General Psychology: Learning, Emotion, Motivation and Attention PDF

GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY: LEARNING, EMOTION, MOTIVATION AND ATTENTION DLBPSAPLEMA01_E GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY: LEARNING, EMOTION, MOTIVATION AND ATTENTION  MASTHEAD Publisher: IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH IU International University of Applied Sciences Juri-Gagarin-Ring 152 D-99...

GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY: LEARNING, EMOTION, MOTIVATION AND ATTENTION DLBPSAPLEMA01_E GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY: LEARNING, EMOTION, MOTIVATION AND ATTENTION  MASTHEAD Publisher: IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH IU International University of Applied Sciences Juri-Gagarin-Ring 152 D-99084 Erfurt Mailing address: Albert-Proeller-Straße 15-19 D-86675 Buchdorf [email protected] www.iu.de DLBPSAPLEMA01_E Version No.: 001-2024-0619 Prof. Dr. Evangelos Zois Coverbild: Adobe Stock. © 2023 IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH This course book is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This course book may not be reproduced and/or electronically edited, duplicated, or dis- tributed in any kind of form without written permission by the IU Internationale Hoch- schule GmbH (hereinafter referred to as IU). The authors/publishers have identified the authors and sources of all graphics to the best of their abilities. However, if any erroneous information has been provided, please notify us accordingly. 2  TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY: LEARNING, EMOTION, MOTIVATION AND ATTENTION Introduction Signposts Throughout the Course Book............................................. 6 Suggested Readings............................................................... 7 Learning Objectives............................................................... 8 Unit 1 Learning 9 1.1 Introduction to The Psychology of Learning.................................... 10 1.2 Classical Conditioning........................................................ 11 1.3 Instrumental Learning and Operant Conditioning............................... 19 1.4 Mirror Neurons.............................................................. 27 1.5 Application Example......................................................... 30 Unit 2 Emotions 33 2.1 Introduction to the Psychology of Emotions.................................... 34 2.2 Emotions and the Brain....................................................... 40 2.3 Effects of Emotions.......................................................... 57 2.4 Cognitive Effects............................................................. 62 2.5 Health Effects............................................................... 66 2.6 Development of Emotions.................................................... 71 2.7 Explanations................................................................ 73 2.8 Application Example......................................................... 74 Unit 3 Motivation 77 3.1 Introduction to Motivational Psychology....................................... 78 3.2 Motivation as a Strength...................................................... 82 3.3 Motivation as a Conscious Calculation......................................... 86 3.4 Content Theories of Motivation................................................ 90 3.5 Goals and Identity Objectives................................................. 96 3.6 Application Example......................................................... 99 3  Unit 4 Attention and Awareness 103 4.1 Introduction to the Psychology of Attention................................... 104 4.2 Functional Level of Attention................................................. 105 4.3 Dichotic Listening and Shadowing Task....................................... 112 4.4 Theories of Attention........................................................ 113 4.5 Visual Attention............................................................. 114 4.6 The Neglect Syndrome...................................................... 119 4.7 Limitations of Attention..................................................... 119 4.8 Introduction to the Psychology of Consciousness.............................. 123 4.9 Theoretical Approaches to Consciousness..................................... 124 4.10 Application Example....................................................... 131 Appendix List of References............................................................... 134 List of Tables and Figures........................................................ 158 4 INTRODUCTION  WELCOME SIGNPOSTS THROUGHOUT THE COURSE BOOK This course book contains the core content for this course. Additional learning materials can be found on the learning platform, but this course book should form the basis for your learning. The content of this course book is divided into units, which are divided further into sec- tions. Each section contains only one new key concept to allow you to quickly and effi- ciently add new learning material to your existing knowledge. At the end of each section of the digital course book, you will find self-check questions. These questions are designed to help you check whether you have understood the con- cepts in each section. For all modules with a final exam, you must complete the knowledge tests on the learning platform. You will pass the knowledge test for each unit when you answer at least 80% of the questions correctly. When you have passed the knowledge tests for all the units, the course is considered fin- ished and you will be able to register for the final assessment. Please ensure that you com- plete the evaluation prior to registering for the assessment. Good luck! 6  SUGGESTED READINGS GENERAL SUGGESTIONS Catania, A. C. (1999). Thorndike’s legacy: Learning, selection, and the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72(3), 425–428. http://search.ebscohost.com. pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cmedm&AN=16812919&site=eds-live&sc ope=site Damasio, A.R. (2001), Emotion and the human brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 935, 101–106. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?dire ct=true&db=edo&AN=ejs19485122&site=eds-live&scope=site Kalat, J. W. (2013). Biological psychology (11th ed). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. http://s earch.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN=ih b.53688&site=eds-live&scope=site Marshall, J. (2014). Mirror neurons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(18), 6531–6531. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct= true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.23772540&site=eds-live&scope=site Myers, D. G., & DeWall, C. N. (2018). Psychology (12th ed.). Worth Publishers, Macmillan Learning. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=c at05114a&AN=ihb.53689&site=eds-live&scope=site Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Atkinson, R. L., & Hilgard, E. R. (Eds.). (2009). Atkinson & Hilgard’s introduction to psychology (15th ed.). Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Rolls, E. T. (2004). The brain and emotion (Reprinted). Oxford Univ. Press. Rolls, E. T. (2019). The cingulate cortex and limbic systems for emotion, action, and mem- ory. Brain Structure and Function, 224(9), 3001–3018. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edssjs&AN=edssjs.D2A3ADF4&site=eds-live &scope=site Solms, M., & Turnbull, O. (2002). The brain and the inner world: An introduction to the neu- roscience of subjective experience. Other Press. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh. de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN=ihb.48107&site=eds-live&scope=s ite Stevens, L. (2015). Introduction to psychology. Open Textbook Library. 7  LEARNING OBJECTIVES General psychology is one of the key modules in an undergraduate psychology degree. It deals with the principles that describe, explain, and predict human experience and behav- ior. Additionally, all topics covered in this module focus on the reception, processing, stor- age, and retrieval of information. General psychology is, therefore, often referred to as cognitive psychology. As its name suggests, the General psychology: Learning, Emotion, Motivation and Attention coursebook covers the topics of learning, emotion, motivation and attention as well as the respective psychological aspects of information processing relevant to all four content areas. The focus is further on psychological theories, mecha- nisms, or explanatory approaches that trace the development of each topic area to the current state of scientific knowledge. Each of the four areas concludes with an application example to make the practical relevance more transparent. 8  UNIT 1 LEARNING STUDY GOALS On completion of this unit, you will be able to... – name psychological theories of learning, emotion, motivation, attention, and con- sciousness. – describe human learning, emotion, motivation, attention, and awareness. – integrate theory-based connections and interfaces between learning, emotion, motiva- tion, attention, and consciousness into their work by considering intradisciplinary mechanisms of action. – discover psychological phenomena of learning, emotion, motivation, attention, and consciousness in your everyday life and transfer them into psychology as a science.  1. LEARNING Introduction Do you know how difficult it can be to get rid of an old and annoying habit and replace it with a new, more suitable one? Why is this often so difficult ? How changes in behavior can be theoretically justified is just as much of interest in this course as models from psychol- ogy of learning that explain how and why we learn. How exactly do we learn? Is this a process entirely bound to reading and learning information? What processes are involved so we end up learning and knowing what we know? All these questions will be answered as you read through this unit as the focus will be on the most important types of learning and how it is taking place. 1.1 Introduction to The Psychology of Learning To begin this unit, we must first define and explain some central terms of learning and dis- tinguish learning from instincts and reflexes. It is interesting to think that we cannot swim unless we learn how , yet no one teaches a newborn baby to breastfeed. Some animals, like baby sea turtles, know how to find their way to the ocean and swim without having been taught how to do either of these things. These are examples of two types of behav- iors that have a fundamental difference: one is a learned behavior (swimming in humans) and the other is not (swimming in baby turtles; Spielman et al., 2020). Let’s focus on the behavior of the baby sea turtles first. The unlearned action of swimming in these animals is an instinct, an inherent pattern of behavior designed to increase the chances of survival of the species (Spielman et al., 2020). Instincts, in their simplest form, are called reflexes. A reflex is a response (motor or neural) to a specific stimulus from the environment that requires a specific bodily action (e.g. sneezing when nasal passages are irritated, or changing pupil size after sudden contact with bright light). Living organisms, in order to survive in their environment, need both instincts and reflexes, neither of which needs to be learned (Spielman et al., 2020). Brainstem The neuronal origin of most reflexes is in the spinal cord and brainstem, whereas instincts This is located at the bot- come from the limbic system of the brain (Gschwend, 1977). Both reflexes and instincts tom part of the brain and connects the brain to the involve a certain way of learning that helps an organism to adapt to its environment. But spinal cord. Along with unlike instincts and reflexes, learned behaviors (or learning) require change and experi- other functions, it is ence. involved in the regulation of bodily processes, such as balance, breathing, Learning represents a lasting change in the behavior/knowledge resulting from an experi- and heart rate. ence (Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Spielman et al., 2020). It is con- sidered one of the most important abilities of a living organism (Stevens, 2015). Through- out our lifespan, we are constantly faced with challenges and changes to which we need to 10 respond, react, and adapt to ensure survival. It is because of our learning abilities that we manage to live an effective life (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Spielman et al., 2020; Ste- vens, 2015). Learning involves two different types: associative and non-associative (Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). We will begin with non-associative learning. It occurs in response to a single stimulus and involves habituation and sensitization (Nolen-Hoek- sema et al., 2009; Schausberger & Peneder, 2017). Habituation is defined as “a behavioral response decrement that results from repeated stimulation and that does not involve sen- sory adaptation/sensory fatigue or motor fatigue” (Rankin et al., 2009, p. 2). For example, you might jump to an unexpected vehicle horn, but if the horn sound is repeated in short intervals, then your startle response will inevitably become less. Sensitization, on the other hand, occurs in the repeated presence of an intense stimulus that intensifies a behavioral response (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009), and as time passes, the animal/organ- ism becomes more sensitive to the stimulus. For example, repeatedly rubbing your hands will give you a warm sensation because of the stimulation of peripheral nerves in your hands. However, this initial warm sensation will eventually become a painful feeling; the brain warns you that rubbing your hands for a long time can be painful and even harmful (AlleyDog, n.d.). A more complicated form of learning is associative learning, which entails the process of conditioning. Conditioning is the ability to connect stimuli (the changes that occur in the environment) with responses (behaviors or other actions; Stevens, 2015, p. 273). It involves learning relationships between events, and it includes classical and operant con- ditioning (Carlson et al., 2004; Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). We will discuss both in the next sections. 1.2 Classical Conditioning Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936), a Nobel Prize recipient in medicine , was a Russian physiologist known for his work on the digestive system of dogs. What he is mostly famous for, how- ever, is his influential work in the field of psychology known as “classical conditioning” (McLeod, 2013; Rehman et al., 2022). Classical conditioning occurs when a neutral stimu- lus (NS)– i.e., an object– that did not mean anything before (hence neutral), is associated with a stimulus that generates behavior. Once conditioning takes place, this NS brings about a response because it is paired (associated) with a stimulus that already produces a similar response. Pavlov uncovered this process by working with dogs in his laboratory (McLeod, 2013; Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Rehman et al., 2022; Spielman et al., 2020; Stevens, 2015). While studying the digestive system of dogs, Pavlov observed something interesting: The dogs salivated every time a lab technician (who was in charge of feeding them) entered the area the dogs were in, although the dogs had not yet received any food. Pavlov assumed that the dogs were salivating because they knew that they were about to be fed. The canines had formed an association between the presence of the lab technicians and 11  the food that followed soon thereafter. Pavlov decided to study this process in some more details; he completed several trials with the dogs, during which the animals were exposed to a sound moment before food delivery (Spielman et al., 2020; Stevens, 2015). Let’s now describe the process using scientific terminology. First, we need to start with the unconditioned stimulus (US). Unconditioned means unlearned, and in Pavlov’s experi- mental work, the US was the food. So, dogs were presented with food, and they responded to it by salivating. Salivation, on the other hand, is an unconditioned response (UR), or reflexive, because it happened automatically (no need to teach dogs to salivate when they see food presented to them). In classical conditioning, learning occurs when you pair an NS with an unconditioned stimulus. A NS does not produce an automatic response. So, Pavlov started pairing (repeatedly) the neutral stimulus of a sound with the unconditioned stimulus of food. Eventually, the sound itself was able to bring about the salivation response from the dogs. When this occurs, we can say that learning has taken place. The sound has become the conditioned stimulus (CS); (i.e. learned), and salivation has become the conditioned response (CR); (i.e. learned response); (Carlson et al., 2004; McLeod, 2013; Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Rehman et al., 2022; Spielman et al., 2020; Stevens, 2015). To make this clearer, it might be helpful to imagine classical conditioning as a four- phase process Figure 1: Classical Conditioning Source: Evangelos Zois (2022), based on Pavlov (1897). 12 Second-Order or Higher-Order Conditioning Once a dog has been conditioned to salivate in response to a sound, it is possible to condi- tion the dog to salivate in response to another stimulus (e.g., the lab assistant) simply by repeatedly pairing the whistle with the lab assistant (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). This is the case with second-order conditioning. Second-order conditioning is a situation in which the constant pairing of a novel neutral stimulus and a previously conditioned stimu- lus elicits the same conditioned responses to the novel neutral stimulus as the one to a previously conditioned stimulus. Pairing a novel NS with an established CS results in second-order or higher-order condi- tioning. Consider what was mentioned previously: During the conditioning phase, the repeated presenting of the NS (sound of the whistle) was immediately followed by the US (the dog food), and it eventually elicited a CR (the salivation) as the response to the pres- ence of the whistle sound alone. The latter happened in the after-conditioning phase. But what if during the conditioning phase another NS was present that preceded the sound of the whistle? Imagine a situation wherein before every trial, Pavlov’s lab assistant walked in the lab, the whistle sounded, and the dog food appeared. If these events occurred repeatedly, we would then observe the dog salivating (eliciting a CR) only at the sound of the lab assistant’s footsteps. In such a situation, the lab assistant has become a second- order or higher-order CS. This is what we call second-order conditioning (Nolen-Hoek- sema et al., 2009). Principles of Classical Conditioning There are three main principles characterizing classical conditioning: acquisition, extinc- tion, and spontaneous recovery. Acquisition This refers to the initial learning period when we are acquiring the associations between the NS (whistle) and the US (food). In this process, we observe that the NS becomes a CS, which elicits the same response as the response to the original US. So, the CS is all you need (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). Extinction This can be described as the second phase (principle) in classical conditioning. Extinction is characterized by a state in which there is a decrease in the CR, when the original CS (whistle) is presented alone until the dog does not respond to the CS (whistle). In this case, the CS returns to its original NS state (also referred to as extinction conditioning); (Nolen- Hoeksema et al., 2009). Spontaneous recovery This is another principle of classical conditioning occurring after extinction. In this case, the experimenter lets the dog rest for a while and then uses the whistle again. Pavlov observed that during the extinction phase, the dog did not produce any saliva following 13  the sound of the whistle. After a pause (resting period), the sound of the whistle again elicited salivation, thus, demonstrating spontaneous recovery. The event of spontaneous recovery provides the evidence that extinction conditioning does not result in complete unlearning, although the response elicited in spontaneous recovery is reduced compared to the CR in the acquisition phase (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). A summary depiction of the three principles can be seen in the following figure. Figure 2: Processes in Classical Conditioning Source: Evangelos Zois (2022), based on Myers (2014). Regarding the principles of classical conditioning, we will also discuss the situation in which a stimulus is “contiguous” with another versus it being “contingent” on another (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). Contiguous means next or near in time/sequence, and con- tingent means dependent on or conditioned by something else in order to happen (Cam- bridge University Press, 2022). Pavlov believed that for conditioning to take place, it is nec- essary that the CS and US be temporally contiguous (occurrence must be close in time). We might assume that conditioning will happen if the CS predicts the US; if that is the case, we can conclude that the US is contingent on the CS. In other words, the US is more likely to happen when the CS is introduced. From a cognitive perspective, researchers inferred that classical conditioning helps the animal acquire knowledge relevant to the relationship between two stimuli (i.e., the animal, given the CS, learns to anticipate the US; Rescorla, 1968). 14 According to Kiesel & Koch (2012), contingency plays a central role in a successful learning process. It relates to the quality with which a CS can predict the US; the more reliable the prediction, the greater the learning strength (Kiesel & Koch, 2012). Their importance will be illustrated using an experiment conducted by Robert Rescorla (1966). In this experiment, the rats were divided into three groups, with each receiving different types of Pavlovian fear conditioning. The first group (R) received the CS (sound) and US (electric shock) randomly and independently, while in the second group (P), the CS pre- dicted the occurrence of the US. In the third group (N), the CS predicted its absence. Dur- ing the experiment, the rats were placed in a box, which was divided in two parts by a bar- rier. One part contained a metal floor grid used to administer the electric shock, which the rats could avoid by jumping over the barrier into the other part of the box. According to Rescorla (1966), the result of this experiment was that in groups P and N, in which the presence or absence of the US was reliably predicted by the CS, the avoidance behavior of the rats increased or decreased, while in group R, in which CS and US occurred independently during the conditioning phase, no effect was detected despite the same number of CS and US stimuli as those in group P. Therefore, Rescorla (1966) was able to show that the strength of the contingency between CS and US had a significant influence on fear response by promoting or suppressing it (Rescorla, 1966). Stimulus Generalization and Discrimination Stimulus generalization relates to the fact that after conditioning a response to a stimulus, a tendencybecomes generalized so that the animal has the same respond to similar CS (Schwartz, 1986). This has positive effects in everyday life when, for example, children avoid not only touching hot stoves but also hot irons. This generalization leads to favora- ble behavior. Watson and Rayner (1920) conducted an experiment , known as Little Albert's Case, with a nine-month-old child to demonstrate stimulus generalization. The aim of this ethically problematic experiment was to investigate whether it is possible to condition the fear of an animal and generalize it to other animals and objects. During the conditioning phase, researchers presented a rat as a NS in several trials. Just as Albert was about to touch the rat, the experimenters would generate a loud noise using a hammer. The loud noise ini- tially triggered an unconditioned startle reaction (UR) in the child. The experiment con- firmed that Albert became afraid of everything that was furry, including the animals shar- ing characteristics with rats (McLeod, 2013). At the sight of a rabbit, rat, dog, or fur coat, Albert reacted by turning away and screaming. Watson and Rayner (1920) argued that emotional problems, such as phobias, can be traced back to such early childhood learning experiences (Watson & Rayner, 1920). An opposing process to generalization is stimulus discrimination, which is the learned ability to distinguish between a CS and other unrelated stimuli (Myers, 2014; Myers & DeW- all, 2018). If we were to react to all possible stimuli constantly, regardless of relevance, it would take a lot of time and energy to behave appropriately. Gerrig et al. (2008), therefore, emphasize the importance of balancing stimulus generalization and stimulus discrimina- tion for the functionality and adaptability of an organism. Through various learning expe- 15  riences, it is always better to observe stimuli, both to differentiate them from and to gen- eralize them to other similar stimuli, thereby optimizing the ability to predict certain events and respond appropriately (Gerrig et al., 2008). Equipotentiality versus Preparedness Equipotentiality proposes that all stimuli can be conditioned in the same way (Michael et al., 2018). There should be no variation in stimuli, responses, or reinforcements used (Öhman et al., 1976). Together with the assumption that through the contiguity of the NS and US (the neutral stimulus is linked with the ability of a conditioned stimulus to trigger a conditioned response), equipotentiality forms a model to explain the effects of classical conditioning (Pauli et al., 2009). According to Koch and Stahl (2017), current research on classical conditioning shows that certain stimuli are more easily associated with the US than others. This might signify potential evidence to whether we learn exclusively based on experience, or whether the different associations formed between stimuli are based on neurobiological predisposi- tions (Koch & Stahl, 2017). If associations are formed because of neurobiological predispo- sitions, they enable the respective species to better adapt (Domjan, 2005). An example of this is conditioning in just a single learning session, as researched by Garcia and Koelling (1966). They gave rats the flavored food that the animals particularly liked. The rats were then exposed to X-rays, which caused them to feel nauseous. This resulted in rats avoid- ing food from then on. The two researchers suspected that natural selection favors such mechanisms that associate gustatory and olfactory stimuli with inner discomfort (Garcia & Koelling, 1966). Sokolowski (2013) also points out that such learning experiences are very difficult to erase, and that taste aversion can be acquired even if there is a time interval of several hours between stimulus and reaction. From an evolutionary perspective, a similar sensi- tivity and willingness to react are also necessary for survival regarding certain fear-trigger- ing stimuli, such as fear of spiders, snakes, rats, or closed spaces (Sokolowski, 2013). Such stimuli are dominant because they are relatively easy to condition compared to everyday objects, such as a vacuum cleaner, and they require significantly fewer learning trials (Bodenmann et al., 2011). Our greater willingness to favorably associate specific stimuli with phylogenetically signifi- cant stimuli is referred to as preparedness (McNally, 2016; Seligman, 2016). According to the preparedness theory, phobic avoidance behavior exhibits a high degree of prepared- ness because it has a limited set of possible objects, is usually acquired in just one pass, is not based on cognitive learning processes, and is highly resistant to deletion. In contrast, fears that are conditioned under laboratory conditions can be acquired by an almost unlimited number of neutral stimuli, and depending on their respective domination, they can be erased relatively quickly (Seligman, 1972). The difference between preparedness and prepotency is that people are not similar in terms of their preparedness; for instance, snakes have a high prepotency and cause fear in many people, but they react differently when seeing them. People living in areas where 16 snakes exist naturally (e.g., the countryside) have more contact with snakes; therefore, they are less fearful of harmless snakes compared to city inhabitants (Bodenmann et al., 2011). The Rescorla-Wagner Model The Rescorla-Wagner model was developed by psychologists Robert A. Rescorla and Allan R. Wagner (1972). It is a mathematical model that requires the implementation of a spe- cific formula to draw conclusions, and it can explain several phenomena that are often observed in conditioning (Miller et al., 1995). The model assumes that classical condition- ing is only possible with an unexpected stimulus. The strength of the conditioning depends on how pronounced the surprise is when the stimulus appears (Kiesel & Koch, 2012), assuming that associations between the mental representations of CS and US are formed with classical conditioning (Koch & Stahl, 2017). The assumption of mental repre- sentations goes far beyond the behaviorist perspective of learning processes, as it focuses exclusively on measurable stimuli, reactions, their connections, and missed internal proc- esses (Sokolowski, 2013). Based on the scientific knowledge available at the time, Rescorla and Wagner (1972) argued that the strength of the CS-US association determines the extent to which the CS can activate the representation of the US and, thus, trigger a CR (Koch & Stahl, 2017). According to the Rescorla-Wagner model, the change in associative strength per learning session can be calculated using the following formula (Miller et al., 1995): Δv = a λ − v Δν is the change in the strength on a single trial of the association between the CS and US. α is the salience and can either be zero or one. λ is the maximum conditioning possible for the US. ν is the total associative strength of all stimuli present. The strength of association increases with each learning session. At the beginning, the increase in associative strength is particularly large, since the US is unexpected, and V is still zero or low. During the learning trials, the surprise and, thus, the learning decrease. Another unique feature of the model is that the US can be predicted by combining multi- ple CS and the sum of their combined association strengths. However, the CS compete with each other, which explains the phenomenon of blocking. In blocking, a new stimulus will no longer be learned if it is presented simultaneously with a previous stimulus (CS1) that has already predicted the US effectively. This leaves little associative strength for the second stimulus, and learning of the unnecessary new association between CS2 and US1 is blocked (Miller et al., 1995). The following two sections will focus on associative learning and its applications. 17  Conditioned Physiological Responses to Drug Use Addiction is a debilitating brain disease. Researchers everywhere are trying to understand it so they can help those suffering overcome it and prevent people from becoming addicted. Over the years, there have been several attempts to understand and explain addiction from different perspectives relevant to theoretical models, neurobiological mechanisms, and personality types (Nutt & Nestor, 2013; Robinson & Berridge, 2008). From a theoretical psychological point of view (specifically theories of learning), it has been proposed that Pavlovian principles of classical conditioning might play a role in the development of addiction (Rehman et al., 2022; Robinson & Berridge, 2008). Specifically, classical conditioning happens when a drug user experiences the pleasurable effects of a drug that generate a sense of euphoria or well-being. If the user is repeatedly exposed to the same environment or cues (NS) in which drug use took place, such as drug related objects, smells, or location, they can become associated with the pleasurable effects of the drug. Over time, the environmental NS elicits a CR, such as drug cravings, even when the drug is not present. This is why individuals in recovery from drug addiction are often advised to avoid situations or people that may trigger them (Berkin & Rief, 2012). Similar conditioning to that described previously in the work of Pavlov is seen in addiction to drugs such as heroin, in which environmental cues like the place the drug is adminis- Tolerance tered or prepared (to be injected, for instance) act as CR in developing tolerance against a situation in which the the drug. The environmental cues can prepare the body for drug entry; as the dosage drug user, after a long period of being an addict, increases, the body becomes able to prepare itself beforehand (i.e., increasing tolerance; needs more drug to get Nutt & Nestor, 2013). the desired effect Understanding the impact of environmental cues can be beneficial to therapeutic inter- ventions in the treatment of addiction. As we discussed previously, when Pavlov rang the bell repeatedly without bringing food to the dog, salivation stopped, and the behavior subsided; this reverted the whistle back to be a NS. Similarly, psychotherapeutic interven- tions exist where the addict is repeatedly exposed to drug-related cues (place, smell, sound, etc.) without engaging in addictive behavior. This unpairs the cues from the uncon- ditioned effect of the drug and makes it neutral again, reducing the effect of the cue that caused craving (Rehman et al., 2022). Classical conditioning helps explain a common cause of drug addiction development. It has also helped in the development of psycho- therapeutic interventions to prevent and treat addiction problems. The Conditioning of Immune Responses This interdisciplinary and well-established field of research deals with the question of whether the regulation of our immune system is autonomous or influenced by our experi- ences and behavior via our nervous and endocrine systems. For instance, animals are very sensitive to inedible food they are about to consume (Garcia & Koelling, 1966); thus, the conditioning of a taste aversion is still possible hours later (gap between the stimulus and the reaction); (Sokolowski, 2013). Gustatory stimuli develop secondary reinforcing quali- ties known as “conditioned nausea” when they are combined with substances that cause nausea and gastrointestinal discomfort. Even when they depend on the licking reaction, auditory and visual stimuli do not easily develop similar qualities (Garcia & Koelling, 18 1966). The belief that it might also be possible to condition immunosuppression started following a series of experiments by Ader and Cohen (1975). They induced temporary dis- comfort in rats that developed a taste aversion to a drink solution in a single trial. A taste aversion to a sweet saccharin solution was conditioned by combining it with a single injec- tion of cyclophosphamide (CY), a substance with an immunosuppressive effect (Ader & Cohen, 1975). Depending on the amount of saccharin solution consumed on the day of conditioning, the aversion could become pronounced and resistant to extinction. In addi- tion, Ader and Cohen (1975) observed a correlation between the amount of solution con- sumed and the mortality rate of the rats; it led them to hypothesize that the pairing of sac- charin with the immunosuppressive agent cyclophosphamide (CY) resulted in conditioned suppression of the immune response. This made the rats more prone to disease and death. A study by Vits et al. (2013) examined the extent to which neuropsychological mechanisms can explain placebo effects observed in the context of allergies; in other words, to what Placebo extent the anti-allergic placebo response is mainly generated due to cognitive factors, aform of treatment, such as pill or injection, such as the expectation of participants toward the benefit of the treatment, or by associa- designed to have no ther- tive learning processes (Vits et al., 2013). In this study, patients with a chronic cold due to apeutic effectiveness their allergy were divided into three groups: During the conditioning phase, the experi- (e.g., sugar pill) mental group received a novel-tasting drink and an antihistamine for five days. The pla- Experimental group cebo group received a drink and a placebo supplement, while the control group did not Also referred to as a treat- ment group in research, receive any stimuli. Both the experimental and placebo groups were informed that there experimental group con- was a 50% chance of getting either the drug or the placebo. The control group was told sists of participants in a that the aim of the study was to observe the stability of the allergic response over time. study receiving the treat- ment (active condition) that the research is inter- In all three groups, the skin prick test provided information about the extent of the allergic ested in studying. reactions. After nine days without treatment, patients in both the experimental and pla- cebo groups were given the flavored drink and a placebo, while the control group received no stimuli. The result of the study showed that, due to conditioning, the size of the allergic marks was significantly reduced in both the experimental and the placebo group, and a significant reduction in symptoms was also recorded in both groups compared to the con- trol group. The authors concluded that both conditioning and the patients’ cognitive expectation had led to this result. The study can, thus, serve as a basis for future system- atic research into placebo effects in combination with drug therapy and contribute to increased well-being of patients (Vits et al., 2013). 1.3 Instrumental Learning and Operant Conditioning You try to take off your jacket, but the zipper gets stuck. First, you pull the zipper up, then down, and then you check to see if the fabric is stuck. You pull out the fabric obstructing it, and then you pull the zipper up and down. The zipper can now move. It is almost cer- tain that you will remember this the next time the zipper gets stuck again. This is a simple, everyday life example that shows how our future behavior is determined and shaped by the success or failure of what took place previously. 19  Edward Thorndike Edward Lee Thorndike (1874–1949) was an influential representative of American behav- iorism , who went beyond the stimulus-response contexts of classical conditioning and focused on more complex behaviors (Donahoe, 1999; Galef, 1998; McLeod, 2013; Nolen- Hoeksema et al., 2009). The theoretical model that emerged from his experimental work will be the focus of this section. Learning based on trial and error Thorndike was inspired by the works and writings of Charles Darwin. He had discovered several texts about animals displaying signs of intelligent and intuitive behavior in Dar- win’s works (Thorndike, 1898, 1905). Thorndike thought that to investigate animal intelli- gence further, he must design and carry out controlled experiments. The results of those experiments led him to conclude that animals, as opposed to humans, have no insight (i.e., awareness of a situation which, in turn, leads to solving problems; Thorndike, 1898). Instead, animals learn through trial and error (McLeod, 2018a; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). This conclusion came about following an experiment implemented on a hungry cat that was trapped in a cage with a door that was kept firmly closed by a latch. Food was placed outside the cage. The only way for the cat to get to the food was to hit the latch so the door would open. However, the cat first tried to reach the food by extending its paws through the cage bars. When this failed, the cat engaged in several other behaviors, but remained trapped inside the cage. Finally, the cat hit the lever accidentally, freed itself, and reached the food. It was then returned to the cage, and some more food was placed outside. The animal engaged in similar behaviors until it hit the latch unintentionally. This experimental procedure was repeated until the cat eradicated its previous behaviors and ultimately opened the latch to free itself almost immediately. Clearly, the cat learned to open the latch to get food. According to Thorndike, this is not an incident of a cat behaving intelligently or acting because of acquired insight. It is, rather, an indication of trial and error learning that is intensified due to the immediate reward (food) that follows (McLeod, 2018a; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Thorndike, 1898, 1905). The law of effect Following the findings and assumptions of those experiments, Thorndike proposed the “law of effect”, which indicates that any behavior resulting in pleasurable and pleasant consequences is likely to become recurrent, whereas a behavior followed by unpleasant consequences is likely to stop (McLeod, 2018a; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Thorndike, 1898). Operant Conditioning B.F. Skinner established the principles of “operant conditioning.” He believed that we can both predict and control behavior by manipulating or controlling the environment (includ- ing predicting it; Skinner, 1965). Skinner defined operant conditioning as a learning proc- 20 ess in which the consequences followed a response to determine whether behavior will be repeated. Behavior that has been reinforced is very likely to be repeated, whereas behav- ior will tend not to be repeated if punishment is involved (Skinner, 1965). The Skinner box Skinner devised the Skinner box (operant chamber) to identify how the consequences of actions can affect future behavior. The Skinner box contained a lever that was used for both positive and negative reinforcement. Positive reinforcement, in the form of food, was delivered through a food dispenser after pressing the lever. There was also an electric grid on the floor of the box that delivered painful electric current and a light that flashed as a warning signal to the rat that the electric current was about to be delivered. Skinner wanted to provide motivation for behavior. To that end, he used hungry rats and placed them in a Skinner box. Similar to the cats in Thorndike’s box, the rats first exhibited random behavior until they pressed the lever accidentally, which resulted in the immedi- ate reward (food). Following several repeated trials, the rats eventually learned that lever pressing would result in a positive outcome (food delivery or reinforcer). So, the conse- quence of receiving food (the desirable stimulus) ensured that the lever pressing behavior would be repeated (positive reinforcement). The same box was also used for negative reinforcement, so the rat was subjected to an aversive stimulus (unpleasant electric current). Pressing the lever switched off the electric current. So, the consequence of escaping the electric current ensured that the behavior would be repeated (lever pressing). Later, Skinner switched on the signal light prior to turning on the electric current, to which the rat developed an association (with the light on, the rat pressed the lever to remove the aversive stimulus). The behavior of lever press- ing was reinforced to remove the aversive stimulus and thus, negative reinforcement was created (Ferster & Skinner, 1957; Skinner, 1965). 21  Figure 3: Skinner Box – Custom Depiction Source: Evangelos Zois (2023), based on Skinner, (1999, p. 630). Primary and secondary reinforcement Reinforcers and punishers are usually divided into two categories: primary and secondary. Primary reinforcers and punishers are the stimuli that naturally trigger unlearned com- mon responses. Primary reinforcers are pleasant (rewarding) things, such as food, water, and sex. Primary punishers are unpleasant things, such as pain, freezing temperatures, and general discomfort. Secondary reinforcers and punishers are the stimuli that we learn to respond to and are associated with primary reinforcers and punishers. Examples of sec- ondary reinforcers include money or grades, whereas secondary punishers are things like a speeding ticket. Both, however, are presented to a situation to create some sort of change in the behavior or response (McLeod, 2018a; Myers & DeWall, 2018). 22 Operant conditioning states that behaviors depend on the consequences that follow ; the consequence of a behavior determines whether we do something again (Skinner, 1965a). According to operant conditioning, there are two consequences that can follow behaviors: reinforcement and punishment. Reinforcement makes the repetition of a certain behavior more likely. For example, you have a dog that begs for food at the dinner table. If you give it food, the dog will be there begging the next time you sit down to have dinner. By giving food to the dog at the dinner table, you have reinforced a response. Punishment, on the other hand, weakens a response and makes it less likely to happen again. Regarding the previous example, oif your reaction to the dog is a firm “no,” then it will go away. In this scenario, you have weakened the behavior of begging for food at the dinner table in your dog. So, the next time you sit at the dinner table to eat, your dog is not going to be there begging for food because it knows that your response will be negative. The consequence of what immediately follows a behavior is very important in shaping that behavior for the future (Ferster & Skinner, 1957; Peterson, 2004; Skinner, 1965). There are two types of reinforcement: positive and negative. Please note that in the con- text of reinforcement, their meanings are different (“positive” does not mean something good and “negative” something bad; Ferster & Skinner, 1957). In behaviorism and learning psychology, “positive” means that you are adding something and “negative” means that you are taking something away. Positive reinforcement happens when there is a pleasant consequence that follows a response; it is the addition of something pleasant following a response, strengthening that behavior and making it more likely to reoccur. For example, if you receive a good grade after studying for a test, you are more likely to study next time you have an evaluation. The consequence of getting a good grade is shaping your future behavior. In the case of negative reinforcement, you take something away, i.e. you remove an unpleasant consequence following a response. It also makes it more likely that you repeat this behavior in the future (Ferster & Skinner, 1957). Going back to the example of study- ing , let us assume that your parents are constantly bothering you because they think you are not studying enough. You promise them to prepare well for the upcoming exam, and they stop bothering you. This removes the unpleasant consequence of pestering: the next time you have an exam, you will study again only to avoid their irritating behavior, the unpleasant consequence of nagging (Ferster & Skinner, 1957; McLeod, 2018a; Myers & DeWall, 2018; Skinner, 1965a). There are also two types of punishment: positive and negative. The goal of punishment is to weaken or decrease a behavior, to make it less likely to hapeen again (Ferster & Skinner, 1957). With positive punishment, an unpleasant consequence is added to or follows a response, reducing the likelihood that you repeat this behavior in the future. Imagine you are studying a lot in the library, and your friends start making fun of you for it. They are adding something that is unpleasant; as a result, to avoid that unpleasant consequence (your friends making fun of you), you change your studying behavior. In contrast, negative punishment happens when a pleasant consequence is removed ; this makes the response less likely to occur (Ferster & Skinner, 1957). You end up missing something that you could potentially enjoy or like. For example, studying is a behavior that prevents you from spending time with your friends, which you enjoy. Therefore, you change your behavior and stop studying. 23  The concepts of reinforcement and punishment (positive and negative) are often challeng- ing topics for undergraduate psychology students. An easy stepwise decision-making process might be of help: 1. Determine the goal. Is it pertinent to reinforcement or punishment? Reinforcement: Enhance the behavior and repeat it in the future. Punishment: Do not repeat the behavior. 2. Decide if it is a positive or a negative reinforcement/punishment. Positive reinforcement: a pleasant consequence will be added if a pleasant conse- quence follows the behavior. Negative reinforcement: an unpleasant consequence has been removed or taken away. Positive punishment: an unpleasant consequence has been added. Negative punishment: a pleasant consequence has been removed or taken away. Table 1: Reinforcement and Punishment Summary Type Description Outcome Example Positive reinforce- A pleasant consequence Increases the frequency Studying hard for an ment has been added if a of the behavioral exam gets you a high pleasant consequence response grade, then studying follows the behavior. hard before exams is likely to increase. Negative reinforce- An unpleasant conse- Increases the frequency A child throws a tan- ment quence has been of the behavioral trum because they do removed. response not have achocolate bar, so, the parent gets the child one. The child then stops the tantrum. Positive punish- An unpleasant conse- Decreases the fre- A student who always ment quence has been quency of the behavio- comes late to class gets added. ral response insulted in front of his classmates by the teacher. To prevent the insults from the teacher, the student might avoid coming late to the class. Negative punish- A pleasant consequence Decreases the fre- An employee is criti- ment has been removed or quency of the behavio- cized in front of his col- taken away ral response leagues by his boss and has certain privileges taken away following his behavior at work. Source: Evangelos Zois (2022), based on Nolen-Hoeksema et al. (2009). Consequences of punishment in child upbringing According to the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection, section 1631, para- graph two of the German Civil Code, “children have a legally guaranteed right to a non- violent upbringing. Physical punishment, mental injuries and other degrading measures 24 are not permitted” (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, 2019). Despite this, a representative survey conducted among 1,003 adults with at least one child in their household showed that 40% of the survey responders had punished their children physically in the last twelve months. Another 10% of children had been slapped in the face, and 4% received spanking as a form of punishment. From a psychological point of view, there are several arguments against these types of punishment, but unfortunately, they are still supported by a quite large number of parents (Forsa, 2011). Studies have shown that punishment can lead to the fol- lowing (Myers 2014): The unwanted behavior will only be suppressed, not changed. Parents, however, are left with the impression that their punishment was successful. What they fail to understand is that physical forms of punishment reinforce unwanted behavior negatively. The child learns violence and aggressive behavior as a way of solving problems and becomes aggressive, following their parents’ pattern. The child differentiates between situations through stimulus discrimination and stops using inappropriate language (e.g., swearing) only when the punishing adult is nearby. The child becomes afraid of the punishing parent. With operant conditioning, stimulus generalization can result in the child not only associating the punishment with undesir- able behavior but also with the person related to the situation. It is very possible the child will develop feelings of anxiety, depression, and helpless- ness. Since physical punishment can cause depression and feelings of helplessness in children, we will briefly discuss the concept of “learned helplessness” developed by Seligman (1972). In his research implemented on dogs (Seligman, 1974; Seligman, 1972), the repeated exposure of them to unpleasant events or being unable to avoid unpleasant or traumatizing events led the animals to be passive and resigned. Despite being able to avoid the unpleasant situation at a later point, the dogs had learned that they were not in control of the situation and accepted it. According to Seligman (1972), there is an overlap between learned helplessness and depressive symptomatology. Like depression, learned helplessness leads to feelings of hopelessness and worthlessness (Myers, 2014; Seligman, 1974; Seligman, 1972). Those affected by it gradually lose faith in being able to be success- ful , and even if they achieve it, they do not realize it (Seligman, 1974; Seligman, 1972). To conclude the section, it is worth repeating Skinner’s position on punishment is that direct positive reinforcement is preferable because it appears to have fewer objective side effects (Skinner, 1965). We will also include, following Skinner’s recommendation, differ- ent possibilities of positive reinforcement. Schedules of reinforcement According to operant conditioning principles and the Skinner box, if every time the rat presses the lever no food delivery takes place, the animal will stop pressing the lever after several attempts. In that situation, the behavior has been terminated. It was observed by many behaviorists that different schedules or patterns of reinforcement have resulted in differences in relation to the speed of learning and termination (extinction; Ferster & Skin- ner, 1957; McLeod, 2018a). 25  Ferster and Skinner (1957) developed different ways of administering reinforcement and noticed that this had effects on the response rate at which the animal pressed the lever (how hard the animal “worked”) and on the extinction rate at which the behavior of lever pressing faded away (how soon the animal stopped pressing; Ferster & Skinner, 1957). They included the following: Continuous reinforcement: The animal is subjected to positive reinforcement every time a specific behavior happens. For instance, whenever the lever is pressed, food is given and then food delivery is stopped. In this case, the response rate is slow and the extinction rate is fast. Fixed-ratio reinforcement: Behavior is reinforced only after it happens a particular num- ber of times; a reinforcement is given after several correct reactions. For example, the rat gets food after every five successful lever pressings. Here, the response rate can be quick whereas the extinction rate is medium. Fixed-interval reinforcement: When delivering at least one correct reaction, a reinforce- ment is given after a fixed amount of time. For example, every 15 minutes food is delivered provided that at least one lever pressing has taken place, then food delivery is stopped. In this case, the response rate is medium as is the extinction rate. Variable-ratio reinforcement: Behavior is reinforced at irregular intervals. What we end up noticing here is that the response rate is fast in comparison to the extinction rate, which is slow. Variable interval reinforcement: If a correct reaction occurs, a reinforcement will be offered after an arbitrary amount of time (e.g., an average of four minutes). On this occa- sion, the response rate is fast in contrast to extinction rate, which is slow. Skinner noticed further that the variable-ratio reinforcement generates the slowest rate of extinction, whereas continuous reinforcement causes the fastest extinction rate (Ferster & Skinner, 1957; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Skinner, 1965). Behavior modification and shaping Behavior change or modification refers to certain psychotherapeutic techniques (interven- tions) originating from the principles of operant conditioning (Ferster & Skinner, 1957; McLeod, 2018a; Skinner, 1965). Behavior modification mainly postulates that by changing environmental schedules of events that are associated with a person’s behavior, we can gradually achieve change in the unwanted behavior. This is done by reinforcing the wanted behaviors and punishing the unwanted ones by essentially bribing the person (McLeod, 2018a; Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Peterson, 2004). When it comes to behavior shaping, behavior can be gradually changed and brought into the desired form by means of reinforcement. Shaping is implemented in complex behav- ior, such as animal training, by rewarding reactions that go in the desired direction and ignoring all others (Ferster & Skinner, 1957; Myers, 2014; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Peterson, 2004; Skinner, 1965). The following section focuses on the learning processes 26 that entail cognitive processing (brain-related processing involving mental, motor, and sensory acts we collectively do to operate effectively). Skinner did not support the idea that cognitive processes are associated with behavioral learning. An example on how cog- nitive processes go hand in hand with learning is found in rat studies. The rats were ini- tially placed in a maze without any type of reward. They developed a mental representa- tion of the maze (cognitive map), and, during their tour of discovery showed that cognitive processes also play a role in operant conditioning. As soon as the experimenter placed a piece of cheese at the exit as a reward, they could show what they had learned (i.e., how to get the cheese). This process is also known as “latent learning” (Myers, 2014). 1.4 Mirror Neurons In this section, we will discuss the neuroscientific (research field examining the function and the structure of the human brain) concept of mirror neurons (Kilner & Lemon, 2013; Murphy & Honey, 2016), followed by Bandura’s social-cognitive learning theory. In the early 1990s a team of researchers based in Italy published findings on macaque monkeys showing the presence of a group of neurons in the premotor cortex of the animals’ brain (di Pellegrino et al., 1992). This group of neurons were observed firing (being active) not only when the macaques were performing an action (e.g., eating a banana) but also when they were watching other monkeys performing the same action (di Pellegrino et al., 1992; Marshall, 2014). This group of neurons was named mirror neurons (Kilner & Lemon, 2013; Murphy & Honey, 2016; Myers & DeWall, 2018). 27  Figure 4: The Cerebral Cortex and Its Functional Areas Source: Evangelos Zois (2022). Not much later than this initial discovery in macaques, researchers examined the exis- tence of the same group of neurons in humans (Marshall, 2014). They have published papers arguing that mirror-like systems exist in humans too, and they relate to the experi- ences of speech, emotions, pain, and music (Kilner & Lemon, 2013; Marshall, 2014; Mur- phy & Honey, 2016). An interesting finding suggested that the same brain regions that were activated when people smelled something disgusting were also active when people watched others taking a facial expression showing disgust (Marshall, 2014; Wicker et al., 2003). The discovery of such a brain system, from the point of view of cognition, has implications associated with the neurobiological basis of another person’s perspective, namely, our ability to put ourselves in someone else’s shoes as we see an action, learn and predict actions, and, most importantly, understand other people’s emotionsand behavior, so that we can react appropriately (Marshall, 2014). Appropriate reactions are relevant to the con- cept of empathy (the ability to understand other people’s emotional states and show emo- tion as a response), theory of mind (Häusser, 2012; Holopainen et al., 2019; Korkmaz, 2011; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009) and, therefore, psychiatric conditions such as autism (Cattaneo et al., 2007; Marshall, 2014). For example, autism is a disorder heavily associ- ated with the inability or difficulty to understand or relate to others (Cattaneo et al., 2007). We can assume that the mirror neurons system is malfunctioning in those affected by 28 autism, hence the neurons in the motor system have led to impairments in understanding Theory of mind (ToM) the meanings of others’ actions (Cattaneo et al., 2007; Kilner & Lemon, 2013; Marshall, This refers to the ability to attribute mental states 2014; Murphy & Honey, 2016). both to ourselves and to others. It is one of the fun- Social Learning Theory damental aspects of social interaction. Its function relates to the As already mentioned in connection with punishment, children can use the aggressive human ability to foresee, understand, and explain behavior of their parents as an example or model, thereby learning to solve conflicts with the behavior of people violence. In this context, we will discuss another prominent psychological learning theory around us. called the “social learning theory.” This theory was introduced by Albert Bandura (1977) and underlines the significance of observing, modelling, and imitating behaviors, atti- tudes, and emotional reactions of people around us (McLeod, 2016). Social learning theory incorporates environmental and cognitive factors and the way they interact to affect human learning and, consequently, behavior (Bandura, 1977). In this theory, Ban- dura (1977) combined the behaviorist learning theories of classical and operant condition- ing and added two concepts. The first concept relates to the mediating processes arising between stimuli and reactions/responses, and the second relates to behavior and the fact that it is learned through the process of observational learning (Bandura, 1977; Bandura et al., 1961; McLeod, 2016; Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009; Stevens, 2015). Observational learning Generally, Bandura was interested in the study of behavior in terms of whether humans can learn from simply observing others do something, which he defined as “observational learning.” To assess observational learning, he conducted a study on children using a doll. The idea behind it was that children tend to observe people who behave in certain ways in their environment. This was demonstrated with the Bobo doll experiment (McLeod, 2016; Stevens, 2015). In this experiment, two groups of children watched a video. The first group were shown a video in which an adult was interacting with a doll in a non-aggressive manner. The sec- ond group, however, watched a version in which the adult was verbally and physically aggressive to the doll. The children were then placed in another room with the doll. The research team observed that they were interacting with the doll based on what they had previously seen in the video. Bandura and his team found that the group that had seen the aggressive video was more likely to be aggressive toward the doll as opposed to the group that had watched the non-aggressive video. This study demonstrated that behavior can be learned through observation, and children, especially, can model an action violently when they observe adults engaging in violent behavior. According to observational learning theory, those who are observed are models. Children encode the behavior of models and then imitate it (Bandura, 1977; Bandura et al., 1961; Myers & DeWall, 2018; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2009). In society, children observe people in their environment; this can be their immediate home surroundings (parents), what they see on television, or their peer group. For instance, boys are more 29  likely to mimic the behavior of adult men: and if parents notice that, they may reward that behavior, which in turn will lead to the child imitating it again. The child’s behavior is, therefore, reinforced. Mediational process Social learning theory focuses on cognitive factors and their role in learning. Bandura believed that humans process the information they receive. In other words, they think about the associations between their actions and the consequences of those actions (information processing). Observational learning happens because of the cognitive proc- esses involved. This means that people do not simply observe behaviors and then imitate them immediately. There is thought (cognitive) process involved prior to imitation execu- tion (mediational process). A mediational process is what takes place cognitively between the observed behavior (environmental stimulus) and the mimicking or non-mimicking of that behavior (response; Bandura, 1977; Bandura et al., 1961; McLeod, 2016). Bandura pro- posed four mediational processes (Bandura, 1977; Bandura et al., 1961; McLeod, 2016; Ste- vens, 2015): 1. Attention relates to noticing a behavior, as well as the consequences following it, and then creating a mental/cognitive interpretation. 2. Retention relates to how well the behavior can be remembered so to be imitated. 3. Reproduction is the ability to execute the behavior that the model has just “shown.” 4. Motivation is the desire to carry out the behavior (rewards versus punishments asso- ciated with the behavior). While the first two processes are necessary for learning the behavior, the last two refer to its execution (Lohaus et al., 2010). According to Bandura, the attention that an observer pays to a model goes hand in hand with the willingness to imitate a certain behavior. The basis for this can be, for example, a membership of a social group to which both the model and the observer belong. Thus, mimicking aggressive behavior is more likely in certain groups than in others.The behavior pattern is represented in symbolic form in memory, both visually and verbally, so that it can guide the future actions of the observer (Bandura, 1977; McLeod, 2016). 1.5 Application Example The following study establishes a connection between Bandura’s social learning theory and the theory of mind and shows how research can guide practical action. An experiment by Lyons et al. (2007) conducted on children aged three to five showed that children in this age group tend to over-imitate, even when it was made clear that the model’s action was illogical. For instance, in order to remove a toy dinosaur from inside a transparent plastic box, they first touched it with a feather rather than unscrewing the lid of the box immedi- ately (Lyons et al., 2007). The phenomenon of over-imitation in toddlers and preschoolers also leads them to imitate unnecessary and nonsensical adult behaviors (McLeod, 2016; Myers, 2014). 30 A recent study by Foti et al. (2019) led them to conclude that the tendency toward over- imitation in children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) resulted in an improvement in their performance on an observational and experiential learning task. During three experimental trials, their performance improved continuously compared to the perform- ance of children without an ASD. The children in both groups first watched a person in a video build a house using plastic bricks and make a few mistakes intentionally. For exam- ple, the person banged stones against the house to insert them or made unnecessary movements. The person then evaluated the accuracy or error of their actions with either a nod or shake of the head, respectively. The children were then asked to recreate the house using their own bricks. The children with ASD imitated the redundant movements and wrong attempts of the model, in contrast to the comparison group of children. While the comparison group performed significantly better in the first two test trials, the children with ASD were able to catch up in the third trial and reached the same level as that of their comparison group. According to Foti et al. (2019), children with ASD use over-imitation as a learning strategy in their daily life, thereby compensating for their deficits in observatio- nal learning. The authors argue that by taking these findings into account during child upbringing and school education, we can, through appropriate learning opportunities, make it easier for children to acquire new cognitive and motor skills and, thus, strengthen their social integration and self-confidence (Foti et al., 2019). Observation gives us a lot of information about our social environment from an early age. Without having experienced certain things personally, we can expand our skills and knowledge and predict consequences ( Gerrig et al., 2008). The behavior of a group of macaques living in Thailand shows that the great apes also learn through observation. They use hair and coconut fibers as dental floss and pass these oral hygiene habits on to their offspring (Paschek, 2016). Social learning in everyday life, in which others serve as mental learning models for our own behavior, is pervasive and not limited to raising children. It becomes visible in work- shops and yoga courses, as well as our diet, customs, dances, and idioms, which are also shaped by the respective zeitgeist (dominant opinions of a particular era as witnessed in the ideas and views of the time; Myers, 2014). A current example of imitation is the grow- ing number of influencers hired by the marketing and advertising industry to market their products through digital media. Their lifestyle is imitated, in particular by children and young people (Myers, 2014). SUMMARY Learning is a process that produces a permanent, experience-based change in behavior or behavior change potential. The importance of the connection between experienced and learned, as well as genetic and biological behavioral dispositions, is emphasized. The fact that certain types of stimuli are innate and, therefore, easier to condition, is referred to as preparedness. The theory of classical conditioning describes a type of learning in which an animal associates a neutral stimulus with another stimulus that is biologically significant, resulting in behavior 31  change. Classical conditioning was first discovered by Pavlov and his famous experiments with dogs, which involves three main principles of acquisition, extinction, and spontaneous recovery. The way these find- ings stimulated further research and contributed to the development of psychoneuroimmunology was illustrated with the study conducted by Ader and Cohen in rats that were experimentally forced to develop taste aversion. The Rescorla-Wagner model is a mathematical model consisting of a sin- gle formula and can explain numerous phenomena in conditioning. Thorndike’s law of effect describes how behavior is reinforced or dimin- ished depending on the consequences. Skinner’s research on operant conditioning investigates the behavior in rats through reward and pun- ishment. It also describes the connections between reinforcers and the probability of a reaction together with the several types of reinforcers and reinforcement schedules, namely, positive or negative. Latent learn- ing is an example where cognitive processes engage in operant condi- tioning. Bandura’s social learning theory focuses on cognitive learning processes. This refers to learning by observing others who serve as mod- els for one’s own behavior. In addition to the effects of imitation on the attachment behavior of parents, the conditions are necessary for learn- ing from the model. Mirror neurons are a potential foundation for obser- vational learning, the ability to understand emotion and theory of mind. Research conducted by Lyons et al. has shown that over-imitation can result in mimicking illogical behavior in children, but research by Foti et al. depicted that children with an autistic disorder were able to improve their learning performance through over-imitation. 32  UNIT 2 EMOTIONS STUDY GOALS On completion of this unit, you will be able to... – name the five main components of emotions and clarify how evolutionary psychologi- cal approaches explain the causes and functions of emotional behavior. – describe how emotional expression, behavior, and culture are connected and how behaviorism and learning theory approaches explain the emergence of emotions. – define how emotions are processed from a neuroscientific point of view and what the importance of the autonomic nervous system is for inner balance. – depict how personal characteristics and environmental factors influence the experi- ence and expression of emotions and define strategies for emotion regulation. – explain the importance of early childhood attachment to our physical and psychologi- cal health, as well as our social relationships.  2. EMOTIONS Introduction Aristotle believed that there is more to the world than what we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch (Solms & Turnbull, 2002). Perhaps he referred to an inner sixth sense that humans are equipped with by generating, experiencing, and expressing emotions (Damasio, 2006; Solms & Turnbull, 2002). The topic of emotions appears in the most complex and interest- ing areas of neuroscience and psychology (Damasio, 2011; LeDoux, 1995, 1998, 2000; Schwarz, 2000). For decades, scientists had neglected to put emphasis on emotions, per- ceiving them as complicated and difficult to identify, making them, therefore, inappropri- ate to study (Damasio, 2006). However, the study of emotions dates back to a century ago with the works of Sigmund Freud (Freud, 1915) who addressed the importance of emo- tions in different psychopathological states (Solms, 2006; Solms & Turnbull, 2002). In his theory of the structure of the human mind, Freud referred to emotions as unconscious “drives” (the id) that are rejected by the executive apparatus of the mind (the ego; Freud, 1915; Solms, 2006; Solms & Turnbull, 2002). More recently, Antonio Damasio (2006) under- lined the importance of emotions in psychological research. He pointed out that under the influence of behaviorism, psychology studied only those processes that were directly observable from the outside and excluded the inner experience, which is only accessible to interoception. He also indicated that those inner processes are important, necessary, and relevant to psychological research; besides, human behavior cannot be fully under- stood from a psychological point of view if emotions are ignored (Damasio, 2011, 2006, 2012). 2.1 Introduction to the Psychology of Emotions Have you ever come home late from a party? It is dark, cold, and the streets are empty. It is a bit spooky, especially when you think of what you read in the newspaper recently (some- one nearby had been mugged). Suddenly, you hear footsteps rapidly approaching from behind. You feel uneasy and a queasy feeling sets in. When someone suddenly taps you on the shoulder from behind, your breath is caught and your heart races. You slowly turn around, only to see the face of your neighbor. Relief unfolds and the tension slowly drains. If this example or a similar situation sounds familiar to you, you may wonder how such bodily sensations are related to your emotional experience and what happens in your body as a result. We all recognize a variety of different emotions, but how does psychology describe and explain the way emotions arise? What influence do they have on our experi- ence and behavior? What effects do emotions have on the way we perceive ourselves and our environment? These and other related questions are clarified in this unit. First, how- ever, we need to explain and define some key terms relevant to emotion psychology. 34 Basic Terminology Finding a universal definition of what is meant by the term “emotion” seems to be just as difficult as determining the number of emotions and their components (Sokolowski, 2013). Despite the increased interest in the study of emotions in the last few decades , there is no single widely accepted definition (Cabanac, 2002). Contemporary scientists have provided several definitions, supporting the notion that emotions are the conse- quences of events that motivate behavior (Cabanac, 2002). Damasio (2001) defines emo- tions as neurochemical interactions in the brainthat allow an animal to adjust in advanta- geous and disadvantageous situations (Damasio, 2011, 2001, 2006). Rolls defines emotions as “states elicited by rewards and punishers, including changes in rewards and punishments. A reward is something for which an animal will work, and a punishment is something an animal will work to avoid” ( 2004, p. 60). The American Psychological Associ- ation (APA) defines emotions as “a complex reaction pattern, involving experiential, behavioral, and physiological elements, by which an individual attempts to deal with a personally significant matter or event” (UWA, 2019). Zimbardo et al. (2016) define emo- tions as a special category of motives that help us to direct our attention, respond to important (usually external) situations, and communicate our intentions to others. They consider emotions to be a special type of motivation that is directed outwards. Like moti- Motivation vation, emotion leads to increased arousal, and on a personal level connects significant An important element of the survival , motivation people, objects, and events with values or feelings, resulting in an approach or avoidance is what directs the animal reaction (Nutt & Nestor, 2013; Zimbardo et al., 2016). to pursue rewards. Components of Emotion Most psychological phenomena, with emotions being no exception, can be interpreted physiologically, behaviorally, and cognitively (Myers & DeWall, 2018; UWA, 2019). Depend- ing on how broad or narrow the emotion component description is , scholars often present a consensus of four or five components by which emotions can be interpreted (Myers & DeWall, 2018; Sokolowski, 2013; UWA, 2019). We will follow the consensus of four distinctive components, assuming that an additional component of “expression,” as sug- gested by Sokolowski (2013), is part of the behavioral component. 1. Cognitive: This refers to the cognitive assessment people make and the way an emo- tional reaction is initiated. The person evaluates a situation based on personal cir- cumstances, for instance, fear of failure and its consequences. 2. Physiological: This component relates to bodily reactions to the activation of the autonomic nervous system following emotions we experience, such as a dry mouth or an increased heartbeat. 3. Behavioral: This refers to the actual manifestation of emotions and includes facial expressions, smile, stuttering, trembling, or any other reaction that is often socially, individually (personality), or even culturally relevant. 4. Subjective: Although everyone expresses basic emotions (fe.g., fear) almost similarly, regardless of culture or nurture differences, the way each individual experiences emo- tion is very subjective. The same emotionally charged situation, such as death, might bring up emotions of anger and regret in some people and sadness in others. 35  The abovementioned components cannot always occur at the same time and in similar ways. Two-dimensional approach to emotion: an underlying construct Affect The two-dimensional structural model of emotions (affect) was introduced by Feldman In psychological terms, Barrett and Russell (1998). Several studies on emotions have shown that, irrespective of this describes the type of influence on the mind the shape it takes or the ways it is evaluated (behavior, imaging method, self-report tools, that is linked to the body. etc.), affect can be described in terms of two psychological dimensions: hedonic valence (value), the pleasure or unpleasure of an emotional experience, and arousal (activation), a state between activated versus deactivated (Feldman Barrett & Russell, 1999, 1998). Because of its structure, affect is also known as the “circumplex model of affect” (Russell, 1980). “Circumplex” refers to a representation of the relationship between variables. For example, in the study of emotion, the focus might be on specific primary emotions. When generating a “circumplex representation,” the opposite values of each emotion under examination will be depicted at the opposite ends of the circumplex (e.g., sad versus tran- quil, annoyed versus pleased), and the similar values of each emotion will be depicted close to each other (i.e., the similarity between the components weakens as the gap between them increases; American Psychological Association, n.d.). Feldman Barrett and Russell conducted several studies assessing one’s current emotional state using different questionnaire measures and tools, also known as scales. Their find- ings suggest that valence is independent of activation, and positive and negative affect, as well as activation and deactivation, each represents the endpoints of two opposite poles (Feldman Barrett & Russell, 1998). The following image depicts several emotional states that differ in terms of their corresponding valence and degree of activation. 36 Figure 5: Two-Dimensional Emotional Approach Source: Evangelos Zois (2022), based on Feldman Barrett & Russell (1998). Similarities and Differences Between Various Emotional States How do emotional states differ from one another and how are they similar? How can they be distinguished? According to Schmidt-Atzert et al. (2014), there are no widely accepted scientific definitions, and the terms are often used interchangeably. Aside from affect, mood, and emotion, emotional states can also be distinguished in terms of an identifiable cause, possible cognitions, the intensity and duration of the emotional state, and the need for a behavioral response (Sokolowski, 2013). Affect: In psychology, affect describes a special kind of influence on our mind that is asso- ciated to our body. It is the mental equivalent of internal bodily depictions connected to emotions, actions, motivation, intensity, and personality inclinations (Feldman Barrett & Russell, 1999). As Sokolowski (2013) points out, affect is an intense emotional statethat is difficult to control but has a short duration. Mood: Comparing this with affect, mood is at the opposite end of the spectrum consider- ing the criteria mentioned by Sokolowski (2013), because it is of low intensity and compa- ratively of long duration – often without any recognizable cause – and it usually does not require any behavior. According to Schmidt-Atzert et al. (2014), mood represents a con- stant reality state in one’s life. If someone occupies the parking space that you wanted for yourself, anger can spontaneously be triggered in you. This can lead to a general angry state in the case where many such events occur and add up (Schmidt-Atzert et al., 2014). 37  Emotions: These are often confused with feelings and moods and should not be used interchangeably. Emotions represent complex patterns of behaviors, reactions, experien- ces, mental processes, and physiological states (Damasio, 2001, 2006). It is how people understand and react to issues or circumstances of personal relevance (UWA, 2019). Feelings: This term is often used interchangeably with emotions, probably because emo- tions generate feelings when an animal is in a state of vigilance (Damasio, 2006). Feelings refer to the perception of somatic (bodily) states combined with mental states (memories, beliefs, etc.) while an emotion is experienced (Damasio, 2006; UWA, 2019). Different Types of Emotions How many different emotions can you think of? Are you sure that all of these would fall under the definition of emotion? To answer this question with a degree of certainty, we first need to consider that emotions are divided into basic and complex. Basic emotions occur spontaneously and relate to familiar facial expressions. Facial expressions are cer- tainly emotion-generated responses and, according to Darwin, are universal, biologically bound, and adaptable (Ekman, 2010b; UWA, 2019). In fact, emotions have been recognized in animals, suggesting that they are crucial to existence and survival (Panksepp, 2005; Panksepp & Lahvis, 2011). In a review published by Ortony and Turner (1990), a range of basic emotions, from three up to eleven, were included in relevant studies published between 1930 and 1987. The inconsistency in the number of emotions included in those studies depended on the dif- ferent inclusion criteria in each study, as well as the corresponding theoretical back- ground of each author. Watson (1919) believed that basic emotions are not learned, but are instead associated with certain hardwired physiological reactions (Ortony & Turner, 1990). From this perspective, certain emotions are inherited and are similarly found in all species (Panksepp, 2005). American psychologist Paul Ekman originally classified emotions into seven basic types that could be explained in terms of facial expressions. In their cross-cultural studies of people’s facial expressions, Ekman et al. (1971) came up with seven different emotions (anger, fear, sadness, disgust, contempt, surprise, and joy) that are universal and can be culturally interpreted by all people (Sauter et al., 2010). Although Ekman had originally classified emotions into six different types, he later included contempt, which he differen- tiated from disgust. He argued that contempt is an emotion expressed only with relevance to people and/or their actions, but not with relevance to taste, smell, or touch (Ekman, 2010a). 38 Figure 6: The Seven Basic Emotions According to Ekman Source: Evangelos Zois (2022), based on UWA (2019). Similarly, another American psychologist, Robert Plutchik (1982), suggested the existence of eight basic emotions. In his model, he categorized emotions into pairs of opposites, such as joy and sadness, anger and fear, trust and disgust, and surprise and anticipation. His model of emotion classification is known as “the wheel of emotions.” Interestingly, the wheel of emotions is comparable to a color wheel, where specific emotions, if mixed, gen- erate new, complex emotions (Plutchik, 1982, 2001). Emotions, just like colors on the opposite sides of the circle, complement one another. The following figure represents the wheel of emotions. Plutchik assumes eight primary emotions that are arranged in an inner circle. In the outer circle, secondary emotions are depicted which, according to his theory, are formed by the combination of neighboring emotions. For example, optimism arises from a mixture of anticipation and joy (Plutchik, 1982). 39  Figure 7: The Wheel of Emotions Source: Evangelos Zois (2022), based on Plutchik (1982). 2.2 Emotions and the Brain From what we have discussed so far on emotions and considering the types of different emotions and the definitions provided, it is clear that psychological approaches differ in the viewpoint by which they examine and investigate emotions. Broadly speaking, psy- chological approaches depend on each researcher’s methodology, as well as their theoret- ical background and focus. In order to capture and understand emotions from different perspectives and, as a result, obtain an overview, we need to look at different psychologi- cal approaches in the study of emotions, which, due to their chronological order, reflect not only the scientific developments in the psychology of emotion but also the respective zeitgeist. 40 Psychological Approaches In this section, we will focus on specific perspectives and respective contributions that different psychological approaches make to explain emotions. Evolutionary and biological approach Charles Darwin is considered the founder of the evolutionary approach. He questioned the meaning of the expression of emotions and developed the principle of “serviceable associated habits” (Darwin, 1872; Merten, 2003). For example, while the contraction of eyebrows and eyelids was originally conscious and served to improve vision, it has devel- oped a new function over time, indicating the behavior – now unconscious – of someone who might be thinking about something (Niemitz, 1987). In the event of a threat, expres- sive behavior serves to send out emotional signals. They indicate a readiness to react by anticipating an action, pointing out to the other person that retaliation is to be expected in the event of an attack (Merten, 2003). An example of this is the snarling and growling of a dog, which coupled with an appropriate posture, signals readiness to fight and warns the opponent that they might get bitten. Basic behavioral patterns According to Merten (2003), basic behavioral patterns were regarded as the basis of emo- tions in various evolutionary biology theories. These have the function of selecting and initiating actions that take the needs of the organism into account and at the same time adapt those needs to the environment (Merten, 2003). Function of emotions One of Darwin’s most important and still-relevant principles states that emotions must have a selective advantage. This means that through natural selection, the characteristics that improve the adaptation of the organism to their respective environment and, thus, ensure their survival and reproduction, are passed on (Myers, 2014; Myers & DeWall, 2018). So, emotions have a complementary function in relation to behavior. In contemporary psychological thinking and science, the consensus in relation to what comes as a result of heritability and/or environmental factors is that there is an interaction between the two. Therefore, depending on the circumstances, the environment influences our genes, and vice versa (