The End of

1
The End of

• Classical Conditioning!!

2
Underlying Processes

• In other words, what makes Classical Conditioning
  work?
• Theories
• S-RLearning the NS becomes directly associated
  with the UR and therefore comes to elicit the
  same response
• S-S Learning the NS becomes directly associated
  with the US and, because of this association,
  comes to elicit a response that is related to the
  US

3
Other Theories

• Stimulus-Substitution Theory (Pavlov)
• CS acts as a substitute for the US
• Pavlov made inferences about what was going on in
  the brain
• Neurological processes in the cortex activated
  during learning
• We now know these are incorrect

4
Is Pavlovs Theory True?

• If it is, then the CR and UR should always be
  identical or at least very similar
• Are they? Not always
• Shock a rats foot and it will jump
• Pair the light with the shock, and the light
  alone (CS) makes the rat freeze
• This suggests that the CR isnt supposed to just
  be a copy of the UR, but is to get the organism
  ready for the US

5
That brings us to the

• Preparatory Response Theory
• The purpose of the CR is to prepare the organism
  for the presentation of the US
• This theory is better, allowing for the CR to be
  different, or even the opposite of the UR

6
Can the CR be opposite from the UR?

• Example UCR to a shock is usually an increased
  heart rate. If you pair that shock with a light,
  the light will generally elicit a decreased heart
  rate
• Why do you think this happens . . . I dont know
  . . . Could it be . . .

7
Yes! The Opponent Process Theory!!

• The Compensatory Response Model
• Compensatory after-reactions to a US may come to
  be elicited by a CS
• Purpose of this is probably to maintain
  homeostasis in the body
• There are LOTS of practical implications for this
  theory

8
Drug Tolerance

• Some CSs (neutral stimuli) begin to signal that
  the drug is coming
• Therefore, when you see these CSs, your heart
  rate lowers, etc., thus moderating the effects of
  the drug (once you ingest it)
• Can you think of some examples of some CSs for
  alcohol or drug use?

9
Evidence for this theory

• McCusker and Brown 1990
• Alcohol-expected vs. alcohol-unexpected
  environments (e.g. drinking at the office vs.
  drinking in a bar)
• Implications for drinking and driving
• Implications for drug overdose fatalities
• Keep in mind, this isnt always the case
• Sometimes, the CSs seem to strengthen the effects
  of the drugs

10
Another Theory About Classical Conditioning

• Rescorla-Wagner Theory
• A given US can support only so much conditioning
• This amount of conditioning has to be distributed
  among the various CSs available
• A strong US supports more conditioning than a
  weaker US
• This theory has contributed greatly to the
  understanding of Classical Conditioning

11
Practical Applications Phobias

• An adaptive response run amok
• Watson and Rayner Little Albert
• Difficulty in conditioning Albert
• Ethics of conditioning Albert

12
Additional Factors Affecting Conditioning

• Observational Learning
• Ex. Dr. McCarty at the Grand Canyon
• Temperament Note Even Watson thought this
  genetic factor was important!
• Ex. Hilary McCarty as a baby going to parties
• Preparedness
• Species are genetically prepared to learn certain
  associations more easily than others
• Ex. Dr. McCartys aquatic frogs

13
More factors affecting conditioning

• History of Control
• Having control lessens traumatic effects
  encountering scary stimuli
• Incubation
• Conditioned fear responses can be strengthened by
  repeated, brief exposures to an aversive CR
• Ex. A childs fear of dogs or a teenage boys
  fear of girls
• Selective Sensitization
• An increase in reactivity following exposure to
  an unrelated stressful event (e.g. stress during
  divorce makes a mild fear worse)

14
Treating Phobias

• Systematic Desensitization
• Why does it work?
• Counterconditioning (Wolpe)
• Reciprocal Inhibition
• Led to use of deep muscle relaxation
• Others say it is just extinction
• Probably, both processes are part of why it works
• Imaginal vs. In vivo

15
Flooding

• A treatment involving prolonged exposure to a
  feared stimulus, thereby allowing it to
  extinguish
• Imaginal vs. In vivo
• Aversion Therapy for alcoholism, smoking, etc.
• Single-session treatment with participant modeling