Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Classical conditioning occurs when a conditioned stimulus (CS) is paired with an unconditioned stimulus (US). Usually, the conditioned stimulus is a neutral stimulus (e.g., the sound of a tuning fork), the unconditioned stimulus is biologically potent (e.g., the taste of food) and the unconditioned response (UR) to the unconditioned stimulus is an unlearned reflex response (e.g., salivation).
The US preceded the CS, rather than the other way around. In the backward conditioning control procedure popular with Pavlov, his dogs did not salivate to the presentation of the CS, in contrast to those that received forward conditioning. However, the dogs did learn something - the presentation of the metronome predicted the absence of the food.
One significant example of classical conditioning is Ivan Pavlov's experiment in which dogs showed a conditioned response to a bell the experimenters had purposely tried to associate with feeding time. After the dogs had been conditioned, the dogs no longer only salivated for the food, which was a biological need and therefore an unconditioned ...
In backward blocking, the subject is exposed to the compound stimulus (CS1 and CS2 together) first, and only later to CS1 alone. In some human and animal studies, subjects show a reduction in the association between CS2 and the US, though the effect is often weaker than the standard blocking effect, and vanishes under some conditions.
Classical conditioning is an example of a learned association. The classical conditioning process consists of four elements: unconditioned stimulus (UCS), unconditioned response (UCR), conditioned stimulus (CS), and conditioned response (CR). [1]
Discrimination learning teaches us more about what other animals are capable of conceptual thought. Humans can use discrimination learning to detect danger, learn about differences, and more. One example of discrimination learning in humans would be a baby who reacts differently to their mother's voice than to a stranger's voice. [5]
Van Hamme and Wasserman have extended the original Rescorla–Wagner (RW) model and introduced a new factor in their revised RW model in 1994: [3] They suggested that not only conditioned stimuli physically present on a given trial can undergo changes in their associative strength, the associative value of a CS can also be altered by a within-compound-association with a CS present on that trial.
That includes his study of the basic principles. For example, the original behaviorists treated the two types of conditioning in different ways. The most generally used way by B. F. Skinner constructively considered classical conditioning and operant conditioning to be separate and independent principles. In classical conditioning, if a piece ...