Transcript Lecture 10 - Critique of Behaviorism

Cumulative Record
no responses constant rate
accelerating
Schedules of Reinforcement
Fixed Ratio
Variable Ratio
Variable Interval
Fixed Interval
Skinner’s “Theory” of
Instrumental Conditioning
• Two-term contingency: R -> SR
•
Nature of reinforcer can vary: R -> S [S+R, Sr, S-R, S-r].
•
3-term contingency (Discriminative operant)
SD : R -> SR (light: bar press -> food)
S : R -> SR (no light: bar press ≠ food)
•
Chaining of discriminative operants:
D
r/D
r/D
r/D
Sn-3:Rn-3  Sn-2:Rn-2  Sn-1:Rn-1  Sn:Rn  S
•Nature of discriminative stimulus can vary:
–Exteroceptive
–Interoceptive
–proprioceptive
R
Skinner’s “Theory”
(cont.)
•Contingency of reinforcement can vary: R  S±R(r)
• Schedule of reinforcement can vary: Rn/t  S±R
– subject must emit n responses within a particular time
frame t.
• Verbal Behavior. Behavior that is reinforced by a member of
one’s verbal community.
• Private events. Discriminative responding to proprioceptive
or interoceptive stimuli (stimuli under our skin). Sd : r  Sr
or Sd : r  Sr.
Verbal Behavior
•Verbal Behavior. Behavior that is reinforced by a member
of one’s verbal community.
• Mands (“demands”), a 2-term contingency
– verbal response  S R [”baba”  bottle]
• Tacts- [tactus (Latin, “to point”)], a 3-term contingency:
– SD: verbal response  Sr
– [Sight of Tom’s apple]: Mary: “May I please have an apple?” 
Tom gives Mary an apple.]
Verbal Behavior
(cont.)
Examples of discriminative control of verbal behavior:
echoic behavior:
*Mother says [“dog”]: “dog”  “good”
textual behavior:
*Printed word [dog]: “dog”  “good”
transcription:
*Write the word [d-o-g]: d-o-g  “good”
intraverbal responses:
*Printed word [c-h-i-e-n]: “dog”  “bien”
*“How are you?”: “Fine thanks”  “good”
*Printed letters [Na]: “sodium”  “good”
*“3 x 3”: “9”  “good”
Skinner [& Freud (& Terrace)] On Consciousness
• Consciousness is a proper subject matter for psychology but it is
not an explanation of behavior. It is what has to be explained (e.g.,
Tom hit Bill because Tom felt angry).
– Why did Tom feel angry?
– How did Tom know he was angry?
• Consciousness vs. Awareness:
– Animals are aware of objects (but only fleetingly).
– Humans are conscious of objects (because they can name
them).
Skinner [& Freud (& Terrace)] On
Consciousness
•Consciousness develops because it enhances the social fabric of the
verbal community. It provides us with a sense of “other minds”, another
person’s hunger, pain, fear, rage, sadness, truthfulness, etc. In this
sense, consciousness is adaptive.
- Internal states are inferred by adult (“You seem hungry.”)
• Feedback about private events is not as precise as feedback for
tacting public events.
• Discriminative control of inner states (tacting) becomes autonomous
with experience.
Behaviorist Approach
All learned behavior (human and animal) can be explained
by the principles of classical and instrumental learning theory (2factor learning theory).
• Classical conditioning:
– assumes that CS’s and US’s can be paired arbitrarily.
– assumes that temporal contiguity of CS and US is necessary and
sufficient for establishing CR.
• Instrumental conditioning:
– assumes that responses selected for reinforcement are arbitrary.
• No need to postulate mental processes.
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
GARCIA EXPERIMENT ON TASTE
AVERSION
•A compound stimulus [taste
& sound] signals the onset of
• nausea or shock.
• Group I: Compound CS [taste & sound]  Shock
• Group II: Compound CS [taste & sound]  Nausea
– taste: water sweetened with saccharine
– nausea: induced by lithium chloride
•Effect of CS evaluated in 2-bottle choice test:
–Bottle 1: saccharine flavored water
–Bottle 2: water
•Group I: preferred sweet drink (natural preference)
•Group II: preferred water (avoid natural preference)
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
Harry Harlow
QuickTi me™ and a T IFF (LZW ) decompressor are needed t o see thi s pi cture.
(1905-1981)
QuickT i me™ and a T IFF (LZW) decom pressor are needed to see t his pict ure
What does an infant monkey love?
Harlow’s Monkeys
•Monkeys spent
more time with
QuickTime™ and a TIFF (L ZW) d eco mpres sor a re ne eded to see this picture .
the cloth mom (15 hr) than the
wire mom (2 hr), regardless of
who provided milk.
•Went to cloth mom when
stressed or scared.
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
Omission Training
SD (Key l ight):
R (Peck):
SR (Food):
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
Blocking experiment (Kamin)
• Training:
CS1  Shock:
CS1 + CS2  Shock
•Test:
CS1  fear
CS2  no fear
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
Predictable and Unpredictable Occurrences of
Food
p(Food/Key Light) > p (Food/Key Light)
Predictable:
CS:
US:
Key
Light
Food
p(Food/Key Light) = p (Food/Key Light)
Unpredictable:
CS:
Key
Light
US: Food
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
•Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
Hunter On “Representations”
...If comparative psychology is to postulate a
representative fact, ...it is necessary that the
stimulus represented be absent at the moment
of the response. If it is not absent, the reaction
may be stated in sensory-motor term.
(Hunter, 1913, p. 21)
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
RADIAL MAZE
Evidence That Questioned
Behaviorists’ Assumptions
Biological Factors:
•“Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Harlow’s experiment on love
Classical Conditioning - Cognitive Factors:
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US
Animal Cognition:
• Hunter’s definition of representation
• Radial maze
• Matching-to-sample
Matching to Sample
Peck
Peck (food)
Peck (no food)
Peck (no food)
Peck (food)
Peck
Evidence That Questioned Behaviorists’
Assumptions
• “Misbehavior” of organisms
• Garcia’s experiment on taste aversion
• Autoshaping and omission training
• Blocking
• Rescorla’s experiment on predictiveness of US.
• Experiments on animal cognition
– Hunter’s definition of representation
– Radial maze
– Matching-to-sample