Question

What are the implications of assuming that animals can learn R-O associations in an instrumental conditioning procedure? Describe a real experiment providing evidence of R-O associations in nonhuman animals. Indicate how S, R, and O might organize hierarchically. Give a laboratory example and a daily-life example of such hierarchical organization.

Answer 1

• O cannot be predicted from S alone; rather, S is followed by O only if R occurs
• -The animal has a mental representation of the outcome (makes response in order to produce the outcome)
• Know of/are familiar with the outcome- goal is to orient this response;Typical in nature
• Experiment by Colwill and Rescorla (1986):
• -Rats as subjects
• -Two R's (pushing a vertical rod either to the left or right) and two O's (food pellets and sugar solution)
• - One of the O's is devalued
• Results: The R that was reinforced by the devalued O decreased at test
• In this experiment, the authors trained their rats to make two different instrumental actions each for a different reinforcer according to the same VI schedule of reinforcement. Following instrumental training of these two different R-O pairs, one of the outcomes was then devalued by pairing it (in the absence of the opportunity to engage in instrumental responding) with LiCl.
• After the animals stopped consuming the outcome that was devalued, the rats were tested on both instrumental responses under extinction conditions (i.e., no reinforcers were delivered in these tests). They observed that that response whose paired outcome had been devalued occurred at a lower rate than the response whose paired outcome was still valued. In addition, the response whose outcome had been devalued occurred at a non-zero level, indicating that the reinforcer devaluation effect was not complete (there was still some residual responding even after outcome devaluation).
• These results have been taken to mean that R-O associations can be learned during instrumental conditioning, and that S-R association may also be learned. The first conclusion is justified by the observation of differential responding depending upon the different outcome values, and the second is justified on the basis of the fact that there was residual responding.
• The contextual stimuli (S) are assumed to activate the R-O association
  *S does not directly activate R
  *S activates the R-O association (this in turn motivates R)
• Conditional relation is learned: S(R-O)
  *Also called occasion setting
• Lab example-: A blinking light (S) signals that pressing a lever (R) will result in the presentation of food (O) to a rat in a Skinner box- the light (S) does not automatically elicit the pressing of the lever (R)
• Daily life example: A phone ringing (S) signals that picking it up and saying "hello?" (R) will be followed by somebody's voice on the speaker (O)- the ring (S) does not automatically elicit picking up the phone (R)