Classical conditioning Flashcards
Define “classical conditioning”. (2 points)
Learning a new behaviour through association
When two stimuli are repeatedly paired together, you learn to associate one stimulus with another
Define “unconditioned stimulus (UCS)”.
Something that triggers a natural reaction
Define “unconditioned response (UCR)”.
A response which is natural and does not need to be learnt
Define “neutral stimulus (NS)”.
Something that does not normally trigger a reaction
Define “conditioned stimulus (CS)”.
Something that triggers a learnt response
Define “conditioned response (CR)”.
A response that has been learnt through association
How does classical conditioning work? (3 steps)
- An unconditioned stimulus (UCS) brings about a natural response (UCR)
- A neutral stimulus (NS) which doesn’t bring about any response with the UCS is repeatedly paired with i t
- The NS eventually becomes associated with the UCS so the NS becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) eliciting a conditioned response (CR)
Define “stimulus generalisation” and give an example.
Subjects, once conditioned, responding to other similar stimuli
Example: Any tin opened makes a cat enter the kitchen
Define “extinction”.
The CS losing its ability to produce a CR after a few presentations of it in the absence of the UCS
Define “spontaneous recovery”.
The conditioned response suddenly reappearing following extinction
Define “timing”.
When conditioning doesn’t take place due to the time interval being too great - the NS can’t be used to predict the UCS
Define “discrimination”.
The subject, after a series of consistent pairings, being able to discriminate by focusing on specific stimuli
What are the 4 supporting and 2 refuting arguments for classical conditioning support as an explanation of human behaviour?
Supporting:
Pavlov
Watson and Raynor
Applications
Psychology as a science
Refuting:
Issues of implementation
Reductionist
How does Pavlov’s study support classical conditioning as an explanation of human behaviour? (3 points)
Pavlov formulated classical conditioning when investigating salivary reflexes in dogs
UCS = food
UCR -> CR = salivation
NS -> CS = bell
These findings can’t be generalised to humans who occupy unique cognitive functioning and mental processes
How does Watson and Raynor’s study support classical conditioning as an explanation of human behaviour? (5 points)
Little Albert was healthy from birth and, at 9 months, had no fear towards a range of stimuli
Only stimulus that triggered a reaction was when a hammer would strike a steel bar (UCS) which caused fear (UCR)
After 7 trials over 2 weeks of pairing hammer hitting steel bar (UCS) with a white rat (NS), Little Albert showed a conditioned response of fear when presented with a white rat (CS) - successfully classically conditioned
Case study of one individual - Little Albert had the rare condition hydrocephalus, not representative of all humans
Study, and therefore conclusion that classical conditioning explains human behaviour, lacks generalisability
How do applications of classical conditioning support it as an explanation of human behaviour? (5 points)
Classical conditioning assumptions have been used to create successful counter-conditioning treatments like flooding
- The patient is immersed someone in their fear
- Their body can’t maintain a high level of fear arousal due to energy constraints
- Their panicked response will eventually subside and a new association of relaxation will form with fear
Suggests CC has predictive validity - assumptions of how classical conditioning causes phobias have been successful in removing phobias
How does psychology as a science support classical conditioning as an explanation of human behaviour? (3 points)
It has brought the language and methods of natural sciences into psychology
Focuses on empirical and objective behaviour in controlled laboratory experiments which produce replicable results
E.g. Pavlov’s study
IV: the dog’s behaviour before and after the procedure
DV: the objective number of drops of saliva produced by the dog
How do practical issues implementing research challenge classical conditioning as an explanation of human behaviour? (3 points)
Much of the research used to investigate it lacks generalisability
Humans’ neurological structures are much more complex than those of animals - their cerebral cortexes and prefrontal lobes are more developed
Any findings from experiments using animals (e.g. Skinner, Pavlov) may not be representative of humans
How can classical conditioning being reductionist challenge it as an explanation of human behaviour? (3 points)
It sees all behaviour as deemed from past associations and experience
Ignores that human behaviour can be:
+ Inherited through genes
+ Due to other types of learning (nurture)
E.g. SLT:
More holistic - considers internal mental processes and choices such as attention and motivation
