Download Behavioural Extinction - Expert Essays Writers

Running Head: Psychology
1
Behavioural extinction
Name
Class
Affiliation
Instructor
Date
Psychology
2
Abstract
Decades has seen a consensus on the debate concerning the role of extinction in
bringing about unlearning .it has been explained that if an event is not paired with its
reinforce the original learning process is altered, however research has gone further to show
that extinction follows two forms of learning and associated with the same context and in
which they are dependent on the extent to which the test will either elicit the original or
extinction learning. This has necessitated the development of four mechanisms of relapse as
evidence for the fact that extinction does not cause unlearning. These include reinstatement,
renewal, spontaneous recovery and reacquisition.
These four mechanisms basically explain the extinction and learning process in
different perspectives. They try to explain although a certain context may be unlearnt it can
always be relearnt by reintroducing the same stimuli in the same conditions.it also shows that
although a subject may be exposed to a separate extinction context the same renewal effect
will occur. Spontaneous recovery also occurs incase a conditioned response occurs and lastly
reacquisition if the original training conditions are restored. The research carried out shows
some of these mechanisms such as the ambiguous group being able to remember the original
learning context in the memory test to show that extinction is merely unlearning.in our case
study the consistent group show unlearning of the original context even though the same
conditions are presented with the same conditioned stimuli.
Psychology
3
Introduction
For decades, there has been a serious debate involving extinction which is the failure or lack
of performance that comes about when an item or organ is not paired with its reinforce, does
not actually destroy what is learnt originally and this motion has been supported by various
researchers.as opposed to the consensus the action that has been previously associated with
the reinforcer, will acquire a second meaning which will exist together with the original
learning. The paper will discuss the context of unlearning, ambiguity and possible sources of
relapse after behavioral extinction as per the research conducted.
The fact is that extinction does not alter any learning that had been done in the past
but simply shows that new knowledge has been gained in contradiction to the hypothesis. .
however, this ambiguity means shows that one or another meaning might have been
activated in accordance with the circumstances or in the context prevailing.as a defense
mechanism to further explain this fact, extinction uses four mechanism of relapse as evidence
that actually it does not alter existing original learning (Haselgrove & Hogarth 2012). The
relapse mechanisms also show the criticality of context in the control of performance once
extinction has occurred.in simplifying this evidences, classical conditioning is used in which
a conditional stimulus (CS) is paired with a motivational partner unconditional stimulus (US)
and the resultant reaction eliminated by introducing the CS alone repeatedly.
Thesis statement: Extinction does not bring about unlearning
The implications of this contextual evidence in the learning control and extinction for
behavior bases robotics are important for models that seek to replicate organic learning
processes. Following the normal extinction two forms of the learning are associated with the
same context and the apparent form of learning is dependent on the extent that the test
Psychology
4
context will elicit either the original learning or the learning extinction. The paper will
discuss possible ways of preventing relapse, converging evidence against unlearning.
Extinction uses four mechanism of relapse as evidence that actually it does not alter existing
original learning.
Reinstatement; It involves the reintroduction of the reinforcer after extinction has occurred of
the conditioned response. In this case the reinforcer is stored in the context in which the
extinction occurred that is the original conditioning situation. The resultant phenomenon in
this case is usually stronger when the conditional stimulus is tested in the same context that
the unconditional stimulus occurred (Domjan et al., 2010). Reinstatement is dependent on the
context learning, the cues constellation that is usually in the background whenever learning
process occurs.
Renewal; when extinction has taken place in a different environment away from the original
learning environment then the extinguished response is renewed when the subject is taken
back to the original training grounds. This effect of renewal usually occurs despite periods of
prolonged exposure to the distinct extinction context.in this case the reduction in fear that
occurs in extinction itself is dependent on learning about the existing context. For instance, in
this effect the subject may receive conditioning in the first context but then show extinction
in the second context (Kamble, 2007). Usually after the response has decreased to zero, the
conditional stimulus is returned to the original first context and retested this typically renews
the conditional stimulus fear.
Spontaneous recovery; this is usually observed after the extinction of a conditioned response.
for instance if a conditioned stimuli is reintroduced, after the conditioned response has
become extinct, a crucial recovery of the conditioned response is usually observed for only a
few trials.an account of this effect involves the inclusion of the passage of time in the control
Psychology
5
of the context of the conditioned response. In case there has been a delay temporarily
between the extinction and retesting, the time is regarded as part of the context then this delay
will change the originality of the extinction context (Seel, 2012). The subject forgets the
original context of extinction due to the delays and the test amounts to a new context all
together.
Reacquisition; the reacquisition of an already extinguished response when the original
conditions of training are reintroduces is usually rapid. However, this process can be slowed
down in case a huge number of extinction activities follow few acquisition trials. This simply
means that, if a subject has spent more time in extinction as compared to the original phase of
learning, then the reintroduction of the context in the original learning may not present as a
strong retrieval cue as compared to the new extinction meaning associated with the context.
Hence slow reacquisition is caused by retrieval of extinction continually and thus if there are
some cues that promote retrieval of the effect then reconditioning is rapid (Seel, 2012).
Results
According to the research, the consistent group showed a lot of learning and memory
as evidenced by the results. They were able to clearly differentiate between the different
meals MO1 and MO2 and the restaurants respectively A or B. This can clearly be seen in the
mean ratings after a confirmatory test is carried out only a small variation is noted. However,
the result of the first meal served in both the restaurants is constant showing the likelihood of
a disease after consumption of the meals in the different restaurants. On the contrary the
ambiguous group shows inconsistent results in the different studies.
They agree the meals would be followed by a disease but the extent to which they
would cause shows a variation. Unlike the firs consistent group the meals in the different
Psychology
6
restaurants will cause diseases in varied degrees. This group also shows a slight agreement
that the meals served in restaurant B would cause a disease to a very small extent.
In the memory test the results take a different course as the consistent group shows poor
memory in matching the different foods to their respective diseases as earlier learnt. Their
percentage scores are low and show consistency of results in the first meal although below
average. the second meal shows a significant memory in matching the second meal in
restaurant A with an above average score while the same percentage remains for the second
meal in restaurant However the ambiguous group shows a good memory in restaurant A for
both meals by showing a good match between the food and disease giving them a higher
score than the preceding group. Although the same case scenario of poor memory in
restaurant B is noted as the score is below average.
Discussion
According to the results, the consistent groups in the causal task show a high
sensitivity to context by showing prowess in the prediction test matching the food to the
disease that would occur and these shows in the high scores shown. This shows that when the
group is presented with a conditioned stimuli it is likely to result to an unconditioned
response in the first phase and incase a new stimuli is introduced it is likely to alter the first
response giving it an new response all together. This can be evidenced by the memory test
which shows a different dimension of the results.
When the group is exposed to the same stimuli, the first conditioned stimuli exhibit
the same response in terms of results while the second gives varied results. This shows that
this group will tend to unlearn the first test and remember the most recent test with a slight
memory of previous test.As per this group it is evident that extinction causes unlearning. In
the second group, from the start it is evident that extinction does not cause unlearning but
Psychology
additional learning.in the first prediction test the ambiguous group showed slow mastery of
the foods and their corresponding diseases as evidenced by their poor scores but when it
came to the memory test they showed a good memory level as compared to the other group.
They were able to show that learning had taken place and when presented with the same
stimuli they were able to clearly match the foods and their respective diseases. This shows
that extinction does not bring about unlearning but elicits the original learning context.
7
Psychology
References
Haselgrove, M. & Hogarth, L. (2012). Clinical applications of learning theory. Hove New
York: Psychology Press.
Domjan, M., Grau, J. & Krause, M. (2010). Principles of learning and behavior. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.
Kamble, S. (2007). Psychology of learning behaviour. New Delhi, India: Global Vision Pub.
House.
Seel, N. (2012). Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. S.l: Springer.
8