Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Learning and Behaviour > Models of Associative Learning > Flashcards

Models of Associative Learning Flashcards

1
Q

What was the dominant idea in the first half of the 20th Century?

A

That contiguity was the guiding principle of conditioning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What 3 ideas influenced the change in the 1970s

A

Kamin - Blocking
Rescorla - contingency
Wagner - Relative signal validity effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is Relative Signal Validity?

A

Wagner 1968 - The CS must be a valid picture of the US judged relative to other present cues.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What did Wagner’s first experiment show?

A

Group 3 got strongest conditioning to the tone because of the intermixed trials L-> nothing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What was the issue with Wagner’s first experiment?

A

Group 2 got twice as many US’s as the others - could be a case that the animal is habituated to the presence of the US. Also the 2nd and 3rd groups get more light exposure.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

How did Wagner’s second experiment solve issues of the first?

A

The 2 groups: correlated and uncorrelated got the same number of US and no US trials: Group 1: T1+L-> US and T2+L-> no US
Group 2: half US half no US for both

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What did Wagner’s second experiment show?

A

Strongest conditioning to the Light in Group 2 because it is at least as good a predictor as the tones are. It is present in all trial when the US is present. Group 1 don’t learn about the light because it is less valid of a predictor.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Who introduced attention to conditioning theory?

A

Mackintosh - changes in the amount of attention a CS captures affects learning.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What phenomenon demonstrates the idea of attention in conditioning

A

overshadowing - L and N compete for attention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what divided Kamin, Mackintosh and Rescorla-Wagner

A

Mackintosh: changes in how the animal processes the CS

Kamin, Rescorla-Wagner: Changes in how the animal processes the US

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What was Kamin’s theoretical analysis

A

conditioning depends on the US being surprising to the animal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What does the Rescorla-Wagner model tell us

A

1972 - strength of the association between CS-US varies on a single dimension

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

(L −∑V): what is L

A

How strong an association can be supported by that US - Large L -> high survival value

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what is ∑V

A

the expectation of the US, based on the total associative strength of all CSs present. animal combines all of them to generate a prediction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What was Mackintosh’s contribution to theory?

A

changes in importance of CS as a signal and changes in intensity of CS effect learning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

which model formulises the notion of surprise?

A

the rescorla-wagner model

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

whats the purpose of aB in the model?

A

They regulate the rate of conditioning, otherwise all conditioning would happen in one trial

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

in wagners second experiment which group had more Light - US pairings?

A

They each had the same number of pairings (50% of the time)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

what is the implication of Rescorla- Wagner model on real life?

A

natural conditioning probably always involves the conditioning of compounded cues - i.e. the context

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

How do we know information value is important?

A

from Blocking and contingency learning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What would make V reach the asymptote faster i.e. for the learning curve to be steeper

A

if the US was more surprising i.e. if (L-V) was larger.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What determines L (the asymptote)

A

the magnitude of the US

23
Q

What would cause the steepness of the learning curve to decline as it reaches the asymptote?

A

the US becoming less surprising as CS predicts it, i.e. (L-V) is smaller

24
Q

Calculate the change in associative strength of the light:
Phase 1: N -> US
Phase 2: L+N-> US

A

∑V= VL + Vn = 0 + 1

△VL=0.2 (1 −1)=0

zero because there is no surprise on the compound trial

25
Q

what is unblocking?

A

Kamin changed the intensity of the US in the second phase leading to learning about the light. Positive change in associative strength of the light:

△VL=0.2 (2 −1)=+0.2

L is 2 now

26
Q

What is the value of L during extinction?

A

zero.

27
Q

What happens to the change in associative strength of the CS in extinction?

A

It decreases.
Phase 1: The CS is paired with the US until V=1
Phase 2: Extinction L=0

△Vn=0.2 (0 −1)=−0.2

Vn approaches an asymptote of zero

28
Q

How can Pavlov’s conditioned inhibition be explained in terms of Rescorla-Wagner’s model?

A

Light-> US
L+N-> No US

Noise becomes an inhibitor its Vn goes below ZERO

VL decreases from 1

∑V approaches the zero asymptote

29
Q

What does the compound in Pavlov’s conditioned inhibition paradigm predict?

A

Nothing because the light predicts the US just as much as the noise predicts no US, cancels out

30
Q

what happens if an excitor and inhibitor are compounded during extinction?

A

the inhibitor may protect the excitor from total associative loss. Implication for exposure therapy: clinicians may extinguish excitors in the presence of cues that become inhibitory during exposure. The excitor alone would still elicit fear. Reason for relapse.

31
Q

which would be more effective during extinction: an excitor paired alone to the US, an excitor-inhibitor compound paired to the US, or an excitor-excitor compound paired to the US?

A

excitor-excitor because: Greater decrease in associative strength when an excitor is extinguished in compound with another excitor.
○ △VL=0.2 (0 −(1+1))=−0.4

where ∑V = 1+1 because the excitors are paired with the US until their V=1 in the initial phase.

32
Q

What is Kremer’s overexpectation effect?

A

Vn=1 and VL=1 for a shock US
N+L-> shock
they each lose associative strength due to overprediction:

△Vn=0.2 (1 −(1+1))=−0.2

once each has a V=0.5 then the reduction stops

33
Q

what happens when a third stimulus is added in the second phase of Kremer’s overexpectation effect trial?

A

it becomes a conditioned inhibitor

- △Vx=0.2 (1 −(1+1+0))=−0.2 issue: the description of a conditioned inhibitor as signalling 'no US' is inaccurate here... better description = an inhibitor signals that an upcoming US is not as strong as other cues on the trial predict it to be.
34
Q

what is the biggest message from the overexpectation effect?

A

CS-US pairings can actually reduce associative strength

35
Q

How does the context lead to blocking in zero contingency?

A

A=Room
X=CS zero contingency

when we have AX-US, the US is not surprising because it is already predicted by the context, A

36
Q

What happens when contextual conditioning is reduced in negative contingency training?

A

little inhibition is acquired by the CS

37
Q

Which theories focus on contextual conditioning?

A

Rescorla-Wagner and Comparator theories

38
Q

What did comparator theories add to contextual conditioning theory ?

A

The idea that CS-US can be stronger or weaker than context-US association. The comparison is made AFTER learning has occurred so it determines PERFORMANCE not learning about the CS

39
Q

According to comparator theories what happens if you weaken the context-US association after learning about the CS occurs?

A

The subject responds more to the CS - shown in Ralph Miller’s lab.

But no one has shown the converse of strengthening the association to reduce responding to the CS.

40
Q

How does the extinction of inhibition contradict the Rescorla-Wagner model?

A

Because if a conditioned inhibitor is presented in extinction trials with no US the model says it will REMOVE inhibition:
○ △Vn=0.2 (0 −(−1))=+0.2
but this is not possible since it can’t decrease inhibition if it is still being presented with NO US…

41
Q

How does Latent inhibition challenge the Rescorla- Wagner model?

A

The model does not account for the fact that if a CS is preexposed before conditioning begins - conditioning responding appears relatively slowly

42
Q

How do Rescorla-Wagner and Mackintosh differ in their explanations of blocking

A

R-W: emphasize the ineffectiveness of the US

Mackintosh: Emphasizes the ineffectiveness of the CS

43
Q

How did Mackintosh’s blocking experiments contradict the R-W model?

A

Group 1: N-shock ————— LN-SHOCK
Group 2: N-shock LN-shock LN-SHOCK

R-W predicts that nothing should’ve happened during Phase 2 and groups should not differ because if N had already been conditioned to the asymptote then there should be no change in the value of V for either CS. BUT group 2 learned less about the light.

44
Q

What occurred in Mackintosh’s blocking experiments?

A

Group 1: N-shock ————— LN-SHOCK
Group 2: N-shock LN-shock LN-SHOCK

Group 2: phase 2 interfered with learning because the animals recognised that L was a redundant predictor of shock and they learned to pay less attention to it so in Phase 3, they ignored it

45
Q

Who introduced attention in conditioning

A

1970s Mackintosh - Attention depends on how well the CS predicts a US relative to other CS

46
Q

How does the Mackintosh model explain latent inhibition?

A

during preexposure to the CS, the value of a goes down because it is no better than the context at prediction no US. So increases are then small when CS is paired with a US

47
Q

How does the Mackintosh model explain the blocking experiment:
Group 1: N-shock ————— LN-SHOCK
Group 2: N-shock LN-shock LN-SHOCK

A

Group 2: Phase 2: first trial a is higher for noise as it has been established as a good predictor of the shock. a for the noise decreases as trials go on. By Phase 3 learning about the light is slower due to a low a.

48
Q

What would contradict Mackintosh’s statement that the value of a can only change after the first conditioning trial?

A

if we saw complete blocking on the first trial (this would support the R-W Model)

49
Q

How does the Hall-Pearce negative transfer contradict Mackintosh’s model?

A
  • Group 1: Tone - shock Tone - SHOCK
    • Group 2: L - shock Tone - SHOCK
      Mackintosh says that for group 1, the tone receives a high a in phase 1 so should receive faster learning in phase 2. BUT Hall and Pearce found they had SLOWER learning.
50
Q

what controls the speed of learning in the Rescorla-Wagner model

A

aB

51
Q

How does L (the asymptote) differ for a compound ?

A

for a compound, the asymptote is lower (L, the maximum that can be learned) for each CS in the compound

52
Q

For a compound to split uncertainty (L) equally, what needs to happen?

A

Their salience (a) must be equal so that they split L (uncertainty) equally

53
Q

what happens if a is larger for one CS in a compound than the other?

A

The CS with a larger a has more salience and takes up more of the uncertainty (L), it reaches a higher associative strength

Learning and Behaviour (11 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions