Post-Midterm Theorists [Joe's Outline]

Question 1

Tinklepaugh

Answer 1

Known for using the Wisconsin General Test Apparatus to examine animals’ ability to learn patterns

Harlow did something similar

Studies lead to the discovery of reinforcer contrast
*when replacing banana chips with lettuce

Question 2

N. R. F. Maier

Answer 2

Tested rats using the Lashley Jumping Stand

Provided some of the first evidence of learned helplessness

Even before Seligman’s study using dogs and electrical shock

Question 3

Edward Tolman

Answer 3

Purposive behaviorism

S-O-R theory
• Emphasize the role of the organism
• Its actions are influenced by its consciousness – it has specific goals
• There is an objectively determined end with a reward
• An observer should be able to infer these ends

A dual theory
• Simple behaviors explained via classical conditioning
• But this cannot account for individual differences
• Complex behaviors require operant conditioning
• Can use intervening variables correlated with specific external, environmental, factors in order to aid in predicting complex behaviors

1. Demand-maintenance schedule
2. Appetite-appropriateness to goal
3. Differentiation-mode of stimuli
4. Motor skills-ability
5. Hypotheses-cumulative experience with trials
6. Bias-history of successful/failure of responses

Demand and appetite is what causes the organism to first approach a stimuli

If the stimuli satisfies the organism, it becomes a “significant”

Frequency of the pairing is all that matters in learning principles

A contiguity theorist

Reward/reinforcement and punishment are not necessary–Just expectations

A molar behaviorist

Molar behavior is goal-directed, makes use of environmental supports, leads to a preference for short/easy means, and is teachable and flexible

Rejected Watson (too much focus on physiology), and ignored goal-seeking behavior

Question 4

Gestalt Principles

Answer 4

Reject the concept of experience and focus on the specific moment

Reject concept of trial and error learning

Learning is a secondary action, derived from perception and insight

Altering one’s gestalt (or perception) into another is what learning is all about

There is no adding or subtracting, simply modifying one’s gestalts via

Law of pragnanz
o We prefer to perceive objects as simple and complete

Law of equilibrium
o We are also trying to reach equilibrium, but learning causes disequilibrium, lack of closure

Law of proximity
o We view close together objects as paired objects
o Explains contiguity and recency

Law of similarity
o Explains generalization

Law of closure
o We tend to fill in the blank and connect the unconnected–make objects look more familiar
o Explains the law of effect–closure is a satisfying state

Zeigarnik effect – if we fail to reach closure, we continue to struggle with that specific stimuli

Law of good continuation
o We tend to group objects and make them fit a standard image
o Explains generalization

Law of familiarity
o We tend to prefer stimuli we are familiar with
o Goes against Pavlov’s belief towards novel stimuli

Law of Regularity
o We prefer regular figures instead of abnormal ones

Fritz Perl
• Gestalt therapist who argued for us to live in the here and now
o Our memories are too distorted to trust

Wertheimer
• Perhaps the most known gestalt theorist

Koffka
• Argued we should not trust our memories because the law of pragnanz alters them
o Leveling = normalizing trace memory in order to understand one’s gestalt methods
o Sharpening = accentuating details in order to aid in discriminating our perceptions

Köhler
• Tested apes to see if they could use rakes to acquire a banana and use a box as a lift to reach a banana

Ralph Hefferline
Found that humans were able to perform actions despite not receiving biofeedback

These subjects claimed there were still receiving the feedback however

Question 5

B. F. Skinner

Answer 5

Argued against most research

They used the wrong testing apparatus, measured the wrong variables, created improper theories, relied on faulty statistics, focused too much on predicting internal behaviors

Advocated instead, we need to focus on the behaviors of an individual, not a the average

Three-term contingencies – the ABCs

SD
o Sets the occasion, informing the subject a reinforcer is available

S∆
o Informs the subject a reinforcer is no available

Sp
o Informs the subject a negative or positive punishment will occur

Recorded behaviors using the cumulative recorder

Used schedules of reinforcement to bring the desired behaviors into reality

CRF – continuous reinforcement
• The key to first creating a R-S bond

FR – fixed ratio
• Produces stop and go patterns

VR – variable ratio
• Like gambling, the organism keeps responding, though there may be a limit to the ratio (i.e. ratio strain)

FI – fixed interval
• Produces a fixed interval scallop – responds near the end of the interval

VI – variable interval
• Produces a steady rate of responding

DRL – differential reinforcement for low rates of responding
• Organism is rewarded for one response, but only after a period of time has passed since the last reinforcement
• If the organism responds before the time frame is complete, the time restarts

DRH – differential reinforcement for high rates of responding
• The organism needs to respond before a specific time period is up

To predict behavior, Skinner argued we must consider

1. Heredity/genes
2. Past reinforcement history
3. Deprivation state
4. Physical state
5. Emotional state

Question 6

Bandura

Answer 6

His famous study did not actually teach anything new, it simply taught the children when to be aggressive

Question 7

Mowrer’s Two-factor Model for Avoidance Conditioning

Answer 7

Extinction of a fear conditioning does not occur because the fearful stimuli functions as a SD

Acting via avoidance, leads to a pleasurable, reinforcing, outcome