Psychology of Learning

Unit 1: Foundations & Reflexive Learning

Summary

Module 01: What is Learning?

Learning is defined as an inferred change in mental state resulting from experience that influences what an organism can do. It is a hypothetical construct, inferred from performance rather than directly observed. Key distinctions separate learning from maturation, reflexes, drug effects, & temporary states. Importantly, learning ≠ performance: latent learning, motivation, & performance deficits show that knowledge may exist without immediate behavior. Biological constraints highlight prepared, unprepared, & contraprepared behaviors, demonstrating that evolution shapes what organisms can learn. Approaches to studying learning include behaviorism (observable behavior, strict control) & cognitive psychology (internal processes, intervening variables). Animal research has been central, offering control & insight, though generalization to humans requires caution. Together, these foundations establish learning as a lasting, experience‑driven capability shaped by biology & studied through complementary methods.

Module 02: Research Methods

Learning psychology relies on the scientific method, emphasizing empiricism, rationalism, & self‑correction. Goals include description, explanation, prediction, & control, under assumptions of determinism, discoverability, & parsimony. Research uses specialized equipment: Pavlov’s conditioning apparatus, Thorndike’s puzzle boxes, mazes (radial arm, Morris water maze), & Skinner boxes for operant conditioning. Variables are carefully defined: independent variables (manipulated), dependent variables (measured), & operational definitions for clarity. Control techniques like random assignment prevent confounds. Designs range from two‑group (independent vs. related), to multiple‑group, to factorial designs with multiple IVs. Statistical tools include t‑tests & ANOVA, with factorial ANOVA revealing main effects & interactions. Validity is crucial: internal validity ensures causal inference, while external validity ensures generalization. Measurement requires reliability & validity. These methods provide the rigorous framework for studying learning scientifically.

Module 03: Unlearned Adaptive Behaviors

Organisms display innate stimulus‑response connections: reflexes, tropisms, kineses, taxes, fixed action patterns, & reaction chains. These are adaptive but inflexible, highlighting the need for learning in changing environments. Habituation (decreased response to repeated stimuli) & sensitization (increased response after intense stimuli) are proto‑learning processes. Neural studies in Aplysia revealed synaptic changes underlying habituation & sensitization. The dual‑process theory explains how both processes operate simultaneously, with behavior reflecting whichever dominates. Opponent‑process theory of emotion extends these ideas to emotional experiences: initial reactions (a‑process) are followed by opposite aftereffects (b‑process), explaining phenomena like thrill‑seeking, drug tolerance, & addiction. Motivation, another hypothetical construct, energizes, directs, & maintains goal‑directed behavior. Together, these processes show how organisms adapt to stimuli & experiences, laying groundwork for classical conditioning.

Module 04: Classical Conditioning 1

Ivan Pavlov’s discovery showed that neutral stimuli can acquire power through association with unconditioned stimuli. Key terms: US, UR, CS, CR. Conditioning proceeds through acquisition (CS–US pairings), producing CRs that resemble but are not identical to URs. Factors affecting acquisition include number of pairings, US strength, & CS–US timing. Extinction occurs when CS is presented without US, but learning is not erased—spontaneous recovery shows persistence. Conditioning differs with appetitive vs. aversive USs, & impossible discrimination tasks can produce experimental neurosis. Advanced phenomena include generalization (responding to similar stimuli), discrimination (selective responding), higher‑order conditioning, sensory preconditioning, sign tracking, conditioned emotional responses, & conditioned inhibition. Classical conditioning thus demonstrates how organisms learn predictive relationships, shaping both adaptive & maladaptive behaviors.

Module 05: Classical Conditioning 2

Research revealed exceptions & refinements. Taste aversion learning violates traditional principles: it can occur after one trial, tolerate long CS–US intervals, resist extinction, & show preparedness (species‑specific associations). Cue competition effects show stimuli don’t condition independently:

• Blocking: prior CS prevents new CS learning.
• Overshadowing: salient cues dominate.
• Potentiation: odor–taste compounds enhance learning. Drug tolerance illustrates compensatory CRs opposite to URs, explaining overdose risks. Extinction is not forgetting but new inhibitory learning, evidenced by facilitated reacquisition & renewal. Theoretical accounts include:
• Pavlov’s stimulus substitution theory (S–S vs. S–R associations).
• Rescorla‑Wagner model (prediction error drives learning, explains blocking, extinction, overshadowing, overexpectation).
• Comparator hypothesis (relative predictiveness, context effects). Physiological research shows conditioning involves distributed brain systems (cerebellum, amygdala, hippocampus, insular cortex). Applications include phobia treatment (flooding, systematic desensitization), though renewal effects highlight context dependency. Classical conditioning thus emerges as a complex, biologically constrained, context‑sensitive process central to understanding associative learning.

Overall Conclusion

Across Modules 01–05, learning is revealed as a biologically grounded, scientifically studied, & theoretically complex process. From innate reflexes to sophisticated conditioning phenomena, psychology of learning demonstrates how organisms adapt, predict, & prepare for their environments. These foundations set the stage for deeper exploration of associative & cognitive learning in subsequent modules.