Pavlovian Conditioning Experimental Design Procedures and Stimulus Factors Conditioning and Learning Exam 2 T1 T2 Model T1 training process T2 post training test ends before the US is given US is also provided a little after Less effective procedures Ex tone paired with food OR control tone and food treat randomly Ex test response to tone OR control test response to tone Common Procedure both Forward Conditioning Measure gap between stimuli trace interval to trace conditioning where the CS Measure inter stimulus interval delay conditioning where the CS starts and the Simultaneous Conditioning both CS and US are paired at the same time Backward Conditioning the US is presented before the CS Measuring the CR Control training CS and US are NOT paired Present CS and US alone Did the behavior change because the subject learned an association between the It is ideal to have the same number of CS and US exposures with no association Random Control Procedure Both CS and US are presented the same number of times as for the experimental CS and US group HOWEVER same probability of occurrence during CS and during inter trial interval CS could be presented a certain number of times a week but US is presented sporadically throughout week PROBELMS associative learning CAN occur during this procedure and sometimes random presentations coincide Better choice Discriminative Control Procedure Uses 2 CS s one is paired with US and one is never paired with US CS and CS trials are usually presented in random order Ex CS tone and then light CS light and then tone individual differences and differences in quality of CS Controlling CS and US pairing versus simple exposure to CS or US Predict if training results in associative learning CS elicits CR orienting to light or tone CS does not elicit CR elicit CR whether it is the CS or CS If CS or US presentation caused sensitization both CS and CS If rats just prefer one specific stimulus over the other tone may Ex Dr Miller hypothesizes that rats can learn to acquire a conditioned preference for a flavor paired with alcohol He trains a group of rats in the following manner Group 1 being CS receives cherry Kool Aid flavored alcohol on odd days and grape flavored Kool Aid with NO alcohol CS on even days Group 2 receives grape Kool Aid with alcohol CS on odd days and cherry with no alcohol CS on even days Better choice 2 Explicitly Unpaired Control CS and US are ALWAYS presented separately Variation CS and US are presented during different sessions Controlling CS and US pairing v simple exposure to CS or US individual differences if subjects are randomly assigned Fatigue sensory adaptation sensitization baseline response rate experiment and take into account relevant confounding factors Best control depends on specific requirements of each individual Predict associative learning increased CR to CS in the experimental group no change in the control group Sensitization increased response in both groups Ex CS tone and US shock always paired versus control group where CS and US presented randomly and NEVER paired Ex Dr Miller should present both cherry Kool Aid and grape Kool Aid CS to both groups and measure how much they drink US Stimulus Factors and Relationships CS or US intensity more vigorous CR Control for sensitization is important Stimulus Salience significance or noticeability intensity or biological relevance Latent Inhibition CS Pre exposure effect DECREASED effectiveness of a CS due to prior exposure Ex CTA Conditioned taste aversion sucrose solution CS LiCl nausea US experimental group is preexposed PE control group is non preexposed NPE Results Sucrose not preferred in PE group because of CTA felt nauseous and knew about it Ex Bernstein in 1978 cream CS before chemo US PE or on a day with no chemo US NPE Children undergoing chemotherapy Eating maple and black walnut ice Choice five months later play a game or eat ice cream choosing ice cream because they were not preexposed Learning was impaired Results without chemo children had a higher percentage of development of CTA to commonly eaten foods Scapegoat taste use novel taste as a CS for CTA and prevent US Preexposure Effect If US is not novel it is harder to associate it with a CS in the future Role of other contextual cues like the room the person during initial US presentation Ex shock US for one hour then light then shock Ex A rat 1 is placed in an experimental chamber and given 20 foot shocks at random intervals Then a light is paired with foot shock over a series of trials Compared to rat 2 that did not receive the initial 20 foot shocks rat 1 took a long time to develop a CR to the red light The slower learning of rat 1 is due to the US preexposure effect Summary more salient stimuli is stronger Pavlovian conditioning and previous experience with stimuli impact learning of new associations Relationships CS US relevance easier to learn others And vice versa Are all stimuli combinations equal when it comes to associative learning If these things naturally occur together in the world will the association be Are we biologically primed to learn some associations more readily than Ex CTA Garcia Tone light combination OR taste CS X rays to induce nausea OR foot shock US Do rats learn taste nausea association better than audiovisual nausea X ray nausea group T1 sweet taste and tone light with x ray Foot shock group T1 mild sweet taste and tone light with foot shock shock group with taste licked much more than audiovisual Results X ray group with tone light licked much more than taste foot Supports hypothesis that rats learn taste nausea association better than audiovisual nausea Ex Primate example snake and spider phobias among most common detect snakes more readily than other stimuli find snake in field of flowers vs find flower in field of snakes fear conditioning progresses faster with a picture of a snake Ex human infant study two videos presented one with a snake and one without voice recordings of nonsense words happy or fearful visual attention coded Results babies more readily associate snakes with negative emotional tones despite no prior experience with snakes happy sounds more looking time with non snake videos Biologically prepared learning Yes Features selectivity of CS US association little training required often single trial learning highly resistant to extinction and not influenced by cognition and surprisingness Characteristics that matter intensity salience familiarity or