PSYC 410 1st Edition Lecture 13 Outline of Last Lecture I. Interpreting Human Behavior II. Skinner’s emphasis on controlIII. The Causes of LearningOutline of Current Lecture II. Pavlovian Conditioning of HumansA. Watson and Little Albert B. Watson and Conditioned Emotional ResponsesC. Mistake about DeconditioningIII. Awareness and Human ConditioningIV. Introduction to MutationsCurrent LectureHuman Conditioning- Pavlovian Conditioning of Humans: J.B. Watson (Founder of Behaviorism) and Condtioned Emotional Repsonseso J. B. Watson, R. R. Rayner, and “Little Albert,” Douglas Merritte (1919-1925)o Fear, rage, and sex response. He uses fear through pavlovian conditioningWatson and Conditioned Emotional Responses (“Little Albert”)US (noise)-----Preexsiting reflex UR (fear)CS (RAT)-------Acquired reflex  CR (fear)Watson didn’t not get the opportunity to decondition the experimentFrequent MistakeI. They wrote what they would do the decondition the experiment but never did itII. Watson had a college that decondition the fear of dog and infantHuman ConditioningThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.- Pavlovian Conditioning of Humans: J. B. Watson and Conditioned Emotional Responses- Awareness and Human Conditioningo Thorndike, you change behavior of a person even if the person is not aware of ito Verbal conditioning Psychotherapy (psychoanalysis) Talk, free associate People start talking about their childhood Umhmm.. consequence of a behavior (Greenspoon)- Reinforced by talking about childhood…reinforced to talk about it- Reinforced umhmm for saying plural nouns (pears, bananas, apples)- Then goes in to extinction…say umhmm to everything- Conclusion. Conditioned them with them knowing- Associative vs. Information Processing Models of Human ConditioningTHE MODERN ASSOCIATIVE TRADITION INFORMATION PROCESSING MODELS (back to side 192)PC: THE S-R STIMULUS SUBSTITUTION THEORY- BASIC CLAIMSo ASSOCIATIONS ARE S→Ro ASSOCIATIONS ARE ACQUIRED BY CONTIGUITY OF US AND CSo CR AND UR ARE QUALITATIVELY THE SAMEo CS ALONE ELICITS CRo ANY US CAN BE SUCCESSFULLY PAIRED WITH ANY PERCEIVABLE CSPC: THE COGNITIVE THEORY (within the animal)- BASIC CLAIMSo ASSOCIATION IS S→So ASSOCIATIONS ACQUIRED BY CONTINGENCY BETWEEN CS AND US (BLOCKING)o CR IS ANTICIPATORY ADAPTIVE RESPONSE, MAY OR MAY NOT BE SAME AS URo CS+CONTEXT ELICITS CR o NOT ALL ASSOCIATIONS EQUALLY LEARNABLE (PREPAREDNESS)- EX. Animal…food, tone, light flash.o Animal ignores light flash because he associated food with the tone therefore light flash is irrelevant (Blocking)- Paradoxical Conditioning- Renewal: change the contextCOGNITIVE THEORY APPLIED TO DRUG ADDICTION (slide 203)- ASSOCIATIONS ACQUIRED BY CONTINGENCY BETWEEN CS AND US- CCR IS ANTICIPATORY ADAPTIVE RESPONSE, OPPOSITE TO UR- CS+CONTEXT ELICITS CCRPC: PREPAREDNESS—CONDITIONED NAUSEA (blank slate claim)- THE GARCIA EFFECTo US and pair with any CSo US: Radiation, Drugo CS: Nausea, Taste, Tone Then he change it with fear- INTEREST IN EFFECTS OF RADIATION- 2 X 2 DESIGN: PAIRING INTERNAL VS. EXTERNAL CUES WITH EXTERNAL VS. INTERNAL CONSEQUENCES- DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS ON OPERANT AVOIDANCE RESPONDING- VIOLATIONS OF USUAL LAWS OF PC LEARNING- THE “SAUCE BÉARNAISE SYNDROME” (SELIGMAN)CONTINGENCY IN INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING- Avoidance Learningo When hears the “beep”, jumps over the shocko Two-factor (contiguity) Theoryo Expectance (contingency) Theory Rat says “I should jump everything I hear the shock so I won’t get hurt” Expectancy is being reinforcedCONTINGENCY IN INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING- AVOIDANCE LEARNINGo TWO-FACTOR (CONTIGUITY) THEORYo EXPECTANCY (CONTINGENCY) THEORYo WORK OF SELIGMAN AND MAIER- Learned Helplessnesso I CANT CONTROL WHAT HAPPENS TO BE. CONTINUES TO LAY THERE AND DO NOTHING- APPLICATION: