Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byPamela Brooks Modified over 9 years ago
2
Cumulative Record no responsesconstant rate accelerating
3
Schedules of Reinforcement Fixed Ratio Variable Ratio Variable Interval Fixed Interval
4
Skinner’s “Theory” of Instrumental Conditioning Nature of reinforcer can vary: R -> S [S +R, S r, S -R, S -r ]. 3-term contingency (Discriminative operant) S D : R -> S R (light: bar press -> food) S : R -> S R (no light: bar press ≠ food) Chaining of discriminative operants: S n-3 :R n-3 S n-2 :R n-2 S n-1 :R n-1 S n :R n S r/DD R Two-term contingency: R -> S R Nature of discriminative stimulus can vary: –Exteroceptive –Interoceptive –proprioceptive
5
Skinner’s “Theory” (cont.) Schedule of reinforcement can vary: R n/t S ±R –subject must emit n responses within a particular time frame t. Verbal Behavior. Behavior that is reinforced by a member of one’s verbal community. Private events. Discriminative responding to proprioceptive or interoceptive stimuli (stimuli under our skin). S d : r S r or S d : r S r. Contingency of reinforcement can vary: R S ±R(r)
6
Verbal Behavior Mands (“demands”), a 2-term contingency –verbal response S R [”baba” bottle] Tacts- [tactus (Latin, “to point”)], a 3-term contingency: –S D : verbal response S r –[Sight of Tom’s apple]: Mary: “May I please have an apple?” Tom gives Mary an apple.] Verbal Behavior. Behavior that is reinforced by a member of one’s verbal community.
7
echoic behavior: *Mother says [“dog”]: “dog” “good” textual behavior: *Printed word [dog]: “dog” “good” transcription: *Write the word [d-o-g]: d-o-g “good” intraverbal responses: *Printed word [c-h-i-e-n]: “dog” “bien” *“How are you?”: “Fine thanks” “good” *Printed letters [Na]: “sodium” “good” *“3 x 3”: “9” “good” Verbal Behavior (cont.) Examples of discriminative control of verbal behavior:
8
Skinner [& Freud (& Terrace)] On Consciousness Consciousness is a proper subject matter for psychology but it is not an explanation of behavior. It is what has to be explained (e.g., Tom hit Bill because Tom felt angry). –Why did Tom feel angry? –How did Tom know he was angry? Consciousness vs. Awareness: –Animals are aware of objects (but only fleetingly). –Humans are conscious of objects (because they can name them).
9
Feedback about private events is not as precise as feedback for tacting public events. Discriminative control of inner states (tacting) becomes autonomous with experience. Skinner [& Freud (& Terrace)] On Consciousness Consciousness develops because it enhances the social fabric of the verbal community. It provides us with a sense of “other minds”, another person’s hunger, pain, fear, rage, sadness, truthfulness, etc. In this sense, consciousness is adaptive. - Internal states are inferred by adult (“You seem hungry.”)
10
Behaviorist Approach Classical conditioning: –assumes that CS’s and US’s can be paired arbitrarily. –assumes that temporal contiguity of CS and US is necessary and sufficient for establishing CR. Instrumental conditioning: –assumes that responses selected for reinforcement are arbitrary. No need to postulate mental processes. All learned behavior (human and animal) can be explained by the principles of classical and instrumental learning theory (2- factor learning theory).
11
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
12
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
13
GARCIA EXPERIMENT ON TASTE AVERSION Group I: Compound CS [taste & sound] Shock Group II: Compound CS [taste & sound] Nausea –taste: water sweetened with saccharine –nausea: induced by lithium chloride Effect of CS evaluated in 2-bottle choice test: –Bottle 1: saccharine flavored water –Bottle 2: water Group I: preferred sweet drink (natural preference) Group II: preferred water (avoid natural preference) A compound stimulus [taste & sound] signals the onset of nausea or shock.
15
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
16
Harry Harlow (1905-1981) What does an infant monkey love?
17
Harlow’s Monkeys Monkeys spent more time with the cloth mom (15 hr) than the wire mom (2 hr), regardless of who provided milk. Went to cloth mom when stressed or scared.
18
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
20
Omission Training S D (Key light): R (Peck): S R (Food):
21
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
22
Blocking experiment (Kamin) Training: CS 1 Shock: CS 1 + CS 2 Shock Test:CS 1 fear CS 2 no fear
23
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
24
Predictable and Unpredictable Occurrences of Food p(Food/Key Light) > p (Food/Key Light) p(Food/Key Light) = p (Food/Key Light) CS: US: Predictable: CS: US: Unpredictable: Key Light Food Key Light Food
25
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
26
Hunter On “Representations”...If comparative psychology is to postulate a representative fact,...it is necessary that the stimulus represented be absent at the moment of the response. If it is not absent, the reaction may be stated in sensory-motor term. (Hunter, 1913, p. 21)
28
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
29
RADIAL MAZE
32
Biological Factors: “Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Harlow’s experiment on love Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors: Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US Animal Cognition: Hunter’s definition of representation Radial maze Matching-to-sample Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions
33
Matching to Sample Peck Peck (food)Peck (no food) Peck Peck (food)Peck (no food)
35
Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’ Assumptions “ Misbehavior” of organisms Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion Autoshaping and omission training Blocking Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US. Experiments on animal cognition –Hunter’s definition of representation –Radial maze –Matching-to-sample
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.