens used in this case are strong motivators

Token Economies

Jenson, Paoletti, & Peterson (1984)•Attempted to reduce behaviorally disturbed 10-year-old boy’s chronic throat clearings

•Prior to use of tokens – 390 times in a 5-hour period

•23 days of treatment

•Throat clearings dropped to just three in 5-hour period

Classical-Operant Interactions in MotivationAcquired FearMiller (1948)Procedure/Results•25 rats put in a two-compartment box; one side was white, the other black; door separated the two sides; wheel or lever could open this door•White side – grid floor which dispensed shocks•10 trials – shocked but experimenter opens door for escape•5 trials – no shock, open door – rats go to “safe” side anyway•16 trials – no shock; closed door; wheel operable, lever inoperable – 13/25 rats turned wheel to get out •Next trials – no shock, closed door; wheel inoperable, lever operable – 12/13 rats pressed lever for escape

Classical-Operant Interactions in Motivation

Miller (1948)Interpretation•Miller’s experiment suggests that the cues of the white compartment became associated with the shock and developed the capability of motivating escape from the compartment (classical conditioned responses)•The motivation to avoid the cues of the white compartment could then be used to generate new, arbitrary responses•Operant conditioned responses such as turning the wheel and pressing the lever•Thus, two factors may be involved in avoidance behavior

Learned Helplessness

A psychological state involving a disturbance of motivation, cognitive processes, and emotionality as a result of previously experienced uncontrollability on the part of the organismA perceived loss of control Demotivation of behavior

Seligman & Maier (1967)Procedure•Phase 1: Dogs receive either: escapable shock (press button with nose), inescapable shock, no shock•Phase 2: All placed in shuttle box (two components)•Light warned of shock on one side•Escape shock by moving to other sideResults•Dogs that had been exposed to escapable shock and no shock quickly learned to escape•Inescapable shock dogs “quietly whined"Interpretation•Inescapable shock dogs developed a perceived loss of control

Learned Helplessness

Hiroto (1974)

Procedure•College students exposed to loud tone pulses that were “unpleasant but not harmful”•Phase 1: Escapable group and inescapable group•Phase 2: Both groups now could escape tone

Results•Inescapable group was slow to respond in Phase 2

Interpretation•Inescapable college students developed a perceived loss of control

Learned Helplessness

Symptoms of Helplessness

Associative Retardation•Learning deficits develop from learned helplessness situations•Very difficult for dogs and humans in Seligman’s experiments to learn new associations after exposure to helplessness situations

Somatic Effects•Seligman (1976) found that helpless rats and dogs are much less aggressive in aversive or competitive situations than normal non-helpless animals•Rats competing for safe pedestal from shocked floor •Puppies competing for food

Reduction of helplessness with timeOvermier & Seligman (1967)•If its just one session of learned helplessness, usually see some recovery•However, multiple training sessions basically cause permanent helplessness

Observational Learning

The social learning analysis of behavior argues that our ability to learn through observations (modeling) allows us to build patterns of behavior without having to resort to trial and error•Vicarious motivations are involved

Albert Bandura (born in 1925)Frustrated Jock Syndrome

Modeling Processes

Major components involved in observational learning:•Attention•Retention•Reproduction

Learning & AggressionModeling is apparent with copycat acts of aggression•Doomsday Flight movie aired on NBC in 1966 is classic example•Many threats (one even before movie ended)•Rerun of movie in 1971 led to repeat of threats and actually caused one airline to decide to divert plane to Denver so that barometric bomb would not go off

Click on picture for full article

Classical Conditioning & Aggression

Pain-Aggression Model•The idea that painful stimulation elicits aggressive behavior reflexively•Shocked rats will box at each other

Instumental Conditioning & AggressionIf a response leads to a rewarding consequence you would expect it to be repeatedGenn & Pigg (1970)Procedure•College students were told to deliver shocks to another person when that person made a mistake on a learning task•One group was praised for its aggressive behavior; a second group was notResults•Praised group gave more shocks at higher intensities; later in word association task used more aggressive wordsInterpretation•Reinforced aggression may have lingering effect

Modeled AggressionBandura, Ross, & Ross (1963)•Bandura did a large number of variations on the “Bobo doll” experiment •Basic set-up: Pre-schoolers were divided into several groups and and allowed to play with "attractive" toys while “Bobo” an unattractive inflatable, adult-sized, egg-shaped balloon creature (the kind that bounces back after it's been knocked down) sat by itself at the far end of the rooms•Later, adults beat up Bobo in front of experimental group of children•These kids modeled the behavior; added aggressive acts that had not been modeled

Bobo

Modeled AggressionInterpretation•Despite criticisms of being unrealistic and bias towards the production of aggression (Bobo dolls are supposed to be hit), a large body of literature supporting Bandura’s ideas makes it difficult to question that aggressive behaviors can be learned through modeling

Bandura, Ross, & Ross (1963)

Credits

Some slides prepared with the help of the following websites:•ftp://ftp.amberton.edu/_CGenest/.../Motivation%201-26-11.pp...•www.bethel.edu/~johluc/PSY315FA06/.../Earlybehaviorism.p...