Classical Conditioning.
● Classical conditioning (CC) is a form of learning in which
behaviour is acquired through association.
● It stems from behaviourist psychology so it assumes that
humans are born as a tabula rasa (a blank slate) and that
behaviour can be learned and unlearned through experience.
● Only observable behaviour can be scientifically measured,
typically through controlled laboratory experiments, and
animal behaviour can provide insight into human learning.
● One of the most influential demonstrations of CC was Pavlov’s
experiment with dogs.
● Initially, food was introduced to a dog and acted as an
unconditioned stimulus (UCS), producing the unconditioned
response (UCR) of salivation.
● The bell, a neutral stimulus (NS), initially produced no
response.
● After repeated pairings of the NS with the UCS, the dog
learned to associate the two.
● The NS became a conditioned stimulus (CS), producing a
conditioned response (CR) of salivation.
● Conditioning had occurred once the dog responded to the bell
alone.
● Several factors affect classical conditioning.
● Extinction occurs when the CS is repeatedly presented without
the UCS, causing the CR to disappear.
● Spontaneous recovery is when the CR and UCS are paired
together following extinction, resulting in a much faster
association.
, ● Stimulus generalisation occurs when similar stimuli to the CS
also produce the CR.
● Finally, timing is crucial, as a long interval between the NS and
UCS may prevent conditioning.
A strength of CC is that it is highly scientific. Pavlov’s experiments
were conducted under controlled laboratory conditions, allowing
precise measurement of the relationship between stimuli and
responses. Using animals reduces demand characteristics, as they
cannot consciously alter their behaviour to fit expectations. Pavlov
measured salivation systematically, ensuring that any changes were
due to the conditioning process rather than extraneous factors.
Therefore, classical conditioning provides a reliable and valid
explanation for learned behaviour, demonstrating that associations
between stimuli and responses can be objectively studied.
Another strength of CC is that it has significant practical
applications. Understanding classical conditioning has informed
treatments for phobias, such as systematic desensitisation, where a
conditioned fear response is gradually replaced with relaxation.
Therapists use repeated exposure and relaxation techniques to
weaken the association between a feared stimulus (CS) and fear
(CR), helping individuals manage anxiety effectively. This shows
that CC is not only a theoretical framework but also highly useful in
real-life settings, enhancing its value as an approach.
However, findings from animal studies may lack generalisability to
humans. Humans have more complex cognition and different
survival needs compared to animals. Seligman (1970) suggested
animals more readily form associations that are significant for
survival, which may not reflect human learning processes. For
, instance, humans may develop phobias of objects they have never
encountered, which cannot be explained by simple Pavlovian
associations in animals. Therefore, while animal studies provide
valuable insights, CC may not fully explain human behaviour,
limiting the external validity of the approach.
Another limitation of classical conditioning is that it is
environmentally deterministic. The approach assumes all behaviour
is learned through association, leaving no role for free will or
conscious decision-making. CC cannot account for why some
people do not develop phobias despite repeated exposure, or why
humans sometimes act against learned associations. This suggests
that CC provides a limited explanation of human behaviour, as it
ignores individual differences and internal cognitive processes.
Therefore, limiting CC’s explanatory power as an explanation of
behaviour.
● Classical conditioning (CC) is a form of learning in which
behaviour is acquired through association.
● It stems from behaviourist psychology so it assumes that
humans are born as a tabula rasa (a blank slate) and that
behaviour can be learned and unlearned through experience.
● Only observable behaviour can be scientifically measured,
typically through controlled laboratory experiments, and
animal behaviour can provide insight into human learning.
● One of the most influential demonstrations of CC was Pavlov’s
experiment with dogs.
● Initially, food was introduced to a dog and acted as an
unconditioned stimulus (UCS), producing the unconditioned
response (UCR) of salivation.
● The bell, a neutral stimulus (NS), initially produced no
response.
● After repeated pairings of the NS with the UCS, the dog
learned to associate the two.
● The NS became a conditioned stimulus (CS), producing a
conditioned response (CR) of salivation.
● Conditioning had occurred once the dog responded to the bell
alone.
● Several factors affect classical conditioning.
● Extinction occurs when the CS is repeatedly presented without
the UCS, causing the CR to disappear.
● Spontaneous recovery is when the CR and UCS are paired
together following extinction, resulting in a much faster
association.
, ● Stimulus generalisation occurs when similar stimuli to the CS
also produce the CR.
● Finally, timing is crucial, as a long interval between the NS and
UCS may prevent conditioning.
A strength of CC is that it is highly scientific. Pavlov’s experiments
were conducted under controlled laboratory conditions, allowing
precise measurement of the relationship between stimuli and
responses. Using animals reduces demand characteristics, as they
cannot consciously alter their behaviour to fit expectations. Pavlov
measured salivation systematically, ensuring that any changes were
due to the conditioning process rather than extraneous factors.
Therefore, classical conditioning provides a reliable and valid
explanation for learned behaviour, demonstrating that associations
between stimuli and responses can be objectively studied.
Another strength of CC is that it has significant practical
applications. Understanding classical conditioning has informed
treatments for phobias, such as systematic desensitisation, where a
conditioned fear response is gradually replaced with relaxation.
Therapists use repeated exposure and relaxation techniques to
weaken the association between a feared stimulus (CS) and fear
(CR), helping individuals manage anxiety effectively. This shows
that CC is not only a theoretical framework but also highly useful in
real-life settings, enhancing its value as an approach.
However, findings from animal studies may lack generalisability to
humans. Humans have more complex cognition and different
survival needs compared to animals. Seligman (1970) suggested
animals more readily form associations that are significant for
survival, which may not reflect human learning processes. For
, instance, humans may develop phobias of objects they have never
encountered, which cannot be explained by simple Pavlovian
associations in animals. Therefore, while animal studies provide
valuable insights, CC may not fully explain human behaviour,
limiting the external validity of the approach.
Another limitation of classical conditioning is that it is
environmentally deterministic. The approach assumes all behaviour
is learned through association, leaving no role for free will or
conscious decision-making. CC cannot account for why some
people do not develop phobias despite repeated exposure, or why
humans sometimes act against learned associations. This suggests
that CC provides a limited explanation of human behaviour, as it
ignores individual differences and internal cognitive processes.
Therefore, limiting CC’s explanatory power as an explanation of
behaviour.
