BLP+ Exam 1 Study Outline - Sp25 PDF

Historical Precedents The Lines of Development from Philosophy Critical Question: How do we come to know things? Early Philosophers Plato / nativism – all knowledge is innate Aristotle / empiricism – all knowledge is acquired More recent philosophical developments Descartes / dualism –...

Historical Precedents The Lines of Development from Philosophy Critical Question: How do we come to know things? Early Philosophers Plato / nativism – all knowledge is innate Aristotle / empiricism – all knowledge is acquired More recent philosophical developments Descartes / dualism – mind and body are separate Mind – free of laws of nature Body – reflexive machine following all laws of nature The will of the mind controls the actions of the body through the pineal gland. Other implications of his dualistic position Scientific Materialism and School of Reflexology Argued that we are all basically reflexive machines Which suggests we can derive the “laws” of the mind Lloyd Morgan’s cannon (Occam’s razor) British Empiricists (associationists) Locke – all knowledge is acquired through experience Knowledge is built up through the association of ideas Associationists (the Mills and Hartley) Principles of Association Contiguity Repetition Vividness Similarity Emerging Properties Developments Within Psychology Problems with “armchair” philosophers Structuralism Systematic introspection Problems with introspection - subjective Behaviorism Watson Reacted against introspection Only study what we can verify (the S and the R) S-R associations represent building blocks of knowledge Change in S-R reflexes acquired through Pavlovian conditioning Suggested that this represents a general mechanism of learning Classic Theories of Learning Pavlov Pavlovian / Classical Conditioning Classic Experiment using dogs Four Components of Classical Conditioning Conditioned Stimulus Unconditioned Stimulus Unconditioned Response Conditioned Response Thorndike Slightly different paradigm than Pavlov Instrumental Conditioning Instituted a contingency between behavior and reinforcement Law of Effect What is Learned in Instrumental Conditioning? The S-R connections in animals can increase or decrease in strength. Outcomes (reinforcers) selectively strengthen (or weaken) S-R associations. Contiguity plays a role Darwinian – only one S-R reflex survives Differences between Pavlovian Conditioning and Instrumental Learning Pavlovian Experimenter has control of CS and US Subject is passive Learning depends on the relationship between two stimuli CR is involuntary Instrumental Subject has control of whether they receive the outcome Learning depends on contingency the relationship between the response and the outcome Response is voluntary What is contingency? Response à Outcome; No Response à No outcome Three Classic Theories on Instrumental Learning: Mathematical-Deductive Approach Hull - S-R Theorist (much like Skinner) Used mathematical formula to describe/predict behavior Incorporated both Learning and performance variables Rp = (D * SHR * K * V) – (IR + SIR) Conditions of Learning D = Drive sHr = habit strength (learning) K = Motivation V = Salience (stimulus intensity) Ir = fatigue  sIr = conditioned inhibition (learning an opposing response) Cognitive Approach Tolman Viewed organisms as more flexible than reflexive machines. Questioned the current theories. Animals form expectancies Reinforcement is not necessary for learning Animals can make S1-S2 associations. R not necessary. First to use a cognitive approach to studying animal learning. Evidence that animals form expectancies Evidence that reinforcement is not necessary for learning Evidence that animals can make S1-S2 associations. R not necessary. Behavioral Approach – Skinner Problem with Cognitive Approach Sometimes animals do look like reflexive machines Solution Distinguished between Pavlovian and Instrumental Learning Eliminated the S in the S-R learning paradigm. Emphasized the idea that we should only study the rate of responding that is modified by rewards and punishments Single-Stimulus Learning What is Learning? Definition How do we know when learning has occurred? Change in behavior But not all behavioral change is learning Learning v. Performance Examples of maturation, motor fatigue, sensory adaptation Levels of analysis General-Process Approach The Reflex and Modal Action Patterns (MAPs) Distinction between elicited behavior and emitted behavior Elicited – automatic and pre-determined in nature Emitted – voluntary and more flexible in nature The Reflex An eliciting stimulus and a linked response Spinal Reflex Arc Sensory (Afferent) Neuron à Interneuron à Motor (Efferent) Neuron Modal Action Patterns (Also called Species-Typical Behaviors) Reflexive response sequences that are typical of a particular species.  Important Features of MAPs Conditions must be “right” to initiate MAP sequence What parts of the eliciting stimulus must be present to produce a response? Sign Stimulus (also called releasing stimulus) Supernormal stimulus Exaggerated features of the sign stimulus will elicit more vigorous response MAPs can combine to form more complex behavioral sequences Appetitive behaviors – early components of a behavioral sequence Typically more flexible and species-specific Ex. Foraging for food; cooking food; preparing food Consummatory behaviors – later components of a behavioral sequence Typically more reflexive and universal for many animals. Ex. Chewing, swallowing food Ways that Reflexive Behavior can change over time: Habituation A decrease in response magnitude with each successive stimulus presentation. Evidence that habituation is not due to sensory adaptation nor motor fatigue: Spontaneous Recovery - if habituation is due to sensory adaptation or motor fatigue, you would expect the response to recover fully by the next day (but it does not). Dishabituation – if habituation is due to sensory adaptation or motor fatigue, you would not expect a brief distraction to restore responding, but the response does partially return. Opponent-Process Theory Standard Pattern of Affective Dynamics Mechanisms a-process b-process – changes with experience Real-world examples Sensitization The magnitude of the response increases or remains high with each successive stimulus presentation. Dual-Process Theory (Groves and Thompson) Habituation occurs in the S-R (reflex) pathway; Sensitization caused by over-arching State system Can explain both sensitization and dishabituation Biological Basis of Habituation and Sensitization Review of Neural Transmission Resting Membrane Potential Action Potential Synaptic Transmission – neurotransmitter release moderated by Ca2+ influx. Aplysia – Neurobiological Model used by Eric Kandel Habituation in Aplysia Touch siphonàgill withdraw Gill withdrawal response decreases over trials Biochemical mechanisms Neurotransmitter release decreases at the synapse Due to inactivation of Ca2+ channels Sensitization in Aplysia Shock tail Touch siphonàgill withdrawal Gill withdrawal response remains high for some time. Biochemical Mechanisms Facilitory interneuron activation (from tail) increases the duration of the action potential, which makes the Ca2+ channels stay open longer. More Ca2+ influx = more neurotransmitter release