Vicarious Learning 1

Observational learning Change in behaviour due to the experience of observing a model Anecdotal evidence Cats open cupboards, latches Dog open gates 2

Early Work on Vicarious Learning Thorndike Puzzle box Experienced model, naïve learner Animals don’t learn by observation Many animals need to observe successes and failures 3

Not so simple… Some behaviours may LOOK like observational learning, but aren’t… Contagious Behaviour Social Facilitation Local/Stimulus Enhancement Affordances Mimicking/Imitation 4

Contagious Behaviour Species-typical behaviour is released when others perform the behaviour Test performance with model absent Example You may eat when you’re already full if you are with others who are eating Same with animals… 5

Social Facilitation or Interference Performance is changed based on the mere presence of others Get better at easy, well-trained tasks Get worse at difficult tasks Before/After tests, baseline, control group Example Performing better at competitions, shows, tournaments Slacking off at work Zanjonc – cockroaches in easy & difficult mazes 6

Local or Stimulus Enhancement Attraction to objects which others are using, then learn about object on own Attraction to locations where others have been Not learning from others, just attract attention to object Two-Action Tests Example A chimp is attracted to a stick that another has discarded. The attraction allows for learning experiences with the stick. 7

Affordances Actions of the model show the observer about the way the environment operates Model is not strictly necessary Two-Action with same affordance Example An observer watches a model push open a door and learns that the door swings outwards Model not necessary, a string pulling the door open could result in same conclusion 8

Mimickry or Imitation “Copy-catting”; reproduction of observed behaviour Doesn’t necessarily show learning! Outcome Example Dick & Anne get to take a treat from one of two bowls One bowl contains good candy, one has yucky candy Dick reaches into the “green” bowl and gets the bad candy If Anne reaches into the “green” bowl, she has imitated but not learned! 9

Human Infants & Imitation At what age can humans imitate? Metzolff & Moore (1977) 12 to 21 day old infants Facial gestures: tongue protrusion, mouth open, lip protrusion 10

Experiment Experimenter: 90 sec passive face (baseline) Infant shown gesture four times Imitation-test period Video taped and scored by “blind” judges Supports imitation 11

12

Results % of tongue-out response baselinetongue-out mouth open Experimenter’s Gesture 10 5 % of mouth open response baselinetongue-out mouth open Experimenter’s Gesture 13

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 Is it vicarious learning? 14

Generalized Imitation Don’t see the outcome of the model’s behaviour, but the observer imitates anyway Prior experience with vicarious learning We learn that imitating others’ behaviour may provide reinforcement We generalize from one condition to another 15

Baer & Sherman (1964) Children observe puppet Mouthing Head nodding Speaking nonsense Lever presses Imitation of first 3 behaviours reinforced All 4 behaviours imitated Stop reinforcement All 4 behaviours decrease (extinguish) 16

Vicarious Classical Conditioning Debate as to whether or not classical conditioning can be learned vicariously Does an observer’s behaviour change due to the observation of the model’s behaviour? Is the observer being directly classically conditioned when observing the model? 17

Haner & Whitney (1960) Model has finger on shock-device; observer watches Model removes finger when light is on Record GSR of observer Shock = US Model’s behaviour = UR Light = CS Increased GSR = CR of anxiety 18

Bernal & Berger (1976) Observer watched video of eyeblink conditioning of model Tone paired with airpuff Recorded observers’ tendency to blink Observers acquire eyeblink CR to tone 19

But... In this study, could be higher-order classical conditioning Seeing someone blink might be a CS for blinking yourself Previously see people blink, if you blink you avoid aversive US Tone could be CS 2 to previously learned CS 1 20

Venn & Short (1973) Baseline measure Watch video Boy shows fear or liking of Mickey Mouse toy over Donald Duck toy Key pressing for M&Ms Responses on Key (%) Before Observing Model After Observing Model Mickey Mouse Donald Duck Model Shows Fear to Mickey Mouse Toy 21

Observation of Conditioning No observation of CS-US pairing i.e. toy never paired with US Change in observers’ behaviour due to toy paired with reaction of model (fear or liking) basic classical conditioning not necessarily vicarious learning Similar to prejudice where US was positive/negative words US = positive/negative reaction of model 22

Vicarious Operant Conditioning Some evidence that operant conditioning can be acquired through vicarious learning Important to distinguish from stimulus enhancement Observe model’s reinforcement or punishment 23

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 24

Dorrance & Zentall (2001) Japanese quail Models trained to peck or step on treadle m m Two-action method controls for stimulus/local enhancement Treadle always gets pressed down, so affordances are the same 25

Methods Observers watched one model either peck at or step on treadle Later tested in absence of model Not contagious behaviour or social facilitation 26

27

Characteristics of the Model Authority Dominance Similarity Sincerity Attractiveness Venus Effect 28

Characteristics of the Learner Uncertainty Sex Age 29

Characteristics of the Situation Task uncertainty Task difficulty Presentation of model 30

31

Bandura’s Studies Bobo the Clown experiments Children as observers Watched various models demonstrating behaviours Consequences of model’s behaviour Availability of reward 32

Model Observers 33

Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory Attentional processes Retentional processes Motor reproductive processes Incentive and motivational processes 34

Miller-Dollard Reinforcement Theory Vicarious learning as a variant of operant conditioning Observer’s behaviour changes due to consequences of observer’s behaviour Three steps: 1. Learner observes behaviour of model 2. Learner copies response 3. Learner receives reinforcement 35

Possible Problems Absence of model Latent learning Delays in behaviour common Lack of reinforcement Generalized imitation 36

Comparison Bandura’s theory Innate processes, learning, and cognition Future expectations Reinforcement theory Behavioural; operant conditioning Past experiences 37

38

Foraging Birds opening milk containers, pecking through creamers Stimulus enhancement? Foraging locations Local enhancement? 39

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 40

Bandura et al (1963) 5 minute video of Rocky & Johnny Johnny plays with toys Rocky asks to share, but Johnny says no Rocky beats Johnny up Rocky plays with toys Rocky puts all the toys in a sack and takes them home Watched how often children played aggressively (hit Bobo doll) One little girl asked for a sack 41

In real life… Causal or Correlational Correlation does not show causation 3 rd factor? 42

Developing Phobias Vicarious acquisition Prevalence in humans? 43

Treatment of Phobias Flooding Systematic desensitization Relaxation and shaping 44

Modeling 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. Symbolic modeling 3. Participant modeling 45