Introduction to Learning
Escape and avoidance
Negative reinforcement: removal of an aversive stimulus after a response.
Escape behaviour: performance of the behaviour terminates the aversive
stimulus.
Avoidance behaviour: performance of the behaviour prevents the aversive
stimulus.
Shuttle avoidance procedure.
At one end there is a light and at the other
end there is a shock. There is a safe space
that they can go to stay away from the
shock. They wanted to see how long it
would take for the animal to try and get
away from the shock.
Two-process Theory of Avoidance (Mowrer, 1947)
Two processes are involved in learning an avoidance response:
Classical conditioning of a fear response to the CS
o Light: Shock Fear
o Light Fear
In the shuttle box they would jump over the wall in the middle to try
and get away from the shock in the floor. The shock was paired with
the light meaning the dog would learn that the light meant a shock.
Operant conditioning in which moving away from the CS (light) is
negatively reinforced by a reduction in fear
o Light: climb over barrier reduction in fear
TWO PROCESS THEORY: PROBLEMS
Avoidance responses are extremely persistent – explained by anxiety
conservation hypothesis. They will continue to jump over the wall even
though there is no shock. This is because they have learnt the behaviour.
After repeated avoidance trials animals will demonstrate the avoidance
response, but no fear – Animals become less fearful, but not fearless
(Levis, 1989).
This was reliant on internal state.
One-Process theory
Rather than avoidance being based on conditioned fear, it is based on
avoidance of shock. Avoidance is reinforced by the lower rate of aversive
stimulation. The rat persists in leaping over the barrier because that
action results in a decreased rate of shock.
, This is a reinforcement process and doesn’t look at reducing internal fear.
Merckelback et al. (1996)
Phobias may affect more than 12% of the population – it is a common
“mental disorder”.
Some phobias are far more prevalent than others. For example, the fear of
spiders vs. fear of electricity.
People argue that this can be because of preparedness. It is the idea that
there is something innate that cause people to become more fearful of
one thing compared to another.
Generally early onset phobias – e.g. 5 years for spider phobia.
Animal phobias occur as infants become more independent and mobile.
This could because they tend to have more contact with the animal or
they are maybe knocked over by the animal when trying to walk.
Claustrophobia later onset (20 years): a more complex phobia.
Preparedness cannot explain all phobias
Hippocrates descry bed a patient with irrational fear of bridges.
People can be phobic for all sorts of things: pickles, antique
furniture, shoes…
Classical conditioning explanations:
Lab studies can condition fears. – Little Albert Study
38% of RTA survivors developed a phobia about driving (Kuch et al,
1994)
Mowrer (1960) suggested that after initial classical conditioning,
operant conditioning maintains phobias.
There are many other explanations:
Neoconditioning – the conditioned stimulus and the unconditioned
stimulus can be separated.
Modelling – see other people respond in a fearful way meaning that
because you have seen someone else become fearful of that thing
then so do you.
Disgust – those who have phobias also demonstrate high levels of
disgust for the thing that they have a phobia of. It is hard to
distinguish which one comes first, we just know that they occur
together. Does disgust cause the phobia or does the phobia cause
disgust?
Cognitive and judgement biases – have more negative fears of the
things that you are fearful of. Makes you judgmental of that
particular thing.
Escape and avoidance
Negative reinforcement: removal of an aversive stimulus after a response.
Escape behaviour: performance of the behaviour terminates the aversive
stimulus.
Avoidance behaviour: performance of the behaviour prevents the aversive
stimulus.
Shuttle avoidance procedure.
At one end there is a light and at the other
end there is a shock. There is a safe space
that they can go to stay away from the
shock. They wanted to see how long it
would take for the animal to try and get
away from the shock.
Two-process Theory of Avoidance (Mowrer, 1947)
Two processes are involved in learning an avoidance response:
Classical conditioning of a fear response to the CS
o Light: Shock Fear
o Light Fear
In the shuttle box they would jump over the wall in the middle to try
and get away from the shock in the floor. The shock was paired with
the light meaning the dog would learn that the light meant a shock.
Operant conditioning in which moving away from the CS (light) is
negatively reinforced by a reduction in fear
o Light: climb over barrier reduction in fear
TWO PROCESS THEORY: PROBLEMS
Avoidance responses are extremely persistent – explained by anxiety
conservation hypothesis. They will continue to jump over the wall even
though there is no shock. This is because they have learnt the behaviour.
After repeated avoidance trials animals will demonstrate the avoidance
response, but no fear – Animals become less fearful, but not fearless
(Levis, 1989).
This was reliant on internal state.
One-Process theory
Rather than avoidance being based on conditioned fear, it is based on
avoidance of shock. Avoidance is reinforced by the lower rate of aversive
stimulation. The rat persists in leaping over the barrier because that
action results in a decreased rate of shock.
, This is a reinforcement process and doesn’t look at reducing internal fear.
Merckelback et al. (1996)
Phobias may affect more than 12% of the population – it is a common
“mental disorder”.
Some phobias are far more prevalent than others. For example, the fear of
spiders vs. fear of electricity.
People argue that this can be because of preparedness. It is the idea that
there is something innate that cause people to become more fearful of
one thing compared to another.
Generally early onset phobias – e.g. 5 years for spider phobia.
Animal phobias occur as infants become more independent and mobile.
This could because they tend to have more contact with the animal or
they are maybe knocked over by the animal when trying to walk.
Claustrophobia later onset (20 years): a more complex phobia.
Preparedness cannot explain all phobias
Hippocrates descry bed a patient with irrational fear of bridges.
People can be phobic for all sorts of things: pickles, antique
furniture, shoes…
Classical conditioning explanations:
Lab studies can condition fears. – Little Albert Study
38% of RTA survivors developed a phobia about driving (Kuch et al,
1994)
Mowrer (1960) suggested that after initial classical conditioning,
operant conditioning maintains phobias.
There are many other explanations:
Neoconditioning – the conditioned stimulus and the unconditioned
stimulus can be separated.
Modelling – see other people respond in a fearful way meaning that
because you have seen someone else become fearful of that thing
then so do you.
Disgust – those who have phobias also demonstrate high levels of
disgust for the thing that they have a phobia of. It is hard to
distinguish which one comes first, we just know that they occur
together. Does disgust cause the phobia or does the phobia cause
disgust?
Cognitive and judgement biases – have more negative fears of the
things that you are fearful of. Makes you judgmental of that
particular thing.
