Chapter 9 Observational Learning

Of Octopuses and Crabs Octopus Crab Put crab in jar Octopus opens jar m/watch?v=ocWF6d0 nelYhttp:// m/watch?v=ocWF6d0 nelY Uh-oh!

Results Trials Time to open jar

Observation Second octopus watches training of first octopus Trials Time to open jar First (model) Second (observer)

Observational Learning Also called “Vicarious Learning” A change in behaviour due to the experience of observing a model

Early Work on Observational Learning Anecdotal evidence Thorndike –Puzzle box –Experienced model, naïve learner –Animals don’t learn by observation Successes and failures

Imitative Behaviour Not necessarily the same as observational learning Do same thing as a model May indicate a lack of learning about a situation –E.g., doing a behaviour that leads to an aversive outcome

Human Infants & Imitation At what age can humans imitate/learn vicariously? Metzolff & Moore (1977) –12 to 21 day old infants –Facial gestures: tongue protrusion, mouth open, lip protrusion

Experiment Experimenter: 90 sec passive face (baseline) Infant shown gesture four times Imitation-test period Video taped and scored by “blind” judges Supports imitation

Results % of tongue-out response baselinetongue-outmouth open Experimenter’s Gesture 10 5 % of mouth open response baselinetongue-outmouth open Experimenter’s Gesture

Infant Research Replication difficult –Tongue protrusion elicited by other means –Infants’ attention: general arousal? Evolutionary advantage Observing and copying behaviour of parents, siblings, etc. may bring more attention

What can you Learn with Observational Learning? Classical conditioning: no Operant conditioning:yes Observe model’s outcome (appetitive or aversive)

Epstein (1984) Model bird (MB) –Experienced Observer bird (OB) –Naïve Experiment –Model trained to use object for food –Ball (B), switch (S), key (K); five phases

Five Phases 1. OB right; B, S, K in left 2. OB right; B, S, K in right 3. MB in left, OB in right; B, S, K in left 4. As above, but B, S, K in right 5. OB right; B, S, K in right baseline

Results Phase 4: observer imitates model Phase 5: observer uses objects without model to guide actions Learning due to observation of a model and expectation of reinforcement (motivation; latent learning) Not due to observer’s prior experience or direct reinforcement

Levy, McClinton, Rabinowitz & Wolkin (1974) Children observed model look at paired pictures, indicating preferences Model received approval, disapproval, or neutral consequences Observers’ subsequent preferences were for the pictures that the models received approval for selecting

Generalized Imitation Don’t see the outcome of the model’s behaviour, but the observer imitates anyway Prior experience with observational learning We learn that imitating others’ behaviour may provide reinforcement We generalize from one condition to another

Generalized Imitation Also an issue of discrimination as applied to: Discriminative stimulus –Who to imitate Response –When to imitate Outcome –What to expect

Miller-Dollard Reinforcement Theory Observational learning as a subset of operant conditioning Observer’s behaviour changes due to consequences of observer’s behaviour, not the model’s

Process Three steps: –1. Learner observes behaviour of model –2. Learner copies response –3. Learner receives reinforcement --> continue imitating Model rat knows maze; observer allowed to follow –Group 1: both model & observer reinforced at end; observer will run maze on own –Group 2: only model reinforced at end; observer will not run maze (latent learning)

Interesting Issues When to delay before imitating –Learning and telling a joke –Limited time offer (e.g., trick-or-treating) Lack of reinforcement –May not actually observe model’s outcome –Model’s outcome may be on PRE –Imitation may not lead to immediately appetitive outcome –Generalized imitation

Bandura’s Studies Bobo the Clown experiments Children as observers Watched various models demonstrating behaviours Consequences of model’s behaviour Availability of reward/punishment

Model Observers

Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory Attentional processes Retentional processes Motor reproductive processes Incentive and motivational processes

Characteristics of the Model Rewardingness Authority Dominance Similarity Sincerity

Characteristics of the Learner Uncertainty Sex Age

Characteristics of the Situation Task uncertainty Task difficulty Presentation of model

Comparison Miller-Dollard Reinforcement Theory –Behavioural; operant conditioning –Past experiences Bandura’s Social Learning Theory –Innate processes, learning, and cognition –Future expectations

Television Violence National Television Violence Study (1998) 8000 hours of programming 7 days/week, 6AM-11PM for 3 years 60% of programs contained violence –Less than 4% contained anti-violence message By age 12, average child has seen 8,000 murders and over 100,000 other acts of violence on TV

TV Violence & Aggression Strong correlation Adapted from Bushman & Anderson (2000) Correlation Smoking & lung cancer Condom use and HIV Lead exposure and child IQ Calcium intake & bone mass Homework & academic achievement Secondary smoking & lung cancer TV violence & aggression

Issues for Studies Correlational findings –Do not imply causation –Third factor? Longitudinal studies –Follow subjects over time Experimental studies –Control and experimental groups –Contrived? –Brief time period

Phobias Development –Vicarious acquisition –Prevalence in humans? Treatment –Flooding –Systematic desensitization

Observational Learning Treatments Modeling –Used with the very young –Sometimes more rapid –May be better at generalization Three types of phobia reduction modeling –1. Graduated modeling –2. Participant modeling –3. Symbolic modeling

Modeling in Behaviour Therapy A model can influence an observer Facilitate known response Teach new behaviours Reduce/eliminate undesirable behaviours

Mirror Neurons Scattered throughout premotor cortex, centres for language, empathy, pain Fire when certain actions are preformed by or observed in someone else “Mental imitation” of witnessed (or heard) actions

Discovery Giacomo Rizzolatti, Vitorio Gallese, & Leonardo Fogassi “Raisin incident” Macaque monkey with electrodes in premotor cortex Published in 1996

Locations in Humans More mirror neurons in more places than in monkeys Premotor cortex (movement) Inferior parietal areas (perception) Posterior parietal lobe, superior temporal sulcus, & insula (comprehend another’s feelings, understand intention, and use language)

Role Learning through observation Understanding meaning or intention of action E.g., become better at golf by watching golf Not limited to motor responses

Gallese, Rizolatti, et al. (2005) Subjects listened to sentences describing actions Same mirror neurons fired as would have if subjects had done the action or seen the action performed Mirror neurons responded to abstract representation (i.e., language)