Date __, 20__
Classical conditioning is an intrinsic style of learning, which occurs by generating a response made by unconditioned stimuli’s, and was produced in 1903 by Ivan Pavlov (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009). The theory behind classical conditioning is often known as one the most acceptable and oldest forms to model when learning about various human behaviors. This paper will focus on theoretical conditions and apply classical conditioning through a various examples as a means to give a better understanding. First off, it is important to understand that a scientist by the name of Pavlov discovered classical conditioning and was by sheer happenstance when examining the digestive system of canines (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009). Another man, by the name of Watson, expanded the understanding of classical conditioning, which is in direct association to the way we learn. Nonetheless, both Watson and Pavlov pioneered classical conditioning as being the main source for remedial affects with creating sound behaviors and phobias. Teachers, parents, businesses, etc. will often use classical conditioning to influence behavior in daily circumstances. For instance, a wife can influence her husband by putting the toilet seat down more consistently by knowing how to utilize classical conditioning with her spouse. One of the first principles’s discovered was a stimulus, which causes instinctive responses (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) For instances, the smell of a cooking food, can cause one to be hungry. One of the stimuli’s, which can cause an instinctive reaction, is referred to as the unconditioned stimulus (US): the food. The unconscious response to the US is referred to as the unconditioned response (UR): the hunger. The neutral stimulus is the second principle, which is not the cause of the UR, rather it is a noise related to it: such as a dinner bell (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) The dinner bell is presented just before the US is stimulated, which is referred to as the conditioned stimulus (CS). The third theory takes place after the US and CS are coupled many times with that of the CS and is usually moments sooner than the US (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) In short, the CS (dinner bell) unaccompanied will originate the hunger. The hunger response, which is similar to the response of the US (food) will cause the proper response need for the CS (dinner bell). In retrospect, the conditioned reaction (CR) has now been assimilated. The US is the reinforcer because the whole conditioning process pivots on whatever reinforcements are being utilized (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) Although in classical conditioning, the animal or person will not always have control over reinforcements, since it happens when the person who is using classical conditioning wishes for it to transpire (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) Conversely, reinforcements are not dependent on any palpable responses: therefore, the behaviors are discovered in their unique ways. Rather classical conditioning that takes place in an animal or person will learn quickly which ecological influences are supportive to its existence (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) When viewing the success of classical conditioning, it typically obtains several pairings, which encompass a US and a CS, and are measured as an association to learning. One of the key elements to associative learning is in classical conditioning, and requires a natural instinct to strengthen (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) Conditioned Fears
John B. Watson, in 1921, was an extremist in environmental determinist, who furthered Pavlov’s philosophies within the human race. Watson strongly felt that every person born had a small amount of essential emotions and reflexes (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) Additionally, his belief was that feeling and emotions were from experiences and genetics. He established that classical conditioning could originate phobias or fears when particular reflexes become coupled with several stimuli’s. Watson disputed with three fundamental emotions (rage, fear, and love) were hereditary, and that these three crucial emotions convert into distinct belongings amongst each person (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) To demonstrate this, Watson experiment on a youngster named Albert. Albert was conditioned using a steel bar, a hammer, and a white rat (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) At the beginning of the experimentation, Albert was familiarized with a white rat. He had shown no indication of anxiousness or fear when touching it or interacting with it. Following the initial interaction, Albert would reach for the white rat and then right following, a person would pound the hammer alongside a steel bar triggering Albert to violently jump back; scaring him. Over a period, Albert became accustomed to a phobia of white rats. By no means did Watson ever fully accept Pavlov’s theories of classical conditioning since he did not feel that it solely relied on reinforcement in its entirety. Rather, he thought classical conditioning emerges due to the fact that the US and CS are harmonizing repetitively and in close proximity of each other (Olson & Hergenhahn, 2009.) The frequency of being coupled together would become more durable with its association. Therefore, classical conditioning can also be utilized when removing fears. Classical Scenario
Given that classical conditioning has been influenced and utilized by parents, teachers, businesses, etc., many ordinary individuals will use classical conditioning to manipulate others into doing what they want for them. For instance, a recently married couple is sharing the only bathroom they have together. The wife is sick and tired of putting down the toilet seat every time she wants to use the bathroom. At this point, she chooses to utilize classical conditioning to influence her spouse to lowering the lid. The wife strikes up a deal: if she cooks his favorite food, he will agree by keeping the lid down. In return, the husband is obligated to make super if he leaves the lid up. The husband begins to realize this is not a fair deal and is becoming quite weary of making the dinners. On into the second week, the husband then becomes habitual about putting the lid down and thus avoids the nagging wife: leaving the wife making his favorite meal for a period of time. The US is the harassing, the UR is experiencing annoyance and making dinner for himself, and the CS is the lid to the toilet. The husband is the CR needing to put down the the lid to the toilet instinctively. When CS and US are coupled together several times, in addition to the UR of annoyance of making his own dinners, the CR is instituted when the husband becomes habitual with her initial requests. Classical Conditioning Time Chart
| | |CR+UR+CR |US+CS | | | |Leaving Lid Up |Putting Lid Down | | | |( |( | | | |Husband is badgered and is |Wife agrees to cook one of his | | | |obligated to cook meals. |favorite dinners and withdraws | | | | |badgering. | |Week One |Monday |( | | | |Tuesday | |( | | |Wednesday |( | | | |Thursday | |( | | |Friday |( | | | |Saturday | |( | | |Sunday |( | | |Week Two |Monday |( | | | |Tuesday |( | | | |Wednesday |( | | | |Thursday | |( | | |Friday | |( | | |Saturday | |( | | |Sunday | |( |
This chart displays the affects when the wife found the lid up and if she badgered her husband, she would make him fix his own meals. On the other hand, if the wife had stopped reinforcing her husband’s actions by making him fix his own meals or withdraw the badgering, the husband would fail to remember this associated pattern about putting the toilet lid down. Conclusion
In summary, classical conditioning was founded by Ivan Pavlov and expounded upon by Jon B. Watson. Coincidently, Pavlov stumbled upon classical conditioning by chance, whereas Watson utilized classical conditioning to shape associative learning. Both Watson and Pavlov pioneered classical conditioning as an accomplished aid for creating different behaviors and curing phobias. Parents, teachers, businesses, etc. will often utilize classical conditioning when manipulating certain behaviors. As displayed in the chart, a wife can influence and manipulate her spouse into classical conditioning.
Olson, M. H. & Hergenhahn, B. R. (2009). An introduction to theories of learning (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.