BLP Exam 2
a surprise
(λ - V
overshadowing results
A elicits CR, but X (less salient) does not
latent inhibition (CS pre-exposure effect) procedure ph 2
all groups get L+
sensory preconditioning Ph 2
all groups get tone and food
blocking procedure ph 2
all grps get BY+
US pre-exposure effect ph 2
all subjects get CS---> US trials
Colwill and Rescorla- devaluation of the US experiment procedure ph 1
all subjects get CS-US training
taste aversion learning
contiguity is lacking; hours between CS and US; yet learning occurs
latent inhibition (CS pre-exposure effect) significance (1)
exposure to L prior to training makes L more resistant to becoming a conditioned excitor later on
Garcia significance (4)
external CSs are more likely to be associated with external USs
Colwill and Rescorla- devaluation of the US experiment procedure ph 2
gr 1 gets US alone; gr 2 gets nothing
overshadowing procedure ph 1
grp 1 and grp 2 are the control groups grp 3 gets AX+
US pre-exposure effect results
grp 1 develops the CR slower than grp 2
blocking procedure ph 1
grp 1 gets B+ grp 2 gets nothing
latent inhibition (CS pre-exposure effect) procedure ph 1
grp 1 gets L alone, grp 2 gets nothing
US pre-exposure effect procedure ph 1
grp 1 gets US alone, grp 2 gets nothing
sensory preconditioning results
grp 1 has a CR grp 2 does not
latent inhibition (CS pre-exposure effect) results
grp 1 takes longer to develop the CR than grp 2
Garcia procedure
grp 1: size- illness grp 2: taste- illness grp 3: size- shock grp 4: taste-shock
Garcia results
grps 2 and 3 learned the CS-US association grps 1 and 4 did not
US pre-exposure effect significance
habituation to the US before training weakens its ability to support learning
Kamin's theory of surprise
must have contiguity and surprise to get learning
Mackintosh and Sutherland assumption (1)
organisms have a limited attentional capacity
Mackintosh and Sutherland assumption (3)
to learn about a stimulus, you must attend to it
what is sensory preconditioning testing?
to see if light elicits a conditioned response
what is overshadowing testing?
to see whether subjects A and X (separately) elicit the CR
Rescorla-Wagner model
unifying theory
overshadowing
A >>>>> X A is much more salient than X
conditioned inhibition procedure ph 1
A+
conditioned inhibition procedure ph 2
A+, AX-
what is blocking testing?
tests to see if Y elicits CR
Rescorla (random US experiment) p (US/CS) >>> p(US/no CS)
CS is a signal for the US, excitatory learning
Rescorla (random US experiment) p(US/CS)<<< p(US/ no CS)
CS is a signal that there is no US, inhibitory learning
test for Pavlovian Conditioning (1)
Colwill and Rescorla- devaluation of the US experiment
sensory preconditioning Ph 1
Grp 1: gets light and tone Grp 2: gets nothing
latent inhibition (CS pre-exposure effect) significance
L is NOT a conditioned inhibitor- fails summation tests
Information account of learning
Rescorla (random US experiment
ΔV = ⍺β(λ - V)
Rescorla- Wagner model
Mathematically captured Kami's idea of surprise
Rescorla-Wagner model
what you expect to get when you see the CS
V
conditioned inhibition results (2)
X is the conditioned inhibitor (it inhibits the CR)
blocking results (1)
Y elicits CR in grp 2, but not for grp 1
sensory preconditioning significance (1)
animals can make S-S associations during phase 1
omission control procedure results
animals cycle between acquisition and extinction
conditioned inhibition results
animals develop a CR to A when A is presented alone but the CR to A is inhibited
biological constraints
assumed "general laws of learning" Garcia experiments
are learning principles the same across species and paradigms?
assumed principle: contiguity is necessary for learning to occur
Attentional account can explain
blocking and overshadowing
Garcia experiments
challenged the assumed "general laws of learning"
expansion of the opponent-process model
conditioned compensatory responses
explains drug tolerance, withdrawal, and overdosing
conditioned compensatory responses
what is learned in Pavlovian Conditioning? (option 2)
during conditioning, the US endows the CS with the ability to directly elicit the CR S-R association after conditioning: CS--> CR (US is no longer in the mix)
test for Pavlovian Conditioning (2)
how does each group respond to the CS?
what omission control procedure testing (1)?
if animals can control CR (salivation), then they should inhibit it during the bell so that they would get the food
what omission control procedure testing (2)?
if animals cannot control CR, then the results should cycle between acquisition and extinction
omission control procedure (1)
if bell ---> no salivation, then receive food
omission control procedure (2)
if bell---> salivation, then receive no food
Garcia significance (3)
internal CSs are more likely to be associated with internal USs
is contiguity sufficient for learning to occur?
no
Rescorla (random US experiment) p(US/CS)=== p(US/no CS)
no information, no learning
can subjects control the CR in Pavlovian Conditioning?
omission control procedure
violations
overshadowing, blocking, random US experiment
Garcia significance (1)
parts are not interchangeable
what do the Colwill and Rescorla results indicate?
that learning is S-S in nature
blocking results (2)
prior conditioning to B blocks learning about Y in B's presence
sensory preconditioning significance (2)
reinforcement is not necessary for learning to take place
Garia significance (2)
some associations are more biologically prepared than others
Garcia wanted to know if
the 'parts' are interchangeable
overshadowing significance
stimuli compete for our attention, the more salient CS wins
blocking significance
subjects appear to only learn about signal when it provides new information
assumed "general laws of learning"
the 'parts' are interchangeable principles are general across learning paradigms and species
two tests of inhibition/ inferring inhibition
summation test and retardation test
Garcia discovered
taste aversion learning
contiguity is a relative term
taste aversion learning allows for longer CS-US interval difference is quantitative not qualitative
Colwill and Rescorla results
the CR is grp 1 is reduced devaluation of the US after conditioning reduces the Cr
what is learned in Pavlovian Conditioning? (option 1)
the CS and the US become associated during conditioning S-S association after conditioning: CS--> mental thought of US--> CR
Mackintosh and Sutherland assumption (2)
we can only fully attend to one thing at a time
is contiguity necessary for learning to occur?
yes
the US - what you get (e.g., shock)
λ
