Classical Conditioning Learning & Memory Arlo Clark-Foos What - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
classical conditioning
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Classical Conditioning Learning & Memory Arlo Clark-Foos What - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jun 18, 2023 370 likes •780 views

Classical Conditioning Learning & Memory Arlo Clark-Foos What is classical conditioning? Learning to associate previously neutral stimuli with the subsequent events. Howard Eichenbaums Thanksgiving Pavlovs psychic secretion

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Classical Conditioning

Learning & Memory Arlo Clark-Foos

slide-2
SLIDE 2

What is classical conditioning?

  • Learning to associate previously neutral

stimuli with the subsequent events.

  • Howard Eichenbaum’s Thanksgiving

Pavlov’s psychic secretion

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Are you conditioned?

  • Some examples of every day

conditioning…

– Holiday Traditions – Food Associations – Fears – Superstitions – Habits – Skills?

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Ivan Pavlov

  • How are digestive fluids controlled?

– Historical view – Pavlov’s view – Pavlov’s Original Experiment

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Pavlov’s Experiments

  • Psychic Secretion

– Specialized procedure for introducing food

  • Claude Bernard’s psychic secretion in horses

– Pavlov’s psychic secretion was unreliable but…

Pavlov Museum, Ryazan, Russia

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Stimuli and Responses

This is appetitive

  • conditioning. What is an

example of aversive conditioning?

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Conditioned Emotional Response

Estes & Skinner

(Dudai, Jan, Byers, Quinn, & Benzer, 1976) (Domjan, Lyons, North, & Bruell, 1986) Appetitive

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Slapping and Blinking in the Name of Research

Clark Hull Ernest Hilgard Electromyography (EMG) Photo Sensors Very well studied

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Rabbit Eyeblink Conditioning

reactive predictive

slide-10
SLIDE 10

It gets more complicated…

  • Similarity among species
  • Tolerance, compensatory responses, and homeostasis
  • Stimulus Timing and Presentation

– Contemporaneous Presentation

  • Not spaced too far apart in time

– Is there an ideal spacing?

– Order and Consistency

  • Reliable relationship/expectation
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Conditioning Procedures

Forward Conditioning

Interstimulus Interval Intertrial Interval

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Learning Not to Respond

Conditioned Inhibition: Decrease in CR in response to CS.

– Need Baseline

CS+1(Tone)  US CS-2(Light)  CS1 ? CS2 ? Baseline CS1 + CS2  CRs diminish

  • ver time as CS-

inhibits CS+

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Transfer of Learning

  • Generalization
  • Discrimination

CS(Tone,1200mHz)  US CS800mHz  CR CS1200mHz  Max CR CS1600mHz  CR CS(Tone,300mHz)  CS(Tone,500mHz)  US CS(Tone,800mHz)  CS300mHz CS500mHz  CR CS800mHz

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Context as CS

  • Penick & Solomon (1991)

– Eyeblink conditioning in rats – Hippocampal Lesions

Transfer Appropriate Processing & Encoding Specificity

slide-15
SLIDE 15

What is being conditioned?

  • How is it learned and what is the nature of the

association?

slide-16
SLIDE 16

S-S or S-R Association?

  • Stimulus Substitution Theory (Pavlov)

– Definition (S-R Association) – US, CS, and Response centers in the brain – Problem: a CR is not a UR

  • CR eyeblink is often more gradual and less complete

US

Response

CS

S-R Association S-S Association

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Rescorla (1973)

US Devaluation

Less CR after US devaluation. S-S Association

Conditioned Suppression (Light/CS + Loud Noise/US) Lever  Reward Habituate Noise Lever + Light?

US

Response

CS S-R Association

S-S Association

slide-18
SLIDE 18

After Conditioning

  • After learning, what happens when you

present the CS alone?

Extinction

slide-19
SLIDE 19

What happens in extinction?

  • What do we (researchers) see?

– No CR = Forgetting? – Excitatory and Inhibitory Associations (Pavlov)

  • CC
  • Extinction

Human eyeblink conditioning and the reduction in responses during extinction.

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Extinction = Forgetting?

  • Spontaneous Recovery

– Pavlov: Inhibitory connections are weak, fade – Alt. Theory: Attention/Interest in CS (habituation?)

Human eyeblink conditioning and the reduction in responses during extinction.

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Extinction = Forgetting?

  • Disinhibition

– Surprising, typically arousing, new stimulus – Return of CR (akin to sensitization)

  • Rapid Reacquisition

– Retraining vs. Original Conditioning – Something is retained Extinction is NOT Forgetting

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Compound Conditioning

  • Context, Multiple Cues

– Extinction: “respond” and “don’t respond”

  • Overshadowing

– Salience

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Error Correction

  • Problems with Aristotle’s contiguity
  • Informational value of cues
  • Kamin’s (1969)

Compound conditioning

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Rescorla-Wagner (1972)

  • Learning on Trains

– Contiguity is not enough

  • Competition for associative strength
  • Prediction Error

– Positive vs. Negative prediction errors – Error-correction learning

slide-25
SLIDE 25

R-W in Humans

  • Error Correction in Human Category Learning

– Bower & Trabasso, 1964

  • Informational value of dot
slide-26
SLIDE 26

Modelling Conditioning

  • Associative Weights

– Connectionist Models (e.g., McClelland & Rumelhart)

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Pay Attention!

  • Exposure to CS alone retards later learning

– Attention to stimuli – Latent inhibition

  • Lubow & Moore (1959)

– Sheep and Goats

  • Where is the surprise?

– US Modulation Theory

  • Prediction error (Rescorla & Wagner, 1972)

– CS Modulation Theory

  • Attention to stimuli (Mackintosh, 1975)
slide-28
SLIDE 28

Properties of C Conditioning

  • It takes time

– 4-5 mo., no eyeblink conditioning in first block but exposure necessary for later learning.

  • Other Factors

– Intensity of CS-US – Timing, ISI

Ivkovich et al., 1999

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Intensity of CS-US

  • Faster and More effective

US Intensity Decreased US Intensity Maintained

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Timing, ISI

  • Timing is critical!

– Ideal ISI for rapid learning – Humans = Animals

Pavlov observed no CRs with Backward Conditioning: CS does not predict US. Animals must be learning association AND temporal contiguity

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Taste Aversion (Garcia Effect)

  • Temporal Contiguity

– Food poisoning after a date…

  • Belongingness: CS-US pairings.

– Tone + Food  Shock or Poison – (Garcia & Koelling, 1966)

  • Neurological basis: gustatory cortex
  • Coyotes (Gustavson et al., 1974)
slide-32
SLIDE 32

Neural Basis in Mammals

  • Cerebellum

– Purkinje cells

  • Inhibitory connection to

interpositus nucleus

– Interpositus nucleus

  • CR output pathway
  • Error correction
  • Brain Stem

– Pontine nuclei (CS)

  • Specialized sensory processing

– Inferior Olive (US)

  • Activates interpositus nucleus and

Purkinje cells

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Neural Bases of CC

A simpler diagram of Rabbit eyeblink conditioning

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Cerebellum

  • Electrical activity
  • Stimulating the inferior olive

– Even specific tones, lights, etc. – Substitute for actual US

  • CC impaired after damage

Purkinje cells

slide-35
SLIDE 35

CS Modulation

  • Latent inhibition not explained by RW
  • Mackintosh (1975)

– Salience of Sensory cues – Hippocampus

  • Animals without do NOT

show latent inhibition

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Back to Aplysia

slide-37
SLIDE 37

CC in Aplysia

  • 1. Aplysia and Eric Kandel
slide-38
SLIDE 38

Neural Bases of CC

In the long run, it’s all just LTP

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Proteins

  • Two routes to long lasting memory

– Activate CREB-1

  • Synaptic growth

– Deactivate CREB-2

  • Rapid learning
slide-40
SLIDE 40

Addiction and Tolerance

  • Homeostasis and compensatory responses

– Environmental cues as CS

  • Reducing reliance on drugs?

+ +