* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Chapter 8: Stimulus Control of Behavior
Sensory cue wikipedia , lookup
Biological motion perception wikipedia , lookup
Social perception wikipedia , lookup
Empirical theory of perception wikipedia , lookup
Multisensory integration wikipedia , lookup
Stroop effect wikipedia , lookup
Time perception wikipedia , lookup
Chapter 8 – Stimulus Control of Behavior • Outline 1 – Identification and Measurement of Stimulus Control • Differential Responding and Stimulus Control • Stimulus Generalization • Stimulus Generalization Gradients as Measures of Stimulus Control – Stimulus and Response Factors in Stimulus Control • • • • Sensory Capacity and Orientation Relative Ease of Conditioning Various Stimuli Type of Reinforcement Types of Instrumental Response • The concept of behavioral control – S (stimulus) • Can elicit responding (R) • Can create expectancies (O) • “Appropriate behavior” is often controlled by cues (stimuli) in our environment. – Get undressed for bed – Get undressed at school – Kiss girlfriend/boyfriend – Kiss random person walking on campus • This chapter considers how stimuli come to control our behavior. • Identification and Measurement of Stimulus Control – How do we know that a behavior is under stimulus control? • Consider Reynolds (1961) – Train pigeons to peck a white triangle on a red background. • VI schedule – Elicited steady pecking – Test with red key (no triangle) – Or white triangle (no red; background is black) • Stimulus Generalization – How specific is stimulus control? • Early researchers (like Pavlov) examined this question. • Guttman and Kalish (1956) – Train • VI schedule • S+ = 580nm light (yellowish orange). – Test • Different colors – – – – – – – – – 520 nm (green) 540 nm 550 nm 570 nm (yellow) 580 nm (yellowish orange) 590 nm (orange) 600 nm 620 nm 640 nm (red • Random order • In extinction Generalization Gradient • The generalization gradient indicates stimulus control by color. – It is somewhat specific for the training stimulus. • But generalizes to similar colors. • There is no gradient for the hypothetically color blind pigeons – Color does not control responding. • What determines the degree of stimulus control obtained? • Stimulus and Response Factors – Sensory Capacity and orientation • Must be able to sense it – Rats don’t do well with color stimuli – They do very well with odor stimuli. • Horse study from book. – Trained to select color over gray. » Push lever with head. » 85% correct » All 4 picked blue and yellow over gray » 3 picked green over gray » Only 1 picked red over grey » Implies they may have poor red sensation • Relative ease of conditioning various stimuli. – Whether a stimulus exerts control depends on whether it stands out from other cues in the environment – Children’s book • Big pictures • Smaller words – Overshadowing (first noticed by Pavlov) • CS1 – loud sound • CS2 – dim light • More conditioning occurred to the stronger stimulus – Conditioning was better for CS2 if presented alone – Overshadowed by CS1 if presented together • Type of Reinforcement – Aversive vs. Appetitive seems to matter • Foree and LoLordo (1973) – Two groups of pigeons – Both were trained to respond when presented with a compound discriminative stimulus • Red light and tone – Group 1 • Step on treadle to gain food – Group 2 • Step on treadle to avoid shock – Test both groups with • Red light alone • Tone alone • Visual stimuli tend to gain control over appetitive stimuli • Auditory stimuli tend to gain control over aversive stimuli. • Behavior systems? – Food RF activates feeding system? • Rats and pigeons are more likely to find food with vision rather than hearing. – Shock RF activates defensive system? • Auditory cues may be particularly adaptive for avoiding danger. • Outline 2 – Learning Factors in Stimulus Control • • • • • • Stimulus Discrimination Training Effects of Discrimination Training on Stimulus Control What is Leaned in Discrimination Training? Interactions Between S+ and S-: Peak Shift Effect Range of Possible Discriminative Stimuli Stimulus Equivalence Training – Contextual Cues and Conditional Relations • Conditioned Place Preference • Learning Factors in Stimulus Control – left to their own devices animals come under stimulus control based on the stimulus and response factors discussed above. – But can we train animals to make finer distinctions? • Stimulus Discrimination Training. – Let’s go back to the color generalization study – Train • VI schedule • S+ = 580nm light (yellowish orange). – Test • Different colors – – – – – – – – – 520 nm (green) 540 nm 550 nm 570 nm (yellow) 580 nm (yellowish orange) 590 nm (orange) 600 nm 620 nm 640 nm (red • Random order • In extinction Generalization Gradient • Note that the pigeons treated the 590 nm stimulus nearly the same as the 580 nm • Can they tell the difference? • How could we find out? • Train with two stimuli. – In operant conditioning we call them S+ (Sd) and S(S∆) • S+ responding will result in RF • S- responding will have no effect – Pavlovian • CS+ (CS-US) • CS- (CS- no US) • For our color discrimination – S+ = 580 nm – S- = 590 nm Hypothetical Result • Effects of Discrimination on Stimulus control – Increased stimulus control • 1) Discrimination narrows the generalization curve • 2) Discrimination within a dimension narrows it even more – Makes the relevant dimension clear? » Tone vs. loudness • Example: Jenkins and Harrison (1962) – Trained with tones • 3 groups – 1) generalization » S+ 1000-cps tone – 2) discrimination » S+ 1000-cps tone » S- no tone – 2) within discrimination » S+ 1000-cps tone » S- 950 cps tone • What is learned in Discrimination Training? – Example • S+ (light) S- (tone) • 1) learn about S+ alone – Respond during light – Learn nothing about tone • 2) learn about S- alone – Suppress responding during tone • Learn nothing about light • 3) learn about both (Spence’s Theory) – Respond during light – Suppress responding during tone • Spence’s Theory of Discrimination Learning – The S+ becomes excitatory • Signals RF – The S- becomes inhibitory • Signals lack of RF • How do we test this? – Responding to S+ and not responding during S- is not enough • Any of the 3 theories predict this • The peak shift can be considered evidence for Spence’s view. • Range of Possible Discriminative Stimuli – Many kinds of stimuli have been examined • Simple – Color – Tone • Complex – Number – Time of day – Kind of music » Carp » Blues vs. Classical » John Lee Hooker vs. Bach • Types of Stimuli continued – Artists • Monet vs. Picasso – Internal • Hunger • Drugs • Drugs – Cocaine = left lever – Saline = right lever • Antagonist? • Other drugs? – Amphetamine? – Caffeine? • Stimulus Equivalence Training – We have seen that discrimination can sharpen stimulus control • Treat similar stimuli differently – Can we produce the opposite effect. • Train animals to treat very different stimuli similarly? • Honey and Hall (1989) • Phase 1 Group 1 Noise = Food Clicker = Food Group 2 Noise = nothing Clicker = Food • Phase 2 Noise= foot shock Noise = Foot shock • Test Clicker Clicker • Which group is more afraid of the clicker? – Group 1 • Seems a common outcome causes the rats to treat the stimuli similarly. • Common Coding – a typical equivalence experiment – Based on Urcuioli, Zentall, Jackson-Smith, and Steirn (1989) • • • • • Phase 1 (Many-to-One Matching-to- Sample) R R+GV R+GG G+RH G+R- • Phase 2 (new comparisons) • R B+Y• G Y+ B• Test (does learning transfer)? • V B Y? • H Y B? • Does Equivalence training cause stimuli to become harder to discriminate? – Based on Kaiser, Sherburne, Steirn, and Zentall (1997) • • • • • Train R R+GV R+GG G+RH G+R- • • • • • Test (discrimination) Consistent Inconsistent R+ R+ V+ VGGHH+ • Which Group learns faster? – pecks S+ 90% of the time • Sidman – True equivalence must demonstrate three concepts • 1) Reflexivity (sameness) – If A = A, B = B, C = C, and so on. • 2) Symmetry (bidirectional equivalence) – If A = B then B = A • 3) Transitivity (transfer equivalence across stimuli) – If A = B and B = C then A = C • Spoken and written speech involves these three aspects of equivalence. • Reflexivity (sameness) – Apple = Apple – Orange = Orange = = • Symmetry (bidirectional equivalence) – A(object) = B (word) – B (word) = A (object) • = Apple • Apple = • Transitivity. – If A (object) = B (spoken word) – And B (spoken word) = C (written word) – Then A (object) = C (written word) • If = • And = Apple • Then = Apple • Some have argued stimulus equivalence is a human trait – Requires language • People with good verbal skills can form equivalent relationships easily. • Those without have much more difficulty. • Animals? • Reflexivity (sameness) – Pick the thing that looks the same • Based on Zentall and Hogan (1978) • Train (Identity matching-to-sample) – R R+G– G G+R- • Test (with “novel” stimuli) –BBY –YYB • Symmetry (bidirectional equivalence) – Based on Zentall, Sherburne, and Steirn (1992) • If red = food, then food = red • If green = no food, then no food = green • Train (differential outcomes procedure) – R R+G- (food) – G G+R- (noFood) do over until correct to move on • Test – Food R G? – No Food G R? • Transitivity – Based on Steirn, Jackson-Smith and Zentall (1991) • Phase 1 (Differential Outcomes) – R R+ G- (food) – G G+ R- (no food) • Phase 2 – food B+ W– no food W+ B- • Test – R B W? – G B W? • Train (Differential Outcomes) • Phase 1 – R R+ G- (food) – G G+ R- (no food) • Phase 2 – food B+ W– no food W+ B- • Test – R B W? – G B W? • Contextual Cues and Conditional Relations – Conditioned Place Preference • Inject Rat with drug and confine to one side of chamber • Test later (next day) – Drug free – Which side do they prefer? • Heroin – Good sick? • Two groups of Thirsty Rats – Morphine Group • Inject with morphine • Place in Side 1 with Sacch. – Control • Inject with Saline • Place in Side1 with Sacch. • Test – open access – two bottles in each side • Sacch vs. Water • Results – Morphine Group? • More time in Side 1 • avoid Sacch. – Control? • Equal time each side • prefer Sacch.