+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Conditioned Inhibition

Conditioned Inhibition

Date post: 19-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: avedis
View: 40 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Conditioned Inhibition. Procedures for producing CI Conditional (standard) Procedure Negative Contingency/Explicitly Unpaired Differential Procedure Backward Conditioning Long-delay/Trace Conditioning. Procedures for Measuring CI. Directed Behavior Test Summation (Compound Stimulus) Test - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Popular Tags:
27
Conditioned Inhibition Procedures for producing CI Conditional (standard) Procedure Negative Contingency/Explicitly Unpaired Differential Procedure Backward Conditioning Long-delay/Trace Conditioning
Transcript
Page 1: Conditioned Inhibition

Conditioned Inhibition

• Procedures for producing CI– Conditional (standard) Procedure– Negative Contingency/Explicitly Unpaired– Differential Procedure– Backward Conditioning– Long-delay/Trace Conditioning

Page 2: Conditioned Inhibition

Procedures for Measuring CI

• Directed Behavior Test

• Summation (Compound Stimulus) Test

• Retardation-of-Acquisition Test

Page 3: Conditioned Inhibition

Chapter 4

• Classical Conditioning: Mechanisms– What makes effective conditioned and

unconditioned stimuli?– What determines the nature of the conditioned

response?– How do conditioned and unconditioned stimuli

become associated?

Page 4: Conditioned Inhibition

What makes effective Conditioned and Unconditioned Stimuli?

Initial responses to the stimuli

CS – does not elicit the CR initially

US – elicits the target response without any special training

Identification of CSs and USs is relative

A particular event may serve as a CS relative to one stimulus and serve as a US relative to another stimulus

Page 5: Conditioned Inhibition

Saccharin – a tasty solution that rats like

Saccharin can serve as the CS in a taste-aversion experiment where illness is the US

The same saccharin could serve as the US

L Saccharin

The animal would approach the L

Page 6: Conditioned Inhibition

The Novelty of Conditioned and Unconditioned Stimuli

The behavioral impact of a stimulus depends on its novelty

Familiar stimuli do not elicit as vigorous a response as donovel stimuli (i.e., Habituation)

Stimulus novelty is important for classical conditioning

If the CS and/or the US are familiar, conditioning proceeds more slowly than if they were novel

Testing the role of stimulus novelty involves 2 phases:- preexposure- conditioning

Page 7: Conditioned Inhibition

CS-preexposure effect or Latent Inhibition

Phase 1: Preexposure

Subjects are given repeated presentations of the CS alone

Phase 2: Conditioning

Subjects are given pairings of the CS with the US

The initial preexposure to the CS usually retards subsequentconditioning

This latent inhibition effect is similar to habituation- the repeated preexposure to the CS limits the processing of, or attention to, the stimulus

Page 8: Conditioned Inhibition

US-preexposure effect

Experiments on the importance of US novelty are designed in a similar way

Phase 1: Preexposure

Subjects are given repeated presentations of the US alone

Phase 2: Conditioning

Subjects are given pairings of the CS with the US

The initial preexposure to the US usually retards subsequentconditioning

- may be due to conditioning of background cues during the preexposure phase

Page 9: Conditioned Inhibition

CS and US Intensity and Salience

Stimulus salience – refers to the significance ornoticeability of the stimulus

Learning occurs more rapidly with more salient, or more noticeable, stimuli

A stimulus can be made more salient by increasing the intensity of the stimulus

-A more intense US will usually result in better conditioning

-A more intense CS also results in better conditioning

Page 10: Conditioned Inhibition

US Intensity

Flavor LiCl

Cons

Low dose High dose

See bigger aversion inthe group that got thehigh dose of LiCl (i.e.,more intense US)

Page 11: Conditioned Inhibition

CS Intensity

A more intense CS also results in better conditioning

This makes sense from an ecological point of view- a more intense CS will be more salient than

the background and will command more attention

With CTA, a stronger concentration of flavor results in bigger taste aversions

- the taste becomes more different than plain drinking water

Page 12: Conditioned Inhibition

CS Intensity

Overshadowing

If two stimuli are presented together and followed by a US, will see better conditioning to the stronger of the two stimuli

TL Shock

T = loudL = weak

T better able to suppress barpressing

Page 13: Conditioned Inhibition

A stimulus can be made more salient by:

- making it more relevant to the biological needs of the animal (i.e., can increase the salience of a salt taste by depriving the animal of salt)

- making laboratory CSs more similar to stimuli animalsmight encounter in the natural environment (i.e., quail)

- increasing the intensity of the stimulus

Page 14: Conditioned Inhibition

Rate of Classical Conditioning is also affected by:

CS-US Relevance, or Belongingness

- the extent to which the CS is relevant to, or belongs with, the US

The importance of stimulus relevance was demonstrated in an experiment by Garcia & Koelling (1966)

They compared learning about peripheral pain (footshock) and learning about illness

In nature, rats are likely to get sick after eating poisonous food, but experience peripheral pain after an encounter witha predator

Page 15: Conditioned Inhibition

Garcia & Koelling’s (1966)“bright and noisy water” experiment

Phase 1

Group 1: Sacc + LN LiCl

Group 2: Sacc + LN Shock

Phase 2 (test)

½ Sacc½ LN + water

½ Sacc

½ LN + water

If taste and sickness ‘go together’, then group given LiCl should have a bigger aversion to saccharin than to the audiovisual cue (LN)

Page 16: Conditioned Inhibition

LNSacc

ShockLiCl

Cons

Page 17: Conditioned Inhibition

Rats that got poisoned decreased saccharin consumption

Rats that got shocked decreased consumption of the ‘bright and noisy’ water

This experiment suggests that tastes are more readily associated with sickness than with shock (peripheral pain) and that audiovisual cues (LN) are more readily associated with pain/shock than with sickness

Selectivity of association

Page 18: Conditioned Inhibition

We see evidence of this selectivity of association in other species

For ex., certain birds locate food by its visual characteristics,rather than by its taste

Wilcoxin et al (1970)Trained rats and quailTaste + visual CS paired with poison

Train: Sour Blue LiCl

Test: ½ blue water

½ sour water

Subjects given blue water were being tested for aversion to color(visual property of food) while those given sour flavor were being tested for taste aversion

Page 19: Conditioned Inhibition

Blue water

Sour water

QuailRats

Cons

Page 20: Conditioned Inhibition

Rats showed a strong aversion to the sour flavor and little aversion to the visual properties of the food

But see opposite pattern in birds – strong aversion to blue water but little aversion to the sour taste

The CS that is most easily conditioned is the one that animals use to procure food

Rats use taste and odor cues to procure food

Birds use visual cues to procure food

Page 21: Conditioned Inhibition

The Concept of Biological Strength

Initially, the CS is weaker than the US

But after conditioning, the CS is strong and elicitsa vigorous response

Could the strong CS now serve as a US?

Page 22: Conditioned Inhibition

Higher-Order Conditioning

CS US T Food

This is an example of first-order conditioningThe CS (Tone) will elicit salivation after a few trials

Now, pair L T

This is an example of second-order conditioningThe second CS (Light) will come to elicit salivation

Page 23: Conditioned Inhibition

Second-Order Conditioning

CS1 US

CR

CS2 CS1

CR

Money is an example of a powerful CS for humans

Page 24: Conditioned Inhibition

Similarity between Second-order conditioning and the standard procedure for producing Conditioned Inhibition

2nd order conditioning CI CS1 US CS+ CS2 CS1 CS+/CS-

Important factors:1. The number of no-US trials

- few no-US trials = 2nd order conditioning- many no-US trials = CI

2. Pattern of trials- 2nd order conditioning = sequential- CI = interspersed

Page 25: Conditioned Inhibition

Examples of Classical Conditioning discussed so far satisfy the criterion of differential biological strength

- strong US and weaker CS (1st order conditioning)- strong CS1 and weaker CS2 (2nd order conditioning)

In some situations, associations form between stimuli when this condition is not met:

1. Counterconditioning

Two stimuli become associated even though both elicit strong responses

The normal response to the CS is reversed, or ‘countered’, by pairing it with a US that elicits the opposite response

Shock Food

Page 26: Conditioned Inhibition

2. Sensory Preconditioning

Two stimuli become associated even though both are weak

CS2 CS1 CS1 US

CR

CS2

CR

Because both stimuli are biologically weak in the first stage, there is no robust response to measure

Page 27: Conditioned Inhibition

Sensory Preconditioning

T L (No CR to measure)

L Food (L elicits salivation)

T (T now elicits salivation)

The procedure for Sensory preconditioning is very similar tothe procedure for 2nd order conditioning

- the 2 phases of conditioning are reversed

Sensory preconditioning 2nd order conditioning CS2 CS1 CS1 US CS1 US CS2 CS1


Recommended