Tag Archives: classical conditioning

Parenting and Conditioning

Leave a reply

While we were discussing conditioning in class, we mostly talked about animals and how with the use of repetition, rewards, and punishments, we can shape behavior. Animals aside, I began to wonder where else conditioning might show up in my life. I realized that as I was growing up, many of these techniques were actually used by my parents in order to prevent bad habits and encourage other behaviors.

Classical conditioning is a type of learning that happens when we connect involuntary responses to certain stimuli other than the original natural stimulus. Similar to Pavlov’s experiments with the dogs, I remember salivating and going downstairs automatically whenever I heard dishes being set on the table. I’m sure that my natural response to dishes being set on the table didn’t make me salivate and expect dinner. However, after years of conditioning to pair the neutral stimulus (dishes) to the unconditioned stimulus (salivating), I expected delicious home-cooked meals when I heard clanking downstairs.

My parents also liked to use operant conditioning when training me as a young child. Operant conditioning, contrary to classical conditioning, shaped my behavior with the use of positive and negative reinforcements and punishments to encourage voluntary behaviors. Learning in operant conditioning depends on the antecedent stimuli, or stimuli after the action, whereas classical conditioning depends on what comes before the response. For example, my parents liked to give me candy after a doctor’s visit so that I wouldn’t scream as loudly and actually get in the car to go. Other times, they would deprive me of television or tell me to go to my room in order to get me to behave myself in social situations. It was extremely effective. In order to avoid the negative punishment, or something pleasant being removed from my life, I was apt to obey my parents and stop hitting my brother.

I never realized the psychological theories behind my childhood, but I suppose it’s natural to know how people react to certain actions. Conditioning is definitely an effective means of getting a child to behave.

Classical Conditioning

Leave a reply

Classical conditioning is when one learns to make an unlearned response in reaction to a stimulus, other than the original stimulus, that normally produces the reflex. An example of this type of learning is regarding my aunt and uncle’s dog, Maybe. Like most dogs, Maybe despises going to the vet. She would whimper and hide very time she went inside the office of the vet. However, over time, physically being in the vet’s office didn’t merely stir up this reaction anymore. For example, simply being a few buildings outside the vet would cause Maybe cry and cower down, despite the fact of not being in the vet’s office. This occurrence is classical conditioning. There are many elements to classical conditioning: unconditioned stimulus (naturally causes reflex), unconditioned response (naturally occurring reaction to unconditioned stimulus), conditioned stimulus (a trigger, initially unrelated to stimulus, that produces learned reflex), and conditioned response (learned response to conditioned stimulus).

The vet’s office is the unconditioned stimulus because the office sparks an involuntary reaction from Maybe every time. This natural reflex of pure panic that occurs every time Maybe enters the office is the unconditioned response. As time goes on, that is when conditioned stimulus and conditioned response takes place. The unconditioned stimulus (the vet’s office) can now be removed and still evoke the same reaction from Maybe by a conditioned stimulus. In Maybe’s case, the environment surrounding the doctor’s office is the conditioned stimulus. Maybe has walked by the buildings by the vet countless time, that even though she is passing boutiques and ice cream shops, she associates these buildings with the vet because she always sees them on her way there. Therefore, these shops induce a conditioned response of Maybe cowering in fear and desperately trying to hide before she even sets her paw in the office.

Moral Questions for Operant Conditioning in Animals

Leave a reply

Have you ever wondered why we, as humans, measure the intelligence of other organisms by their ability to mimic the characteristics or behaviors that we exhibit? For example, consider a dog. If a dog listens well, does tricks, and obeys orders given by their owners then that dog is considered to be intelligent when compared to a dog that does not obey their owners. Now, if these two dogs are the same breed and the same age it is safe to assume that one has received training, most likely in the form of operant conditioning during their raising while the other dog did not. Does the fact that one dog was taught how to do tricks through positive reinforcement, most likely, make it more intelligent than the dog that was not given the same opportunity? I would venture to say that tricks and obeying orders does not explicitly illustrate the intelligence level of animals. I would argue that tricks and obeying orders is simply a medium which trainers and psychologists use to project the intelligence of animals into a tangible scale that most people are able to understand.

Now, the question arises: is it morally right and psychologically safe to use classical and operant conditioning methods to make animals perform tricks and obey orders that they would inherently never do in nature. Granted, domesticated animals such as service dogs serve a greater purpose than ‘rolling-over’, but take this idea and extrapolate it out from domesticated animals to organisms that truly have no place in captivity.

Consider the orca whale. For over 30 years these animals have been used as show animals for organizations like SeaWorld performing tricks for crowds of people of all ages. I would recommend watching the documentary ‘Blackfish’ in regards to the details of the orcas of SeaWorld, and for those of you who have seen it you might understand my stance a bit more clearly (Blackfish, Cowperthwaite). By nature, the orca is an extremely emotional driven animal. They live in families that live and die closer than most humans do to their families. Naturally, they are extremely intelligent and highly skilled in teamwork. A short video (hyperlink: http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/orca-juvenile-training-lex) shows how a family of orcas not only using teamwork to capture a seal, but using observational learning techniques with the children to try and show them how hunting works (Killer Whales). As we saw in class, the use of observational learning requires the use of mirror neurons which seem to only be found in organisms with high cognitive development such as primates and humans.

The heightened ability to learn through observation may have been a reason leading to making orcas show animals, but this has proven to have negative influences on the animals. In the film ‘Blackfish’, SeaWorld trainers explain how they used positive reinforcement to promote behavior and negative punishment to demote behaviors. On the surface this worked to train the animals to do tricks for their performances. However, just as Pavlov’s dog would do after conditioning if the trainers would make the orca do a trick and deny it a reward they would get frustrated. This frustration has led to violence and, in cases, the death of trainers.

Unfortunately, the moral questions continue. As stated before, orcas are very family based creatures. When taken from their homes and dumped into a cage with strange whales they can quickly begin to show signs of anxiety. There are cases where this anxiety has led to violence against other whales and to trainers. Over time, this anxiety has led to what seems to be similar to antisocial personality disorders and even depression. Once again I would highly recommend watching the documentary ‘Blackfish’ to get a sense of what I have talked about.

I hope this has sparked some thought into why we as humans find it necessary to psychologically shape other creatures when given the chance. In the case of orcas this forced conditioning has led to possible psychological disorders and in the case of domesticated animals it has led to the near complete dependence on humans for survival.

I encourage comments, thoughts, and criticisms.

 

Works Cited:

Blackfish. Dir. Gabriela Cowperthwaite. Dogwoof, 2013. Film.

“Killer Whales “Gang Up” to Capture Seal.” Killer Whales “Gang Up” to Capture Seal. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2014.

Sick to my stomach

1 Reply

Sometimes there is just that one food or beverage that no matter how appealing it looks, you avoid it at all cost because it makes you sick to your stomach. When a food or beverage causes an adverse effect, usually nausea or vomiting, to the point where you are afraid to have it again at a later time it is known as taste aversion. A reaction to the food or beverage may or may not happen right after ingestion, but can happen up to 6 hours later. For some people, they may be able to get over their aversion after some time, whether it is months or years, but for others they could have that aversion for the rest of their life.

When I was in elementary school, like any other child, I LOVED chocolate milk. I always got it with my lunch no matter what they were serving, and on the rare occasion the only time I did not have chocolate milk was when I felt like having milk and cereal together.  But one day my love for chocolate milk disappeared in a heartbeat.

I grabbed my carton of chocolate milk after stepping of the lunch line like I did during lunch every day.  I sat down at my table and open the carton; except when I went to drink my chocolate milk this time it tasted nothing like my beloved chocolate milk usually did. With that first sip of milk, I felt my lunch wanting to come back out the way it went it. I thought that the carton of milk just went bad before their time, so I attempted to drink another carton of milk. But it was the same outcome. I felt my lunch wanting to come back up. Realizing that it was futile, I gave up on eating or drinking anything chocolate related. To this day I still have an aversion to chocolate because of this event. I thought I got better at one point as I was able to eat brownies, but the aversion came right back and once again.

Aversions to certain foods or beverages could be an ingrained survival mechanism that has some sort of evolutionary advantage. Especially with allergies, people are not born with a list that says “this is what I am allergic to” rather we have to learn to trial and error. For me I am not allergic to chocolate the way I am allergic to seafood, but the nausea and vomiting someone experiences from taste aversion could be the body’s natural way of saying “this is bad. DON’T eat!”

Animal training and conditioning

Leave a reply

When a lot of animal trainers and pet owners begin to train their animals they immediately begin to implement operant conditioning. According to our textbook, the practice of operant conditioning includes the use of both positive and negative consequences after a voluntary response emitted by the organism. Furthermore, operant conditioning utilizes reinforcement and punishment. Reinforcement is anything that increases the chances of a response occurring, while punishment is anything that follows a behavior that reduces the possibility of that behavior occurring again in the future. My family recently got a Brittany Spaniel puppy and, as we begin to train him, our first intention was to use operant conditioning, rewarding him with food as soon as he sits, lays down, or comes when called (a source of positive reinforcement). However, after learning about operant and classical conditioning in class, I wondered why classical conditioning is not used more, or referred to as often when training animals. There are actually some negative aspects to operant conditioning when considering training an animal. One of the major issues I found is the inability of people to always supply an animal with something it likes in time for the consequence to have a relationship with the behavior. For example, sometimes when we let our dog outside without a leash and when we ask him to come we do not have any treats or desirable toys with us to give him as a reward. We end up running back inside to get him a treat, but is that delay between the behavior and the reward too long for the dog to form the association? There are some cases when operant conditioning is not ideal, and it is more successful to use classical conditioning.

Many individuals would not initially consider classical conditioning as a desirable way to train their animal, however, I think it is a lot more effective in some circumstances. Classical conditioning is often used by animal trainers for two reasons: One, to condition or train autonomic responses, such as the drooling (in Pavlov’s experiment), producing adrenaline, or reducing adrenaline (calming) without using the stimuli that would naturally create such a response; Second, to create an association between a stimulus that normally would not have any effect on the animal and a stimulus that would. Classical conditioning can be an extremely useful training method for an animal that you cannot easily supply with something it likes or dislikes. For example, if you were trying to train a Dolphin to jump while it is in the water, the chances that you could give the Dolphin a fish fast enough after it performs the behavior are pretty low, it is highly likely that the fish will start to sink. Additionally, some dog trainers utilize classical conditioning by repeatedly pairing the sound of a clicker with the taste of food and eventually the sound of the clicker alone will begin to produce the same response that the taste of food would. Also, classical conditioning can be useful to train your dog to respond to verbal cues or hand gestures. In fact, you can “teach” your dog to associate words with their actions relatively easily. If your dog is sitting and you say, “sit” whenever you observe him sitting he will begin to associate the word with the behavior. Overall, operant conditioning and classical conditioning have both proven to be useful ways to train an animal. In many situations, deciding which method to use depends on the type of animal, or the preference of the individual training the animal.

Classical conditioning

3 Replies

John Brzozowski

Classical Conditioning

            During class we learned about classical conditioning and the results of the experiment done by Pavlov. The theory of classical conditioning has to do with stimulus and responses or reflexes. In his study he was able to pair the sound of a metronome with the presentation of food; which elicited the unconditioned response of salivation by the dogs. He was then able to have this unconditioned response by the dogs, without the unconditioned stimulus of the food, by just playing the metronome. Therefore the dogs learned to respond to the sound because they expected it to be immediately followed by the unconditioned stimulus, being the food.

After going over this in class I tried to look back in my life to see if there was any time where I either unknowingly used classical conditioning on someone or had it done to me without my knowledge. I could not think of anything, but my roommate who takes the same class had an idea. He decided to use this method to condition me into having an unconditioned response without the unconditioned stimulus. His conditioned stimulus was him saying the words, “John, mint!” which would then be followed by him throwing a small mint at me with great force and accuracy. This would elicit the unconditioned response of me cringing. He did this enough times so that when he no longer paired the conditioned and unconditioned stimulus together, he could still get the response he intended. He had effectively conditioned me to respond without the correct stimulus. I realized what he was doing after the first time he had not paired the two stimuli together and therefore the extinction period was not very long. But effectively, we proved the findings of Pavlov to be true.

Classical Conditioning

Leave a reply

Terms to know:

  • Unconditioned Stimulus (UCS): A stimulus that elicits a response without conditioning
  • Unconditioned Response (UCR): Automatic response elicited by the unconditioned stimulus
  • Conditioned Stimulus (CS): A neutral stimulus that when paired with an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) elicits a similar response
  • Conditioned Response (CR): A response that is learned by pairing the originally neutral conditioned stimulus (CS) with the unconditioned stimulus (UCS)
  • White Coat Syndrome: White coat syndrome is a condition wherein the individual demonstrates elevated blood pressure in a clinical setting, and not in other settings.

Classical Conditioning is a learning process that has had major influences in the school of thought in Psychology known as behaviorism. The process was discovered by Russian scientist Ivan Pavlov. The stages of classical conditioning are seen in various day to day experiences. Pavlov first noticed the process while studying a sample of dogs. Like most discoveries, this one was an accident. Pavlov was studying the digestive patterns of dogs when he noticed something astonishing. What he discovered was that the dogs began to salivate before food was presented to them. Then, the dogs began to salivate as soon as the person feeding them would enter the room. He soon began to gain interest in this phenomenon and abandoned his digestion research in favor of his now famous Classical Conditioning study. Pavlov discovered that we make associations which cause us to generalize our response to one stimuli onto the neutral stimuli it is paired with.

Pavlov then paired a bell sound with the dog’s food. He realized that even when the food was not presented, the dogs would eventually being to salivate after hearing the bell. Since food and drooling naturally follow one another these two are called the unconditioned Stimulus (UCS) and the unconditioned response (UCR). The bell and salivation pair are however, not naturally occurring. Therefore they are the conditioned stimulus (CS) and the conditioned response (CR).

An example of this would be white coat syndrome: shot= scary, doctor=shot, doctor=scary. In fact this is the reason for most of the phobias we have. A child bit by a dog may grow up to fear all dogs. Nervousness in cars could be the result of a bad car accident in the past.

Many of our behaviors today are shaped by the pairing of certain stimuli. Have you ever noticed that certain stimuli, such as the smell of a perfume, a certain song, a specific day of the year, and results in fairly intense emotions? It’s not that the smell or the song are the cause of the emotion, but rather what that smell or song has been paired with. A significant other, the death of a loved one or even the day you met your best friend. These connections are made all the time and we hardly realize the power they hold. But in fact, we have all been classically conditioned.

When I was younger, about four or five, I tried to help my mother out in the kitchen with dreams of being a world famous chef. I tried to cut up a carrot with a knife. Of course, my little hands slipped and I cut my finger pretty badly. I had to go to the hospital and get stitches. It was so scary that to this day I get extremely anxious when I’m around knives. In my case, the knife was the conditioned stimulus and fear is the conditioned response.

If you really enjoyed reading this, I suggest checking out this blog. It offers a deeper explanation of classical conditioning as well as experiments that they conducted on their own.

http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/steves-primer-of-practical-persuasion-3-0/doing/ding-dong-classical-conditioning/