Spontaneous Recovery in Classical Conditioning

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Abstract
Introduction
Method
Training stage
Extinction stage
Spontaneous recovery
Results
Discussion
Reference

Abstract

Spontaneous recovery is the recurrence of responses associated with certain unconditioned stimuli that had faced extinction. The field of spontaneous recovery was used in history to experiment with the preferences and recurrence of preference of given tastes containing certain chemical compounds. Classical conditioning is correlative learning that takes place through a process not involving contingency between behaviors. Extinction is the diminishing probability of indicating a certain response with the withdrawal of the reinforcing stimuli. The method to be used will involve Sniffy the virtual rat simulation that works like an ordinary rat under experiment conditions. The training takes a repetitive reinforcement of responses through rewarding and negative reinforcements also referred to as punishments like exposure to electric shock. The extinction period is where the related stimuli are blocked to erase the associative relationship. Spontaneous recovery will depict even after a given number of extinction phases until the response is fully extinguished. The outcomes show that spontaneous recovery occurs even after trials of extinction. The concept of spontaneous recovery can be used to avoid the recurrence of drug addictions and in promoting learning activities. Researchers should seek to make future research on spontaneous recovery more analytical but precise.

Introduction

Spontaneous recovery as a concept under Classical conditioning; is a field related to learning and conditioning. Precisely, spontaneous recovery is the recurrence of a response (conditioned response; CR) that had been lost. The recuperation may take place after a time period of non-exposure to the conditioned stimulus (CS). The reason why it is referred to as spontaneous is that the comeback is seen to reappear out of the unknown. Spontaneous response normally takes place after the erasure or replacement of an idea; that the organism was exposed to through training but which comes back to make them behave or conduct themselves according to the initial idea that was extinguished by the introduction of new ideas among other factors (Alloway, Wilson, & Graham, 2005).

The field of spontaneous recovery has been studied in the past where rats were conditioned into preferring a taste (CS+) coupled with sucrose in the place of another taste (CS-) coupled with Saccharin. In this case, the conditioned flavor (CS-) was extinguished by presenting the new taste (CS+) flavor lacking sucrose; after this experiment, the results were replicated in a second experiment; in which the spontaneous recovery of the extinguished taste preference demonstrated values of 7,14, and 21after the date of the extinction test. This was the first clear indication of the extermination and spontaneous recovery of a habituated taste preference based on calories. This experiment played an important role in creating the understanding of the mechanism behind the conditioning of taste or certain stimuli preferences (Alloway, Wilson, & Graham, 2005).

Classical conditioning is a phrase used to explain a type of correlative learning which takes place through a process that does not include contingency between the behaviors (BH) of an animal with a biologically significant event (unconditioned stimulus, CS ). This application applies the prime example experiment done by Pavlov around 1920 in which he trained dogs to associate given tones with certain food rewards. In this type of experiment the subject depicts feeble or no response to the stimulus, it is being conditioned to (CS). An example of a conditioned stimulus is the association of certain tones with specific phenomena within the subject’s environment. However in the process of instilling the conditioned response; certain unconditioned responses take place (UR). An example of the unconditioned response that may take place during the conditioning of a subject like a dog to cognitively relate certain tones with certain food rewards; includes the (UR) of saliva production. In the process of the instruction; the conditioned stimulus is obtained together with the unconditional stimulus and as a result of the repetitive associate nature of the two. This results in the subject forming a relationship between the unconditioned and the Conditioned response. This, therefore, implies that in a successful training session the subject will portray the conditioned response (CR) like saliva production with the CS alone if the given association has been instituted and memorized. However classical conditioning is opposed to operant conditioning in which producing a behavior controls the US presentations (Alloway, Wilson, & Graham, 2005).

Extinction is used to refer to the diminishing probability of indicating given reactions when a distinctive reinforcing stimulus is no longer presented to a subject. It is a concept used in classical conditioning used to explain the decline of a conditioned reaction when a conditioned stimulus repetitively takes place; without portraying signs of the unconditioned stimulus it was previously paired with. Under Operant conditioning extinction is the reduction of an operant reaction when it is not reinforced in the company of its discriminative stimulus. In this paper the methodology and experiments are meant to support the contention that; “If a subject is presented to a given stimulus that is associated with a certain response the subject will depict the conditioned response even after the response has faced extinction” (Jukabow, 2007).

Method

In this section, the Sniffy Pro software will be used that applies the simulation of the virtual rat instead of using real rats as it is prohibited and considered as cruel treatment towards real animals. The reason for this choice is that the virtual rat software allows for operant conditioning; and that in the case of mistakes the experiment can be restarted all over again. The computer to be used is a high-performance Pentium 4 loaded with the Sniffy pro software; that is managed under the Microsoft Windows Operating System. The computer is connected to hardware that translates the signals from the sniffy box which are used as a monitoring system towards the behavioral responses made by the subject (Jukabow, 2007).

Sniffy’s chamber is formed from a box large enough to accommodate the lab rat; and is sound and light proof to avoid exposure to distracting stimuli. The operant chamber has a manipulandum that is used to perceive the occurrence of a behavioral action or response. In this case, the manipulandum constitutes of response levers that when pressed by the subject; trigger the movement of a lever that moves resulting in the closure of a switch on the opposite side. This switch is monitored by the programmed computer, which is to be used in the experiment. The sniffy chamber has a conditioning compartment that plays the role of delivering a primary reinforcement referred to as an unconditioned stimulus, which in this case are pellets of food and water. It also plays the role of registering the giving of a conditioned reinforcement that is meant to ensure the repetition of the response e.g. an LED that acts as a token (Jukabow, 2007).

The manipulanda and feeders will help investigate the psychological phenomenon under study. In this case, there are three response levers, two feeders, and a variety of devices that will be used to generate different stimuli to the subject including; sounds, lights, music, and drawings. In this case, the configuration will make use of an LCD panel that can be used to generate any stimulus desired through being operated by a computer. The operant chamber also has an electric floor so that electrical charge can be passed to the subject; or lights of different colors that communicate when the food is available. A punishment mode is also instilled that will be administered by the use of an electric shock despite the fact that previous studies have shown that it’s not very effective (Jukabow, 2007).

Training stage

When the Sniffy Pro operant software starts up Sniffy is seen exploring the chamber and grooming himself; the behavioral actions are recorded taking bar pressing as the key behavior in this experiment. Inside the Operant compartment you can visualize Sniffy changing positions by moving about and at the rear edge is the button-like bar that Sniffy is to be coached to press; a food dispenser; a water point; a loudspeaker device and a signal producing device. These items play the role of administering the food; water and generate relative signal sounds. The lab assistant window will guide through giving suggestions of what is to be done next; and there is a need to open an operant association’s window as well as a cumulative record window. The operant associations mind window displays the strength of the associative bar pressing through the depiction of the psychological processes taking place including; the sound food association; bar pressing sound association; and the action strength. There is also the cumulative record window which is helpful in observing changes in Sniffy’s bar pressing rate as a depiction of the learned associations (Gibbon, Balsam, 1981).

Normally like a real rat Sniffy will press the bar two or three times every ten minutes but this is not indicative. To train Sniffy to press the bar; you dispense a food pellet which acts as a constructive reward for every bar press immediately after the auction. This will increase the incidence with which bar pressing takes place through the shaping procedure in which you train sniffy to associate the chosen sound with a reward. This is the characteristic sound generated by the food provision mechanism; after it releases a food pellet into the food dispensing point through Magazine instruction, where you provide food pellets relative to the characteristic sound generated by the administration mechanism. After several dispensations, Sniffy will have learned to associate the sound with the availability of food in the hopper and these are shown in the Operant Associations mind window and the lab assistant window that also give suggestions of the moves to succeed. After Sniffy has learnt o associate the sound and the food pellet delivery; the Lab assistant window will show the message that It has fully acquired the association (Jukabow, 2007).

The succeeding stage is that of coaching Sniffy to push the bar. In this stage patience and careful observation are important in that you start by giving Sniffy a pellet when he rears up in front of the back wall. At this point Sniffy rears up before the buttons; there is a great possibility that he will push it. On pushing the bar he will perceive the magazine noise; is provided with a food bit and the bar-sound relation will begin developing. After numerous reinforced bar presses a message showing that the association is being created will form in the Operant associations mind window. After this Sniffy will have formed the association therefore after eating a food pellet; he will press the bar again immediately; or after rearing up near the bar once or twice. After this; progress will be seen as he will press the bar more frequently and you should not restrict him from pressing more. After the bar pressing becomes rapid and regular it shows in the rising bar sound association strength. Conclusively the Operant Associations mind window shows that Sniffy’s training is complete due to the fully established bar pressing; sound and food reward association that is achieved in him. By this stage it may be 30-45 minutes leading to a pressing rate of at least more than 20 times every five minutes. These results are presented in a graph where the Y-axis has the variable of rate of bar presses and the X (horizontal) axis shows the time taken. The slope of the graph shows the speed with which Sniffy is responding that depict the different levels of reinforcement and timely nature of the same (Gibbon, Balsam, 1981).

Extinction stage

At this point; Sniffy’s bar pressing is not associated with the specific magazine sound; and there is no dispensation of a food pellet meaning that the bar pressing behavior is not being reinforced anymore. As a result of failure to reward Sniffy’s pressing behavior; his rate of bar pressing rate declines until the pressing rate is almost that at the start of training. Nevertheless the primary consequence of extinction will show through an amplified response in Sniffy’s bar-pressing speed which is termed to as the extinction burst as a result of the change from uninterrupted fortification to extinction. Secondly the Operant association’s window shows that the bar-sound association and action strength has been eliminated however the sound-food association remains integrated because he does not receive food pellets without haring the sound. After the bar-pressing rate goes below 2.5 presses in five minute; the bar pressing behavior is considered extinguished. At this stage the time taken to reach the extinction criterion from the start of extinction as well as the number of responses in the same time is noted down. However a single extinction period is not enough to enduringly reduce the incidence of an operant response to its pre-training incidence (Gibbon, Balsam, 1981).

Spontaneous recovery

This is seen when an organism that was taken through the extinction process is allowed to rest for 24 hours in its normal environment. However the response rate at the start of a new extinction phase is higher than the ending rate of the preceding extinction phase. This shows that the rest creates the manifestation of an extinguished operant response; and is referred to as spontaneous recovery despite the fact that the new response rate is lower than that at the start of the extinction process. In this phase the organism is exposed to a spontaneous recovery conduct test in which the extinguished responses are partly reinstated. After Sniffy meets a second extinction criterion stage; the sum of time and responses is seen to be less than that in the first extinction criterion period and is the case with further extinction attempts (Jukabow, 2007).

Results

The increasing account on observing Sniffy as responding is shown in the following cumulative record.

The increasing account from observing the initial extinction progress is shown in the increasing record below.

The cumulative records covering the duration of spontaneous recovery are shown in the cumulative diagram below.

Discussion

From the study it is conclusive that spontaneous recovery as an aspect of classical conditioning and learning; is the reappearance of learnt behavior or responses; most often trained responses after their extinction with time and exposure to other stimuli that provoke different responses. From the study it is conclusive that; the extent of spontaneous recovery after extinction is greater when the interval between primary conditioning and extinction is shorter. The length of duration between extinction trials lowers the chances of renewal and spontaneous recovery. This is the case because the longer the time between the phases of extinction; directly affects the level of recovery that is to be extinguished in the successive extinction phases. Spontaneous recovery also takes place as a result of the over expectation of results of the behavior which in this case is the reward associated with the response. Spontaneous recovery levels after reversal or attempts of partial renewal; were greater than in the cases where there were no attempts of renewal. The change of environment lowers the chances of spontaneous recovery but in the short run they have a positive effect of promoting the creation of the response on return to the environment of conditioning. The rate of learning and conditioning is directly proportional to the timely response of rewarding the conditioned response and the enhancement of the rearing up actions. During the process of extinction the conditioned response may be depicted for a short time giving the implication that spontaneous recovery is taking place; but this is not the case because it is only a stage within the extinction process referred to as the extinction burst. The effectiveness of training is also directly proportional to the magnitude of spontaneous recovery regardless of the duration between the time of extinction and that of spontaneous recovery. The responses depicted under spontaneous recovery after extinction soon get completely erased; when the organism is exposed to further extinction attempts or other cognitive learning sessions that associate the primary unconditioned response to other conditioned responses. The sound food association in Sniffy remains intact and that shows that shows that the rat is able to grasp associations for longer times that are not lost with the extinction of other related associations (Jukabow, 2007).

This study greatly supports the hypothesis that the subjection of a subject to stimuli that it previously associated with certain responses; will lead to the recurrence of the given response even after extinction. This is justified by the recurrence of the conditioned response even after trials of extinction (Jukabow, 2007).

The area of application of this research study in the current society include; the areas addressing the problems of individuals who at some point in time faced the risk of drug addiction. Studies in spontaneous recovery indicate that their exposure to stimulus with strong attachments to the drug may cause the recurrence to drug addiction. An example of these strongly associated stimuli is white powder that has a close association with cocaine addictions. The field of spontaneous recovery is a useful tool in the training of different living things like dogs; parrots; and birds among other animals that are capable of learning. Spontaneous recovery is an important tool in the learning of younger learners that is best achieved when associative stimuli are involved in the learning process (Jukabow, 2007).

This study focused on the use of only one form of organism and only one of its kind; as a result the results attained may not be fully conclusive as there may be depictions of differences in the results collected from the experiment if the number of organisms used were more than one (rats); or if there was use of different classes of organisms like a rat and a bird. This study did not apply the use of negative reinforcement or punishment which is also an important tool in achieving the desired responses (Gibbon, Balsam, 1981).

Future research should be focused on studying the different rates of learning that are associated with the different organisms; so that long-term studies of spontaneous recovery get their experimentation with the organisms that give the most effective; analytical and methodological results in the shortest experimentation duration possible (Alloway, Wilson, & Graham, 2005).

Reference

Alloway, T., Wilson, G., and Graham, J. (2005). Sniffy the virtual rat: Pro version 2.0. Belmont, CA: Thomson West

Gibbon J, Balsam P. (1981).Spreading association in time. In C.M, Terrace, H., Gibbon J, (Eds.), Autoshaping and conditioning theory (pp 219-253). New York:

Jukabow, J. (2007). Review of the book Sniffy the Virtual Rat Pro Version 2.0. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 87, 317-323.

Click Here To Order Now!