1 / 23

Reinforcement & Punishment: What is an S R ?

Reinforcement & Punishment: What is an S R ?. Lesson 11. What is an S R ?. Thorndike’s Law of Effect Satisfiers & annoyers Skinner determined by how B changes reinforcer:  B punisher:  B Primary reinforcers & punishers biologically important stimuli ~.

abel
Download Presentation

Reinforcement & Punishment: What is an S R ?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Reinforcement & Punishment: What is an SR? Lesson 11

  2. What is an SR? • Thorndike’s Law of Effect • Satisfiers & annoyers • Skinner • determined by how B changes • reinforcer:  B • punisher:  B • Primary reinforcers & punishers • biologically important stimuli ~

  3. What is an SR? (continued) • Secondary reinforcers & punishers • money • praise • How do they become an SR? • Classical Conditioning • Higher order learning ~

  4. Drive Reduction View (50s & 60s) • Similar to Law of Readiness • Relative state of deprivation required • for a basic drive • thought to always be true •  Drive  motivation B  reduction of drive state (SR) ~

  5. Sensory reinforcement • Sensory stimulus unrelated to biological drive • monkeys learn response • reward is watching toy train • rats learn to bar press • reward = turning on a light • or turning off light ~

  6. Premack Principle • Commonly used in educational setting • impractical or unethical to use food • Thought of reinforcers as responses • press bar  eating response • wider application of I/O conditioning • Differential probability principle • High probability responses reinforce low probability responses ~

  7. Premack Principle • Homme et al (1963) • Unruly 3 year olds • High probability behaviors • ignored teacher • screaming • pushing furniture • Low probability behavior • sitting quietly ~

  8. Premack Principle: Homme et al • Rewarded sitting quietly with... • 3 min of running around screaming • Results: sitting quietly increased • Particular behaviors observed by different kids • different responses effective reinforcers for different kids ~

  9. Premack Principle • Charlop, Kurtz, & Casey (1990) • autistic children • High probability behaviors • echolalia • perseveration • Low probability behaviors • adding up coins • judging objects: same or different ~

  10. food RFT Premack Principle: Charlop et al 100 80 echolalia RFT % correct responses 60 40 # of sessions

  11. Premack Principle: Problems • Fluctuation of response probabilities • e.g., sometimes kid would rather play outside than play video games • Solution: token economies • Reinforcer value not absolute • Individuals differ • Can change with context ~

  12. Behavioral Regulation Approach • Response deprivation • limit access to a response • does not require high vs. low probability • Behavioral homeostasis • preferred distribution of activities • operant conditioning imposes limits • behavioral bliss point • e.g., time spent studying vs. video games ~

  13. Behavioral Regulation Approach • A behavior is limited below bliss point • disturbance of behavioral homeostasis • analogous to increased biological drive • Contingency set during I/O procedure • establish relationship between responses • B  move toward bliss point (baseline) ~

  14. Behavioral Regulation Approach • Low probability behaviors as reinforcers • observe baseline rate of behavior • limit activity below baseline • Require a response to engage in deprived behavior • contingency • Increase toward bliss point • cost vs. benefits determines how much ~

  15. What Becomes Connected? • Skinner? • refused to consider associations • Thorndike: S-R view (SD-B) • association b/n stimulus context and response • NOT the outcome (SR) • no representation of reinforcer ~

  16. S-R-O (SD-B-SR) view: Tinkelpaugh (1928) • Goal-oriented responding • respond with idea of getting reward • The monkey and the hidden banana • 2 cups, put banana under 1 • task: choose cup with banana • Secretly substituted rotten lettuce • monkey became agitated • Expected banana reward (outcome) ~

  17. S-R vs. S-R-O • Adams & Dickinson (1981) • Taste aversion paradigm • Associate sucrose (sweetner) • w/ lithium chloride (LiCl)  illness • Will rats press bar to get something that makes them sick? ~

  18. S-R vs. S-R-O • Phase 1: • Trained rats to bar press for sucrose • Phase 2: • associate sucrose w/ illness • Phase 3: • Will rats press bar now? • No sucrose delivered ~

  19. S-R vs. S-R-O : Results • Predictions? • If S-R-O • If S-R • Results • Rats did not press bar • Supports S-R-O ~

  20. S-R vs. S-R-O • Use different levels of training • Phase 1: Same procedure but… • some get 100 RFTs • some get 500 RFTs ~

  21. Results & Conclusions • Less training  low response rate • Little training  outcome important • S-R-O • Extensive training  high response rate • outcome less important • response is well established • S-R ~

  22. Parallel learning in humans • Learning a skill • e.g., to drive a car • Early trials • consider consequences • must think about what you are doing • After extensive experience • becomes automatic • after many trials ~

  23. Extrinsic Reward vs Intrinsic Motivation • Early trials • expectation of reinforcer • extrinsic reward • CER = positive affect • Well-established behavior • no expectation of reward • intrinsic motivation • CER = positive affect ~

More Related