PS261 Chapter Notes - Chapter 10: Operant Conditioning, Forced Exposure, Classical Conditioning
Chapter Ten: Aversive Control − Avoidance & Punishment
Ch 10.2 − Differee Betee Aoidae & Puishet
- Avoidance procedures increase the occurrence of instrumental behaviour
o Safety is achieved by doing something − active avoidance
o Research is primarily focused on theoretical issues
- Punishment procedures suppress instrumental responding
o Safety is achieved by not doing something − passive avoidance
o Research is primarily focused on ethical considerations
- With both procedures:
o The final result is less contact with aversive stimulus/longer period of safety
Ch 10.3.a − Origis of the “tud of Aoidae Behaiour
- Originated in studies of classical conditioning
- First avoidance experiments conducted by Vladimir Bechterev
o Had participants put fingers on metal plate
▪ Gave warning stimulus (CS), followed by brief shock (US)
o Participants could control whether they received the US
▪ Could lift finger in response to CS to avoid shock
- Different fro Palo’s ethods
o In those, CS does not cancel delivery of US
Ch 10.3.b − The Disriiated/“igaled Aoidae Proedure
- Involves discrete trials:
o Each one initiated by the warning stimulus (CS)
- What happens after that depends on the participant
Successful Avoidance Trial
- Participant makes target response before shock is delivered
o CS is turned off, US is omitted on that trial
Escape Trial
- Participant fails to make response during CS-US interval
o US is delivered and remains on until response occurs
- Results in escape from shock
- Most trials are escape trials during early training
o As training progresses, avoidance trials predominate
Two-Way Shuttle Avoidance
- Animal moves from left to right in shuttle box on first trial
o And back the other way on second trial
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
One-Way Shuttle Avoidance
- Animal placed on same side of apparatus at start of each trial
o Always moves from there to other side
- Easier to learn:
o Two-way procedure requires animal to return to the side that was dangerous on the
preceding trial
- Procedures involve a negative contingency between response and aversive stimulus
o No particular pleasure is derived from them − you simply don’t get hurt
Ch 10.3.c − To-Proess Theor of Aoidae
- Two-Process Theory of Avoidance:
o There are two processes going on in avoidance conditioning
1. Classical Conditioning Component
▪ The CS has to be paired with the US before the CS can elicit fear
2. Instrumental Conditioning Component
▪ Negative reinforcement on avoidance trials
• Subject can end their exposure to aversive CS
▪ Avoidance response is reinforced by reducing fear to CS
- Theory treats conditioned fear as a source of motivation for avoidance learning
Ch 10.3.d − To-Proess Theor: Preditios & Eidee
- Any Fearful CS Should Be Able to Motivate the Avoidance Response
o No matter how that CS acquired the fear, it can now motivate the avoidance response
through negative reinforcement
o First studied by Brown and Jacobs
- The Conditioning of Fear to CS & the Avoidance Response Should Go Together
o Fear decreases during extensive avoidance training, as seen in the conditioned
suppression procedure
▪ This is not followed by a decrease in avoidance response
o Shown by Kamin et al.
- The Strength of the Avoidance Response Should Fluctuate in Cycles
o The strength of the response should fluctuate in cycles due to continued extinction and
reacquisition
▪ The response is extremely persistent for many trials, without ever being
exposed to the US
- Extinguishing an Avoidance Response
o Flooding − CS is presented in avoidance situation without the US, and without giving the
animal the opportunity to perform the avoidance response
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Chapter ten: aversive control avoidance & punishment. Ch 10. 2 (cid:862)differe(cid:374)(cid:272)e bet(cid:449)ee(cid:374) a(cid:448)oida(cid:374)(cid:272)e & pu(cid:374)ish(cid:373)e(cid:374)t(cid:863) Avoidance procedures increase the occurrence of instrumental behaviour: safety is achieved by doing something active avoidance, research is primarily focused on theoretical issues. Punishment procedures suppress instrumental responding: safety is achieved by not doing something passive avoidance, research is primarily focused on ethical considerations. With both procedures: the final result is less contact with aversive stimulus/longer period of safety. Ch 10. 3. a (cid:862)origi(cid:374)s of the tud(cid:455) of a(cid:448)oida(cid:374)(cid:272)e beha(cid:448)iour(cid:863) In those, cs does not cancel delivery of us. Involves discrete trials: each one initiated by the warning stimulus (cs) What happens after that depends on the participant. Participant makes target response before shock is delivered: cs is turned off, us is omitted on that trial. Participant fails to make response during cs-us interval: us is delivered and remains on until response occurs. Most trials are escape trials during early training: as training progresses, avoidance trials predominate.
