Pavlovian Conditioning and its Concepts D R D I N E S H R A M O O

Pavlovian Conditioning and its Concepts D R D I N E S H R A M O O

Introduction In the late 1800s and early 1900s, behaviourism was becoming a dominant force within psychology. Researchers sought simple, mechanical explanations to displace what they considered unscientific accounts of thoughts, ideas, and other mental processes. The mood of the time was ripe for the theories of Ivan P. Pavlov, a Russian physiologist who had won a Nobel Prize in physiology in 1904 for his research on digestion.

As Pavlov continued his digestion research, one day he noticed that a dog would salivate or secrete stomach juices as soon as it saw the lab worker who customarily fed the dogs. Because this secretion undoubtedly depended on the dog s previous experiences, Pavlov called it a psychological secretion. He enlisted the help of other specialists, who then discovered that teasing a dog with the sight of food produced salivation that was as predictable and automatic as any reflex. Pavlov adopted the term conditional reflex, implying that he only conditionally (or tentatively) accepted it as a reflex (Todes, 1997). However, the term has usually been translated into English as conditioned reflex, and that term is now well established in the literature.

Pavlov s Procedures Pavlov presumed that animals are born with certain automatic connections called unconditioned reflexes between a stimulus such as food and a response such as secreting digestive juices. He conjectured that animals acquire new reflexes by transferring a response from one stimulus to another. For example, if a neutral stimulus (e.g., a buzzer) always precedes food, an animal would respond to the buzzer as it responds to food. The buzzer would begin to elicit digestive secretions. The process by which an organism learns a new association between two paired stimuli a neutral stimulus and one that already evokes a reflexive response is known as classical conditioning, or Pavlovian conditioning. (It is called classical because it has been known and studied for a long time.)

Pavlov s Experiment Pavlov used an experimental setup like the one in the figure (Goodwin, 1991). First, he selected dogs with a moderate degree of arousal. (Highly excitable dogs would not hold still long enough, and highly inhibited dogs would fall asleep.) Then he attached a tube to one of the salivary ducts in the dog s mouth to measure salivation. He could have measured stomach secretions, but measuring salivation was easier. Pavlov found that, whenever he gave a dog food, the dog salivated. The food and salivation connection was automatic, requiring no training. Pavlov called food the unconditioned stimulus, and he called salivation the unconditioned response. If a particular stimulus consistently, automatically elicits a particular response, we call that stimulus the unconditioned stimulus (UCS), and the response to it is the unconditioned response (UCR).

Next Pavlov introduced a new stimulus, such as a metronome. Upon hearing the metronome, the dog lifted its ears and looked around but did not salivate, so the metronome was a neutral stimulus with regard to salivation. Then Pavlov sounded the metronome a couple of seconds before giving food to the dog. After a few pairings of the metronome with food, the dog began to salivate as soon as it heard the metronome (Pavlov, 1927/1960). We call the metronome the conditioned stimulus (CS) because the dog s response to it depends on the preceding conditions that is, the pairing of the CS with the UCS. The salivation that follows the metronome is the conditioned response (CR). The conditioned response is simply whatever response the conditioned stimulus begins to elicit as a result of the conditioning (training) procedure. At the start of the conditioning procedure, the conditioned stimulus does not elicit a conditioned response. After conditioning, it does.

At first

During training

After some number of repetitions

Conditioned and Unconditioned Response In Pavlov s experiment the conditioned response (salivation) closely resembled the unconditioned response (also salivation). However, in some cases it is quite different. For example, the unconditioned response to an electric shock includes shrieking and jumping. The conditioned response to a stimulus paired with shock (i.e., a warning signal for shock) is a tensing of the muscles and lack of activity (e.g., Pezze, Bast, & Feldon, 2003).

Summary To summarise, the unconditioned stimulus (UCS), such as food, automatically elicits the unconditioned response (UCR), such as salivating. A neutral stimulus, such as a sound, that is paired with the UCS becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS). At first this neutral stimulus elicits either no response or an irrelevant response, such as looking around. After some number of pairings of the CS with the UCS, the conditioned stimulus elicits the conditioned response (CR), which usually resembles the UCR. The key difference between the CR and UCR is that the CS (conditioned stimulus) elicits the CR (conditioned response) and the UCS (unconditioned stimulus) elicits the UCR (unconditioned response). All else being equal, conditioning occurs more rapidly if the conditioned stimulus is unfamiliar. For example, if you heard a tone many times (followed by nothing) and then started hearing the tone followed by a puff of air to your left eye, you would be slow to show signs of conditioning. Similarly, imagine two people who are bitten by a snake. One has never been near a snake before; the other has spent years tending snakes at the zoo. You can guess which one will develop a fear of snakes.

Examples of Classical Conditioning Your alarm clock makes a faint clicking sound a couple of seconds before the alarm goes off. At first the click by itself does not awaken you, but the alarm does. After a week or so, you awaken as soon as you hear the click. Unconditioned Stimulus = Alarm Unconditioned Response = Awakening Conditioned Stimulus = Click Conditioned Response = Awakening

Examples of Classical Conditioning You hear the sound of a dentist s drill shortly before the unpleasant experience of the drill on your teeth. From then on the sound of a dentist s drill arouses anxiety. Unconditioned Stimulus = Drilling Unconditioned Response = Tension Conditioned Stimulus = Sound of the drill Conditioned Response = Tension

Examples of Classical Conditioning A nursing mother responds to her baby s cries by putting the baby to her breast, stimulating the flow of milk. After a few days of repetitions, the sound of the baby s cry is enough to start the milk flowing. Unconditioned Stimulus = Baby sucking Unconditioned Response = Milk flow Conditioned Stimulus = Baby s cry Conditioned Response = Milk flow

Examples of Classical Conditioning Note the usefulness of classical conditioning in each case: It prepares an individual for likely events. In some cases, however, the effects can be unwelcome. For example, many cancer patients who have had repeated chemotherapy or radiation become nauseated when they approach or even imagine the building where they received treatment (Dadds, Bovbjerg, Redd, & Cutmore, 1997). Unconditioned Stimulus = Chemotherapy or radiation Unconditioned Response = Nausea Conditioned Stimulus = Approaching the building Conditioned Response = Nausea

Try this Form an image of a lemon, a nice fresh juicy one. You cut it into slices and then suck on a slice. Imagine that sour taste. As you imagine the lemon, do you notice yourself salivating? If so, your imagination produced enough resemblance to the actual sight and taste of a lemon to serve as a conditioned stimulus.

The Phenomena of Classical Conditioning

Acquisition The process that establishes or strengthens a conditioned response is known as acquisition. Once Pavlov had demonstrated how classical conditioning occurs, curious psychologists wondered what would happen after various changes in the procedures. Their investigations have extended our knowledge of classical conditioning.

Extinction Suppose I sound a buzzer and then blow a puff of air into your eyes. After a few repetitions, you will start to close your eyes as soon as you hear the buzzer. Now I sound the buzzer repeatedly without the puff of air. What do you do? You will blink your eyes the first time and perhaps the second and third times, but before long you will stop. This decrease of the conditioned response is called extinction. To extinguish a classically conditioned response, repeatedly present the conditioned stimulus (CS) without the unconditioned stimulus (UCS). That is, acquisition of a response (CR) occurs when the CS predicts the UCS; extinction occurs when the CS no longer predicts the UCS.

Extinction Extinction is not the same as forgetting. Both weaken a learned response, but they arise in different ways. You forget during a long period with no relevant experience or practice. Extinction occurs as the result of a specific experience perceiving the conditioned stimulus without the unconditioned stimulus.

Extinction Extinction does not erase the original connection between the CS and the UCS. We can regard acquisition as learning to do a response and extinction as learning to inhibit it. For example, suppose you have gone through original learning in which a tone regularly predicted a puff of air to your eyes. You learned to blink your eyes at the tone. Then you went through an extinction process in which you heard the tone many times but received no air puffs. You extinguished, so the tone no longer elicited a blink. Now, without hearing a tone, you get another puff of air to your eyes. As a result, the next time you hear the tone, you will blink your eyes. Extinction inhibited your response to the CS (here, the tone), but a sudden puff of air weakens that inhibition (Bouton, 1994).

Spontaneous Recovery Suppose you are in a classical-conditioning experiment. At first you repeatedly hear a buzzer sound (CS) that precedes a puff of air to your eyes (UCS). Then the buzzer stops predicting an air puff. After a few trials, your response to the buzzer extinguishes. Now, suppose you sit there for a long time with nothing happening and then suddenly you hear another buzzer sound. What will you do? Chances are, you will blink your eyes at least slightly. Spontaneous recovery is this temporary return of an extinguished response after a delay. Spontaneous recovery requires no additional CS UCS pairings.

Spontaneous Recovery Why does spontaneous recovery take place? Think of it this way: At first the buzzer predicted a puff of air to your eyes, and then it didn t. You behaved in accordance with the more recent experiences. Hours later, neither experience is much more recent than the other, and the effects of the original acquisition are almost as strong as those of extinction.

Stimulus Generalisation Suppose a bee stings you. You quickly learn to fear bees. Now you see a similar large insect, such as a wasp or hornet. Will you fear that too? You probably will. However, you probably will not show any fear of ants, fleas, or other insects that don t resemble bees. The more similar is a new stimulus to the conditioned stimulus, the more likely you are to show a similar response.

Stimulus Generalisation Stimulus generalization is the extension of a conditioned response from the training stimulus to similar stimuli. This definition may sound pretty straightforward, but psychologists find it difficult to specify exactly what similar means (Pearce, 1994). For example, after a bee stings you, you might fear the sound of buzzing bees when you are walking through a forest but not when you hear the same sounds as part of a nature documentary on television. Your response depends on how similar the total configuration of stimuli is to the set on which you were trained, and that similarity is hard to measure.

Discrimination Suppose your alarm clock makes one kind of click when the alarm is about to ring but you hear a different kind of click at other times. You will learn to discriminate between these two clicks: You will respond differently because the two stimuli predicted different outcomes. You awaken when you hear one click but not when you hear the other. Similarly, you discriminate between a bell that signals time for class to start and a different bell that signals a fire alarm. You might learn to discriminate between a poisonous snake and a similar looking, harmless snake.

Classical Conditioning E X A M P L E S

Drug Tolerance Classical conditioning shows up in places you might not expect. One example is drug tolerance: Users of certain drugs experience progressively weaker effects after taking the drugs repeatedly. Some long-time users inject more heroin or morphine into their veins than it would take to kill a nonuser. Consequently, the users crave larger and larger amounts of the drug. Drug tolerance results partly from automatic chemical changes that occur in cells throughout the body to counteract the drug s effects (Baker & Tiffany, 1985). It also depends partly on classical conditioning.

Consider: When drug users inject themselves with morphine or heroin, the drug injection procedure is a complex stimulus that includes the time and place as well as the needle injection. This total stimulus predicts a second stimulus, the drug s entry into the brain, which triggers a variety of body defences against its effects for example, changes in hormone secretions, heart rate, and breathing rate. 1 st Stimulus Injection Procedure 2 nd Stimulus Drug enters brain 3 rd Stimulus Body s Defences

Whenever one stimulus predicts a second stimulus that produces an automatic response, classical conditioning can occur. The first stimulus becomes the CS, the second becomes the UCS, and its response is the UCR. So we can relabel as follows: CS Injection Procedure UCS Drug enters brain UCR Body s Defences

If conditioning occurs here, what would be the consequences? Suppose the CS (drug injection) produces a CR that resembles the UCR (the body s defences against the drug). As a result, as soon as the person starts the injection, before the drug enters the body, the body is already mobilizing its defences against the drug. Therefore, the drug will have less effect the body develops tolerance. Shepard Siegel (1977, 1983) conducted several experiments to confirm that classical conditioning occurs during drug injections. That is, after many drug injections, the injection procedure by itself evokes the body s antidrug defences: CS Injection Procedure CR Body s defences

One prediction was this: If the injection procedure serves as a conditioned stimulus, then the body s defence reactions should be strongest if the drug is administered in the usual way, in the usual location, with as many familiar stimuli as possible. (The whole experience constitutes the conditioned stimulus.) The evidence strongly supports this prediction for a variety of drugs (Marin, Perez, Duero, & Ramirez, 1999; Siegel, 1983). For example, a rat that is repeatedly injected with alcohol develops tolerance, improving its balance while intoxicated. But if it is now tested in the presence of loud sounds and strobe lights, its balance suffers. Conversely, if it had practiced its balance while intoxicated in the presence of loud sounds and strobe lights, its balance suffers if it is tested without those stimuli (Larson & Siegel, 1998). In short, the tolerance depends on learning.

Why do some people die of a drug overdose that is no larger than the dose they normally tolerate? They probably took the fatal overdose in an unfamiliar setting. For example, someone who is accustomed to taking a drug at home in the evening could suffer a fatal reaction from taking it at a friend s house in the morning. Because the new setting did not serve as a CS, it failed to trigger the usual drug tolerance.

Emotional Conditioning Without Awareness

Introduction In many situations conditioning occurs fastest when people are aware of the connection between the CS and UCS (Knuttinen, Power, Preston, & Disterhoft, 2001). (With laboratory animals, it is hard to ask!) However, emotional responses sometimes become conditioned without awareness. The implications are far-reaching. We shall examine one study in detail. In some ways this discussion will seem out of place: The whole idea of discussing attitudes, emotions, and so forth is contrary to the customs of radical behaviourism. Nevertheless, we see here how other psychologists have taken the idea of classical conditioning and applied it more broadly.

Hypothesis People will form favourable attitudes toward items paired with something they like and unfavourable attitudes toward items paired with something they dislike, even if they are not aware of the connection (Olson & Fazio, 2001).

Method Forty-five female college students viewed a series of slides. Most included a Pokémon image, although a few were blank. Most of those with a Pokémon also included another picture or a word. Each student s task was to look for a particular target Pokémon and press a computer key whenever she saw it, ignoring all the other pictures and words. Most of the other Pokémon images were paired with neutral words and pictures, but one of them was always paired with something likable (e.g., a picture of tasty food or the word excellent ), and one was always paired with something negative (e.g., a picture of a cockroach or the word terrible ). After viewing all the slides repeatedly, each student was asked to look at all the Pokémon images (by themselves) and rate how pleasant or unpleasant they were. They were also asked whether they remembered what other items had paired with each Pokémon.

Results On the average the women gave a higher pleasantness rating to the Pokémon that had been associated with favourable words and pictures and lower ratings to the one associated with unfavourable words and pictures. However, they did not remember what words or pictures had been associated with each Pokémon. (They hadn t been told to remember those pairings, and they didn t.)

Interpretation These results show classical conditioning can alter people s emotional responses to pictures, even though people did not notice them enough to report explicit memories. Additional research has shown conditioning of other kinds of emotional responses. In one study people saw words paired with pictures of faces, some of which were smiling or frowning. For some of the participants, personally relevant words (their name, their birth date, etc.) were consistently paired with smiling faces. As a result of this pairing, they showed increases in several measures of self-esteem! Evidently, the pairings enhanced emotional responses to reminders of the participants themselves (Baccus, Baldwin, & Packer, 2004).

Summary

Classical conditioning. Ivan Pavlov discovered classical conditioning, the process by which an organism learns a new association between two stimuli that have been paired with each other a neutral stimulus (the conditioned stimulus) and one that initially evokes a reflexive response (the unconditioned stimulus). The organism displays this association by responding in a new way (the conditioned response) to the conditioned stimulus.

Extinction. After classical conditioning has established a conditioned response to a stimulus, the response can be extinguished by repeatedly presenting that stimulus by itself. Spontaneous recovery. If the conditioned stimulus is not presented at all for some time after extinction and is then presented again, the conditioned response may return to some degree. That return is called spontaneous recovery. Stimulus generalization. An individual who learns to respond to one stimulus will respond similarly to stimuli that resemble it. However, it is difficult to specify how we should measure similarity.

Discrimination. If one stimulus is followed by an unconditioned stimulus and another similar stimulus is not, the individual will come to discriminate between these two stimuli. Emotional conditioning without awareness. In many situations conditioning is strongest if the learner is aware of the CS UCS connection. However, emotional responses can be conditioned even if the learner is not aware of the connection. Drug tolerance. Drug tolerance is partly a form of classical conditioning in which the drug administration procedure comes to evoke defensive responses by the body.

Questions?

At the start of training, the CS elicits and the UCS elicits. At the start of training, the CS elicits no response and the UCS elicits the UCR. After many repetitions of the CS followed by the UCS, the CS elicits and the UCS elicits. After many repetitions of the CS followed by the UCS, the CS elicits CR and the UCS elicits UCR.

Some useful reading Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. A review of social learning by its most influential investigator. Kroodsma, D. (2005). The singing life of birds. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Thorough account of research on a fascinating kind of animal learning. Staddon, J. (1993). Behaviorism. London: Duckworth. A critique of both the strengths and weaknesses of Skinner s views.

References Baccus, J. R., Baldwin, M. W., & Packer, D. J. (2004). Increasing implicit self-esteem through classical conditioning. Psychological Science, 15, 498 502. (6) Baker, T. B., & Tiffany, S. T. (1985). Morphine tolerance as habituation. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 78 108. (6) Bouton, M. E. (1994). Context, ambiguity, and classical conditioning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3, 49 53. (6) Dadds, M. R., Bovbjerg, D. H., Redd, W. H., & Cutmore, T. R. H. (1997). Imagery in human classical conditioning. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 89 103. (6) Knuttinen, M.-G., Power, J. M., Preston, A. R., & Disterhoft, J. F. (2001). Awareness in classical differential eyeblink conditioning in young and aging humans. Behavioral Neuroscience, 115, 747 757. (6) Larson, S. J., & Siegel, S. (1998). Learning and tolerance to the ataxic effect of ethanol. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 61, 131 142. (6)

References Marin, R. H., Perez, M. F., Duero, D. G., & Ramirez, O. A. (1999). Preexposure to drug administration context blocks the development of tolerance to sedative effects of diazepam. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 64, 473 477. (6) Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2001). Implicit attitude formation through classical conditioning. Psychological Science, 12, 413 417. (6) Pavlov, I. P. (1960). Conditioned reflexes. New York: Dover. (Original work published 1927) (6) Pezze, M. A., Bast, T., & Feldon, J. (2003). Significance of dopamine transmission in the rat medial prefrontal cortex for conditioned fear. Cerebral Cortex, 13, 371 380. (6) Siegel, S. (1977). Morphine tolerance as an associative process. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 3, 1 13. (6) Siegel, S. (1983). Classical conditioning, drug tolerance, and drug dependence. Research Advances in Alcohol and Drug Problems, 7, 207 246. (6) Todes, D. P. (1997). From the machine to the ghost within. American Psychologist, 52, 947 955. (6)