Learning - Illinois State University Websites
Download
Report
Transcript Learning - Illinois State University Websites
A Brief History of
Learning Theory
What is learning?
Definition of learning:
Dictionary definition: To gain knowledge, comprehension, or mastery
through experience or study.
Psychology definition: A relatively permanent change in behavioral
potentiality that is not due to maturation or typical physical growth, but is
due to (reinforced) practice or experience.
Which is better description? Why?
Behavioral potentiality:
Obviously, must be measurable behavior change
But when must behavior occur?
Immediately after learning? Within 1 year?
Issue of learning vs. performance- is this an important distinction?
Must learning result in behavioral change?
Define permanent and define behavior
Instinct- may emerge at different time periods
Importance of critical periods
Walking- learned or instinct?
Memory issues
How much cognition is necessary? Can bacteria learn?
Definition of behavior: If a dead man can’t do it…….
Definitions of learning?
Learning: experience, practice or performance?
Reflexes: Are they important for learning?
Instincts: imprinting and critical periods
Practice vs. Experience
Performance as an issue
Modified definition of learning: learning is
a relatively permanent change in behavior or behavioral
potentiality
that results from experience and
cannot be attributed to temporary body states (e.g., fatigue,
altered states of consciousness)
Definitions of learning?
“Types” of learning:
Classical conditioning
Instrumental or operant
Social learning
Latent learning
Cognition
Learning = survival or our strongest instinct
Early history of learning theory
Plato:
Socrates was his teacher, Aristotle was his student
Nativism: Knowledge is
inherited and a natural component of the human mind
a matter of recollection, and not of learning, observation, or study
not empirical, and that it comes from divine insight.
Every object in physical world has corresponding abstract idea or
form that causes it
We experience a “tree” but not “treeness”
Rationalism: One gains knowledge by reflecting on the
contents of one’s mind:
The mind’s eye: gaining insight
Turn inward to ponder what is innately available
Believes in a soul
Reminiscence: recollection of our experience that our
soul had in heaven which is beyond heaven
Plato’s Cave analogy
Early history of Learning Theory
Aristotle: Plato’s student
Empiricism: Knowledge derived from sensory experiences;
was NOT inherited
Rationalism: Mind is actively involved in attainment of
knowledge- must integrate sensory experiences with own
knowledge
Nativism: Mind must actively ponder the information
provided by the senses to discover the knowledge contained
within the information
Described in detail the human senses
Laws of association: Experience or recall of one object will
elicit recall of things
Similar to that object (similarity)
Opposite that object (contrast)
That were once originally experienced with that object
(contiguity)
Early History of Learning Theories
Rene DesCartes: 1596-1650
Gentleman Soldier
Knowledge is innate
Mind versus body problem
Separate laws govern each
Only humans have souls (mind)
Body has “animal spirits”
Two do influence one another
Reflex arc:
Why important? Showed
mechanisms of body
Early History of Learning Theories
The British Empiricist (including, but not limited to):
Thomas Hobbes (1651)
John Locke (1690)
James Mill (1829)
John Stuart Mill (1843)
Source of all knowledge was sensory experience
People are born knowing nothing
Gradually we gather knowledge via experience
Tabula rasa or blank slate idea (Locke)
Opposite of Kant's Nativism
Embraced phenomenalism, rational empiricism, pragmatism
Extreme position = Empiricist position
Set hypotheses for Associationism:
Empiricists first outlined:
How old concepts become associated in memory
How new concepts are formed
Hypothesized a direct correspondence between experience and memory
Proposed a 1:1 correspondence between simple sensations and
simple ideas
experience = sensations
memory = ideas
idea = form of a sensation
Complex ideas: James Mill
2 or more simple sensations repeatedly presented together,
product of union may be complex idea
once complex idea formed, can also be evoked by process of
association from simple sensations or ideas
Set hypotheses for Associationism:
Thomas Browne (1605-1682): Secondary Principles of
association:
Attempt to make Mills theory more complete
No data yet…just assumptions and hypotheses
Several hypotheses
The length of time 2 sentences coexist determines the strength of association
The liveliness or vividness of sensations also affects strength of association
The frequency of pairings: more frequent = stronger association
Recency of pairings: more recent = stronger association
Freedom from other strong associations
Constitutional differences
current emotional states
momentary state of body
individual prior habits
Variations on Associationism
John Stuart Mill: (1806-1873) Complex associations
Most important contribution: The whole is different from the sum of its parts
(Wait, didn’t the Gestaltists say this!?!!?)
George Berkely: (1685-1753): We can experience only
secondary qualities
Nothing exists unless it is percevied
To be is to be perceived
David Hume: (1711-1776): We know nothing for sure about
ideas
We can be sure of nothing
Mind = stream of ideas, memories, imaginings, associations, feelings
We experience empirical world only indirectly through our own ideas
“Habitual order of ideas” give rise to general concepts like causation
Continentalist view:
Back to knowledge = innate
French: Jean-Jacques Rousseau: 1712-1778
Wrote Emile, or On Education
Believed in stages of human development
Critical for French revolution and our own formation of the U.S.
German: Immanual Kant (1724-1804): Innate categories of
thought:
Careful analysis of our experiences reveals certain categories of thought
Categories included: Causality, unity, totality, reality, existence, necessity,
reciprocity, (and 5 more)
Mental faculties superimposed over our sensory experiences, providing them
with structure and meaning
Other Historical influences
Thomas Reid: Naïve Realism (1710-1796)
What we perceive = naïve realism
Mind has powers of its own which strongly influence how we
perceive world
Faculty of psychology: mixture of nativism, rationalism,
empiricism
Franz Joseph Gall: Role of Physiology (1758-1828)
Faculties housed in specific brain locations
Before this assumed the heart held all important information!
Phrenology: two lasting effects
Led to emerging neuroscience research
Belief that faculties become stronger with practice- the mental
muscle
Other Historical influences
Three important scientists/philosophers make an important
impact on how we approach learning theory today:
Charles Darwin
Karl Marx
Sigmund Freud
What? Why those 3?
Darwin: suggests we have common ways in which our bodies and our learning
operate.
Karl Marx: suggested that people were equal
Royalty or upper class were not “smarter”
People were people
Freud: suggested that our early experiences were critical for forming our later
experiences
Evolution’s influence on Psychology
Charles Darwin (1809-1882): Biological and Behavioral Evolution
1859 book: Origin of Species
Argued species originated from other species and eventually become distinct
from their ancestors
Thus: many animals have common, but very distant, ancestors
Evidence from domesticated plants and animals
Breeding programs; hybrid plants, purebred dogs, cats, etc.
Great similarity in body parts across animals: paws, arms, etc.
Embryology: most embryos look HIGHLY similar
Fossil records:
First “Psychological” Research in Learning
Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850-1909)
First empirical test of associationist hypotheses
used nonsense syllables to avoid prior associations
served as own subject
measured length of time took to learn, amount remembered after some passage of
time
Results: Several major findings
List length: the greater the list- the greater the time to learn PER item
Effects of repetition: over-learning and mastery
Effects of time on remembering and forgetting:
discovered forgetting curve
serial position curve
Role of contiguity: more contiguity = greater learning
Backwards associations
Provided DATA for associationist principles
Behaviorism
It’s not your Mother’s Skinner!
American Behaviorism
E.L. Thorndike: (1874-1949): Studied animal behavior and how animals
learned to react to consequences.
Did not have access to Pavlov’s work
John B. Watson (1878-1958) founded the school of psychology known as
behaviorism.
Psychology should be a science of behavior only.
Believed that environment molds behavior
By 1920s, behaviorism became dominant force in American psychology
B.F. Skinner (1904-1990): Blended Watson and Thorndike’s approaches
Heavily influenced by Edwin Guthrie, Clark Hull, Edward Tolman
Studied how behavior is shaped by rewards and punishments
Principles of learning apply to animals and humans alike
Thordike(s) and Guthrie also had profound effects on learning/education
Thorndike: began to look at
Instrumental Behavior
Son of a Methodist Minister
Graduate of Harvard, student of and highly influenced by
William James
Professor at Columbia University, influential in starting
the psych program there
Animal Intelligence (1911)
Rated the intelligence of various animals
One of the first contemporary psychologists to examine how
animals learned
Focus on trial and error learning
Did NOT have access to Pavlov’s work.
Experimented with cats in a puzzle box
Put cats in the box
Cats had to figure out how to pull/push/move lever to get out;
when out got reward
The cats got faster and faster with each trial
Thorndike: Law of Efect
Law of Effect emerged from this
research:
When a response is followed by a
satisfying state of affairs, that
response will increase in frequency.
When a response is followed by a
non-satisfying state of affairs, that
response will decrease in frequency
Also studied conditioned reflex
University of Chicago PhD. With John Dewey, who’s ideas he rejected
STRICT behaviorism: Everything is learned, no affect from
biology
Started out as an educator; developed his theory of behaviorism
Felt that any research should use ONLY observable events: rejecting
structualism and gestalt schools
Rejected traditional study of “thoughts” and “feelings”
Had access to Pavlov’s work (unlike E.L. Thorndike)
But felt that this Classical Conditioning could be used in other ways
Most famous work: Little Albert Study
Demonstrated classical conditioning of the emotion of fear
But: got in hot water:
Behavioral “eugenics”: believed if he could control environmental variables,
could control outcome of any human
Had an affair with his grad student
Ethics of Little Albert study
Pavlov’s Contribution
Ivan Pavlov was
Son of a Russian Orthodox priest
Russian physiologist: Studied salivation
1901: discovered and wrote about classical conditioning
Found that his dogs reacted to both his presence and the time
of day for feeding/experimentation
Wanted a way to study conditioned reflexes systematically
Researched this:
Measured amount of salivation during baseline:
Present food to dogs
Measure slobber
Then added a predictive stimulus: a Bell
Presented the BellFood
Measured slobber to see if dogs would begin to slobber to the bell
Classical Conditioning
Remember the Reflex Arc
Reflex is elicited by a stimulus
At first, must directly stimulate this reflex
But, a predictive stimulus can elict the reflex after many pairing
Classical conditioning is learning to react to a predictive
stimulus
The predictive stimulus predicts the eliciting stimulus
The eliciting stimulus elicits the reflex
Learn to anticipate the reflex behavior so that it occurs to the
predictive stimulus is productive and potentially lifesaving!
Classical Conditioning Procedure
CS US UR
Bell
Food
CR
Slobber with less
Digestive enzymes
Slobber
Why so important to American
Behaviorism?
In the 1930s and 1940s:
Physics is “the” science
Move towards laws and strict scientific notation of events and
variables
Use of equations to describe physical phenomenon
Pavlov USED strict notation
Used clear labels to identify variables
Strict notation system for denoting behavioral events
Very “scientific”
Thorndike had not access to Pavlov’s work; Watson had some
contact, Skinner was a student of Pavlov’s writings
Burris Frederick Skinner
1904-1990
Skinner’s influence on modern Behaviorism
Skinner studied at Harvard
Started out as English major, but was unsuccessful
Taught at Minnesota and Indiana University; founded a true Psych
department at Indiana just after Harvard started theirs
Lifelong friend of Fred Simmons Keller
Keller was developing concepts of operant conditioning at Harvard
with more of an applied/educational focus
Also Nate Schoenfield at Columbia
Formed the first “group” of behaviorists
Skinner’s influence on modern Behaviorism
Behavior of Organisms (1948)
Laid out tenants of his operant or instrumental conditioning
Focus on contingencies and consequences
Again, avoided non-observable events
but did not say they didn’t exist, just that they needed to be operationalized as
observable to be studied
For more information see his books On Verbal Behavior or
Beyond Freedom and Dignity- very relevant for today!
Utopian society:Walden Two (1948)
Several kinds of behaviorism:
Methodological Behaviorism:
Behaviors as such can be described scientifically without recourse
either to internal physiological events or to hypothetical constructs
such as thoughts and beliefs
Watson was a methodological behaviorist:
Objective study of behavior;
No mental life or internal states- only internal behavior
Thought is merely covert speech.
Several kinds of behaviorism:
Radical behaviorism: Skinner’s behaviorism
Expands behavioral principles to processes within the organism
In contrast to methodological behaviorism it is not mechanistic or
reductionistic;
Hypothetical (mentalistic) internal states NOT considered causes of
behavior
Phenomena must be observable at least to the individual experiencing
them.
Teleological Behaviorism:
Post-Skinnerian,
Purposive behaviorism
Highly related to microeconomics
Focuses on objective observation as opposed to cognitive processes.
Several kinds of behaviorism:
Theoretical Behaviorism:
Post-Skinnerian,
Accepts observable internal states as long as can measure with modern technology
Dynamic, but eclectic in choice of theoretical structures, emphasizes parsimony.
Biological Behaviorism:
Post-Skinnerian,
Centered on perceptual and motor modules of behavior
Theory of behavior systems.
Psychological Behaviorism
Centers on human behavior.
Many applied techniques such as time-out, token-reinforcement
Behavioral explanations of child development, education, abnormal, and clinical
areas
Commonalities among “Behaviorisms”
Emphasis on behavior
Classical conditioning: S-R psychology
Relatively passive
Organism does not have to make a response in order for the
consequences to occur
Responses are ELICITED
Operant conditioning: R-S psychology
Emphasis on organism operating on environment
Behavior is the result of a contingency on that response: If/Then
Operant conditioning: responses are EMITTED
Radical Behaviorism
Science of behavior = natural science
Assumptions include:
Animal behavior be studied profitably and compared with
human behavior
Strong emphasis on the environment as cause of behavior
Strong tendency to operationalize behavior
Emphasis on operant conditioning,
Use of jargon: Make definitions specific and clear
Tendency to apply concepts of reinforcement/punishment
to philosophy and daily life
Emphasis on private experience.
Radical Behaviorism
Embraces genetic and biological aspects of the organism
Assumes that behavior evolves as part of the nature of the
organism,
Study of behavior is a distinct field of study, but
Is compatible with biological and evolutionary approaches to
psychology
Is a proper part of biology
Radical behaviorism does not involve the claim that
organisms are tabula rasa, without genetic or physiological
endowment.
Radical Behaviorism
Skinner's work focused on operant conditioning:
Again, R-S, not S-R
Emphasized schedule of reinforcement as IV; rate of responding as DV
Emphasis on outcomes and response rates that include areas of study such as
decision making, choice, self-control
Myth that organisms are passive receivers of conditioning: rather:
Operant behavior is titled operant because it operates on the environment
Operant behavior is emitted, not elicited:
Animals act on the environment and the environment acts back on them, or
The consequence of a behavior can itself be a stimulus;
Radical Behaviorism
But isn’t radical behaviorism = logical positivism.
Skinnerians maintain that Skinner was not a logical positivist and
recognized the importance of thought as behavior.
Skinner himself noted this in his book About Behaviorism.
Philosophically, radical behaviorism is most similar philosophically to
American pragmatism.
Study behavior because it is observable, predictable, orderly and
functional.
Skinner’s Behaviorism: 1966 article
What is the important event or datum to study in the science of
behavior?
o The probability of a given behavior to occur at a given time
When, where, under what circumstances
Experimental analysis deals with probability of
responding in terms of frequency or rate of responding.
o Specify topography of response in such a way that separate instances
of an operant can be counted.
o The specification is usually made with the help of an apparatusthe"operandum"-some device that allows the response to be counted
Skinner’s Behaviorism: 1966 article
Responses defined so that they show a uniformity as the
organism moves about in a framework defined by its
own anatomy and the immediate environment.
o Record changes in rate of response and reinforcer
o Examine under different environmental situations
o Examine under different rules for delivery of reinforcer
o Skinner used “cumulative recorder” , we use computers
o Also examine interresponse times, interreinforcer times, slopes, etc.
o For example: different patterns of responses under 4 basic
reinforcement schedules
The Ind.Variable according to Skinner:
Task of EAB: discover all the variables of which probability of a
response is a function
These might include:
The stimulus: both as an antecedent and as a consequence
Discriminative stimuli: the stimulus control assigned to a particular stimulus
Asks how the organism perceives the stimulus, not how the experimenter designed the stimulus to
be seen
Examine via generalization and discrimination gradients
The function of the behavior:
How does the response operate on the environment
What does it “gain” the subject; what is the reinforcer earned by that response?
Does not alter “inner states” but environmental manipulations:
Not hunger but food intake
Not fear, but aversive stimuli
Maturation is a variable
The IV according to Skinner:
Role of the contingency is important (critical) feature of
independent variables in EAB, for example in
Shaping
Extinction
Delay of reinforcement
Contingencies involving several stimuli and several consequences
Examine organism’s actual behavior under different experimental
contingencies
Examine where, when, how behavior changes under different
stimulus conditions
Can begin to build rules or laws of behavior
The IV according to Skinner:
Relationships among the variables are very important
Use real time rather than trial by trial
“Free operant”:
Within given time period, allow subject to make responses
Subject determines when, how often, which responses to make to
a given set of stimuli and consequences
Subject controls the rate of behavior
Allows a behaviorist to determine how IVs interact
to alter the DV of behavioral responding
The IV according to Skinner:
Skinner argues his “theory” is atheoretical
Does not rely on preconceived hypotheses
Rather- examines behavior and from the patterns
observed
One determines systematic rules and descriptions of
behavior under various contingency conditions
In Applied settings, best example of this is functional
analysis.
Inductive and not Deductive
Inductive reasoning= reasoning in which the premises seek to
supply strong evidence for (not absolute proof of) the truth of the
conclusion.
Conclusion of a deductive argument is supposed to be certain
Truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is supposed to be
probable, based upon the evidence given.
Inductive reasoning = reasoning that derives general
principles from (many) specific observations
Deductive reasoning = reasoning that hypothesizes general
principles and then looks for specific observations to support
the hypotheses.
What does distinguish Skinner’s approach
from more typical approaches?
Behavior is not a sign of inner mental or
physical activities
Not a means to the end, but the end
Allows a careful specification of the behavior and
the processes by which the behavior occurs
Really a “functionalist” approach: What is the
FUNCTION of the behavior? What does that
behavior get for the organism?
What does distinguish Skinner’s approach from
more typical approaches?
Changes in behavior are studied in and of themselves, and
not assumed that they belie some underlying cause
Study behavior because behavior is interesting and a legitimate variable
that is orderly and occurs for a reason
Every behavior has a reason
Examine how a set of responses come under the control of a
corresponding set of stimuli
Use probability of response and changes in probability of responses
Skinner argues rate of responding is most basic dimension
Not assume behavior is a sign or symptom of inner traits,
abilities, processes, etc.- look at many behaviors
Not rely on verbal behavior alone
What does distinguish Skinner’s approach
from more typical approaches?
Behavior is examined because behavior is
important
Behavior is not “adjusting to a situation” or “solving
a problem”
Examine the topography of the behavior
Look at the ABCs:The Antecedents, the
Behavior, the Consequences
Rise of Behaviorism as a field of study
As popularity of research grew, several specialized journals popped up:
Journal of The Experimental Analysis of Behavior (JEAB): 1958
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA): 1968
Verbal Behavior
The Behavior Analyst
Division 25 in APA is called Experimental Analysis of Behavior
International Association of Behavior Analysis: late 1970’s
Several international conferences each year
General conference
Autism
Verbal Behavior
Several specialized experimental conferences
National conferences in variety of countries
Now have one of fastest growing licensed professionals in psychology: BCBA and
BCBAc
Assumptions of Modern Behaviorism
Focus on classical and operant behavior; highly
influenced by neuroscience
Include internal events as part of an organism’s
environment
Both external AND internal environments influence behavior
But: avoid use intervening variables like cognitivists
Instead of saying “memory” study relationship between items recalled
and length of time between presentation of stimulus and behavior.
Assumptions of Modern Behaviorism
Feelings and behavior:
Don’t consider feelings as “cause” of behavior, but rather as a behavior in and of
themselves.
Feelings are REAL behaviors that can be studied
Again, look for environmental events that may be causal (internal and external)
But: also remember that self reported “feelings” can be unreliable:
What you think you feel and why you feel it may causal!’
Thinking = behavior
Thinking and talking are BEHAVIORS
Language = verbal behavior
Thinking = private behavior
Assume same rules that govern other behaviors will govern thoughts and feelings
Obviously, verbal behavior is MUCH more complex in humans but can be studied in
similar ways as any behavior
Verbal behavior is a HUGE research area in behaviorism.
Behaviorism Today
Not Skinner’s behaviorism!
Focus on both theoretical and applied areas
EAB: focus on developing theories of behavior
How do animals learn about contingencies
How do animals categorize/organize stimuli
How do animals make decisions
ABA: focus on application
Biggest impact on autism, developmental disabilities
Also in education, business, industry
Emerging as major force in animal behavior, particularly with
domestic and companion animals
Learning = Adaptation
Learning = Evolutionary behavior?
Instinctive knowledge: knowledge obtained through the
mechanism of heredity
Evidence in many species
Flexible, but not learned
Two common misconceptions about instinctive knowledge
Instincts are not influenced by experience
Humans do not possess instinctive knowledge
Doctrine of Evolution by Natural Selection
Mechanism of inheritance: Observed characteristics of
individuals are inherited; that is, offspring tend to resemble their
parents more than they resemble other individuals
Source of variation: Within a species, individuals differ from
another in both their physical structures and behavioral dispositions.
Method of selection: Those individuals with characteristics that
favor survival in competition with others and in the face of
environmental stressors or changes will be more likely to transmit
their characteristics to offspring and thus tend to be preserved.
Natural Selection:
Darwin’s 5 major premises:
The members of particular species have characteristics that vary
Some of these variable characteristics are passed on from parents to
siblings
Some of these variable characteristics aid survival
Species produce more offspring than survive to become adults
Those characteristics that aid survival will become more common
across generations, those that impede survival will die out.
Remember the time line for these changes: MANY generations
For humans, this means thousands of years
Learning = Adaptation to environment
Learning is an adaptive specialization
Adaptation = changes that occur over successive generations as a
species adjusts to its niche
Adaptation = process of adjustment to circumstances in which an
individual lives.
Thus: Are evolved as solutions to some of problems of survival
Humans use adaptation and learning
as evolutionary mechanism
We learn to adapt to our ever changing niche
Greater flexibility to deal with new situations
Those that can adapt…live and pass on their genes!
Cultural evolution: Process by which (we humans) adapt
to our environment by transmitting acquired knowledge
from generation to generation through our teaching and
imitation.
Chimpanzees, Bonobos and the domestic canine also show
evidence of this cultural evolution.
Domestication of Dogs
Involves both natural and artificial selection
Natural Selection:
Natural selection developed individuals who more likely tolerant of humans
Remain closer in, live with humans
Several sub categories
Tame domesticated
Genetically domesticated but wild (feral)
Wild type but tame
Interestingly, 75% of world’s dogs are feral
Domestication: 100,000 year history of domestication
As humans entered more agricultural lifestyle, wolves scavenged food from humans
This led to changes in wolf morphology and behavior
Reduced fear and aggression in presence of humans = exploitation of more food sources
Later, humans began to selectively breed dogs
Ontogeny of social behavior in Canids
Domestication results in both physical and behavioral changes
Physical changes include:
Larger size variation: dwarf and giant
Piebald coat color
Reproductive cycle changes
Changes in hair, shortened tails, floppy ears
Social changes:
Lack of development of fear to humans
Exhibiting play behavior in adulthood
Prolonged juvenile period
Ontogeny of Social Behavior in Canids
Most important: Paedomorphosis
Retention of juvenile traits into adulthood
Physical characteristics
Behavior characteristics
Important:
Changes in head: muzzle, ears, coat, eyes, tail
More juvenile signaling and extended play behavior in place of
adult aggression/antagonistic signaling
Extended play
Reduced need for adult-type signaling
Physical and Behavioral differences
Sharpness of features
Roundness of features
Pointy ears, eyes, snout
Rounded eyes, floppy ears,
Intense eyes
“smiling”
Softened eyes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QqsSw5BDA8&feature=
related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Z9dUkbq1g&feature=r
elated
Compare Wolf to Dog Play
Paedomorphosis
Wolf pups have much shorter development duration
Good motor by 3 weeks of age
Domestic dogs: Good motor control comes around 10-12 weeks
Wolf pups show complex social behavior much sooner than
domestic dogs
Dogs begin socialization once begin to walk (about 3 weeks)
Continue to form primary relationships until at least 12 weeks to 16 weeks (best
time for adopting a puppy is 8-12 weeks)
Socialization to both dogs and humans is critical for dog
development
Shelter dogs
Dogs weaned/adopted too soon
Working dogs: avoid human contact, want them to bond to cattle or sheep
Farm Fox experiment
Dimitri Belyaev: 1959 to today (Tut, 1999)
Manipulated breeding of foxes on fox farm
Selected breeders based on behavioral characteristics: mostly
sensitivity to humans
Only about 3% of males, 10% of females selected in first generation
Not reared with humans, just a 1 time test
Rapid effects on behavior and morphology
By 6th generation: begin to see domestication elite: no fear of humans
By 8th generation: morphological changes begin
By 42 generations: about 70% meet criteria for domestication elite
Farm Fox experiment
Interesting physical changes: Note, NOT selected for these traits
Physical Trait changes:
Floppy ears; Rolled tails; Splotchy coats
Shorter tails and legs
Correlated with “tameness”
Behavioral Changes
Extended developmental period for bonding/attachment
Exhibit juvenile play traits in adulthood
Slower to develop adult behavior repertoires
Hormonal changes correspond with this: delay in onset of innate fear response
Lengthened developmental periods
Typical fox: 45 days or about 5/5 weeks.
Marked by onset of fear and avoidance and reduction in exploratory behavior
Generations 28-30: Increased to about 12 weeks and often longer
Similar to domestic dogs
Domestication hypothesis
(see Hare, Alexandra , Kaminski, Brauer, Call & Tomasello, 2010):
Domestication = sufficient cause of canid’s sensitivity to
human social behavior
Human and dog convergent evolution of advanced social cognition
in response to similar social selection pressures
Brian Hare: Number of comparisons of wolves versus dogs and
domesticated foxes:
Hare argues against ontogeny as important factor
Ontogeny = the entire sequence of events involved in the
development of an individual organism
Domestication hypothesis argues genetic changes sufficient
Problems with
Domestication Hypothesis
Not account for differences in developmental windows
With shorter window, shorter set of experiences and opportunity to
learn
Can’t test dogs/wolves of same chronological age, but must
compare at same developmental age
Dogs exposed to experimental manipulation while still in
sensitive period of socialization require less experience to
produce greater effect
Note important differences:
Dogs
Wolves
Better at following several
human gestures
Only good at point/gaze
Feral dogs and dogs reared in
shelters show same unsocialized
behavior as wolves
Socialized wolves improve in
wolf-human social interactions
over unsocialized wolves
As get older dogs prefer to be
with humans
As get older wolves prefer to be
with another wolf
Are these differences due to domesticity or experience?
Proximity to humans = important factor
Domestication correlates with proximity to humans
Domestication theory does not account for Exposure Effects
But: Hard to research:
Hard to get proper comparison group
Wild wolves with no contact with humans (dangerous)
If use tame wolves, have the human issue
Wild dogs also hard to work with!
Studies which have attempted to account for human proximity have
found that contact with humans is an important factor
Shelter dogs show more “wild-like” behavior; increased fear and aggression
Dogs socialized after sensitive period show similar patterns
Conditioning/Learning Experiences:
With human contact comes opportunity to become conditioned to
human behavior
Serendipity in learning human social cues: Get reinforced more often!
Domestic dogs learn human cues faster than wolves
Domestic dogs are reinforced for appropriate response to humans
almost constantly
Learn how to “manipulate” owners
“guilty look” = I look “guilty” then I get back with the pack
Not necessarily have human emotion with it, but show appropriate response
due to conditioning
Arguments against
Domestication hypothesis
Domestic dogs have smaller brains than wolves
Socialized wolves can learn human signals as well as dogs
Improbable that dogs have innate ability to exploit behavior of humans
Not conspecifics
Different morphology and behavior
E.g., the “hat” problem: not seem to understand morphology of humans
vs. their clothing
Ontogeny plays crucial role in development of effective conspecific
social interactions in canids (and many other species)
Two stage hypothesis
Sensitivity of canid to human social cues depends on 2 types of
ontogenic experiences
Interactions with humans during sensitivity developmental period
leading to acceptance of humans as social companions
Learning that is not restricted to one particular phase of development
Learn to use location and movement of human body parts to locate sought-after
objects
Domestication does not qualitatively change behavior, but has
changed quantity and duration of certain behaviors
These behaviors must then be reinforced to be maintained.
Predictions of Two-Stage theory
Both wild and domestic canids have:
Phylogenetic prerequisites to respond to human social signals
Have mutually beneficial interactions with humans
Preparedness (Seligman, 1967; also Bolles 1967; Timberlake, 2001)
Biological boundaries
Prepared to attend to certain cues because these increase probability of survival
But: this preparedness to respond requires experience to elicit and
shape beneficial behaviors
Dog will become socialized to whatever it is around:
Other dogs
Sheep or cattle
Humans
Learns behavior that works the best
Why is this important?
Drives research questions:
Is it nature or nurture that is more important
How does nature interact with nurture
Suggests need to examine developmental stages more closely
Authors caution: standardization of methods
Several research questions begin to emerge:
Breed differences?
Experience Differences? Shelter vs. fostering dogs for adoption
Deaf, blind or deaf/blind versus typical dogs: What is effect on socialization?
What cognitive abilities do dogs have?