Transcript PSY402 Theories of Learning

PSY402
Theories of Learning
Chapter 11 – Learned Helplessness
Learned Helplessness Theory


Seligman – depression is learned.
Depression occurs when people
believe:



Failures are due to uncontrollable
events.
Failure will continue as long as events
are beyond their control.
Depression arises from
helplessness.
Animal Research

Step 1 -- three groups of dogs:





Inescapable shock – no control.
Escapable shock -- terminated if the
dog pressed a panel.
No shock
Step 2 – 10 trials of signaled
avoidance training in shuttle box.
2/3 of inescapable shock dogs did
not learn to jump during step 2.
Helplessness in Humans

Hiroto – three groups of college
students:





Uncontrollable group – wrongly told
that pushing button would end noise.
Escapable group – pushing button
ended noise.
Control – no noise.
Tested using finger shuttle box.
Uncontrollable group did not escape
Characteristics of Helplessness

Motivational impairment – unable to
initiate voluntary behavior.




Mice in water maze.
Nonspecific – carries over to a variety
tasks and test situations.
Intellectual impairment – incapable
of benefiting from future experience
– even if they jump, don’t learn.
Emotional trauma – neg. affect.
Studies of Depressives



Show similar results to learned
helplessness studies.
Depressed individuals do not escape
noise, responding like inescapable
non-depressed individuals.
Depressed individuals do not adjust
likelihood of succeeding upward
when they experience success.

They credit chance not skill.
Criticisms of Seligman’s Theory




There is more to depression than
learned helplessness.
Helplessness subjects described the
task as a skill task, even though
acting as if it were a chance task.
Failure to replicate performance
deficits in humans – facilitation of
performance instead.
May be due to attributions.
Attribution Theory

Causal attributions of failure have
three dimensions:



Internal-external – internal traits or
characteristics vs environmental forces
Stable-unstable – past causes will
persist vs new forces will determine
future outcomes
Global-specific – outcome relates only
to one task vs outcome effects
everything.
Attributional Model of Depression
Internal
Dimension
External
Stable
Unstable
Stable
Unstable
Global
I’m
unattractive
to men
My
conversation sometimes bores
men
Men are
overly
competitive
with
intelligent
women
Men get into
rejecting
moods
Specific
I’m
unattractive
to him
My
conversation bores
him
He’s overly
competitive
with women
He was in a
rejecting
mood
Two Kinds of Helplessness



Personal helplessness – an
individual’s inability causes failure.
Universal helplessness – the
environment is structured so that
no one can control future events.
Abramson -- both kinds lead to
depression.


Vary on external-internal dimension.
Low self-esteem only with personal.
Severity of Depression


Depression can be transient if
attributed to global but changing
conditions.
Severe depression occurs when
attributions are:




Internal
Global
Stable
Better if external, specific, unstable.
Hopelessness Depression

Hopelessness – the expectation that
desired outcomes will not occur.


Learned helplessness -- no control over
undesired outcomes.
Accounts for anxiety without
depression.


Anxiety – possibility that a person may
have no control over negative events.
Depression occurs when certain.
Pessimism


Pessimistic explanatory style –
attributional style predicts
susceptibility to depression.
Langer – a perceived control is
basic to human functioning.


Optimists – feel they can control
events, more successful.
Pessimists – believe they have no
control over events.
Cognitive View of Phobia

Bandura – two kinds of expectancy
maintain a phobia:



Stimulus-outcome expectancy – about
the nature of the stimulus.
Response-outcome expectancy – about
the likely result of behavior.
Why does phobia produce behavior
with negative outcomes?

Efficacy expectancy – belief that one
cannot execute a particular action.
Self-Efficacy

Types of information used to
establish self-efficacy:





Personal accomplishments, success.
Task difficulty, amount of effort.
Observations of success/failure of
others – vicarious modeling.
Emotional arousal – we feel less able to
cope when agitated or tense.
Efficacy predicts approach behavior.
Criticisms of Efficacy View


Efficacy expectations may be
epiphenomenal – arise with anxiety
but do not affect responding.
Three types of anxiety:




Cognitive – affects self-efficacy
Physiological – affects physiology
Behavioral – affects responding.
Lang – contribution of each depends
on prior experience and situation.
Contemporary Theories

Shift from global theories to
theories about specific aspects of
learning.



Global theories were about operant
responding not classical conditioning.
An animal’s biology influences whether,
what, and how fast it can learn.
Cognitive view requires emphasis on
specific cognitive processes.
Stimulus-Substitution Theory


What is the nature of the CR – is it
just the UCR of is it different?
Pavlov – stimulus-substititon
theory:


The CS stimulates the same areas of
the brain as the UCS, producing the
same response.
Activation of CS with UCS establishes
neural connection between brain areas.
Conditioned Opponent Response

The CR and UCR are often different:


CR of fear is different than UCR of pain.
Siegel – best evidence of difference:




Morphine (UCS) produced analgesia,
reduced pain (UCR)
Light or tone (CS) produced
hyperalgesia, increased pain (CR).
Rats remove paws from heat quickly
with CS, slowly with UCS.
Insulin (glycemia) works the same way
Conditioning and Drug Tolerance

Elimination of a CS results in a
stronger response to the UCS, drug.


Extinction of responding to environmental cues strengthens drug response
Changing the context in which a
drug is administered increases
response to the drug.

Novel environment does not elicit an
opponent CR.