Quick question on learning
Good morning all: A student asked a question regarding the use of invisible fences. A dog wears a collar that delivers a mild shock whenever the dog crosses over the boundary and learns not to cross the boundary. Is this an example of operant or classical conditioning? I answered that it was operant conditioning (positive punishment) because the shock follows the behavior and decreases it. Just wanted to double check that my answer is correct. Thanks to those who take the time to reply. JL Edwards[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: David Wasieleski, Ph. D. [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 7:33 AMSubject: Re: need some collegial adviceWhy the qualifier other than confronting him? I believe that speaking with him after class is the best solution. You don't have to call him on the winking behavior (he may have a tic disorder; we had an undergraduate here who always looked like she was winking; turned out she had a tic disorder), but ask him about the note taking (particularly if he isn't faring well in the class). If he's being inappropriate during that meeting, you can call him on the behavior and tell him that if he isn't coming to class to learn, he needn't bother.Seems to me the reluctance to confront behavior on the part of faculty can often be taken by some students as implied consent. If you prefer, however, you can try to utilize extinction, by not reacting at all to his winking (you may not even realize that you might be glancing at him to see if he's winking, etc.), or to use punishment, by asking him whether he has something in his eye or something (in front of the class, who likely don't see his winks).That's my 3.5 cents...DavidAt 08:29 PM 3/19/01 -0800, K Jung wrote: Hi Colleagues,I have a somewhat uncomfortable situation that has developed over the past 3 class sessions. (or maybe I finally noticed it.) I have a bright male student who sits in the front (of course) and I've noticed that during my lecture he is winking at me He doesn't take notes so he is always armed and ready so to speak. I've been completely ignoring him but it doesn't seem to have the desired effect. Any suggestions other than confronting him?peace,KKitty K. Jung, MATruckee Meadows Community CollegeReno, NV Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com David T. Wasieleski, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Psychology and Counseling Valdosta State University 229-333-5620 http://chiron.valdosta.edu/dtwasieleski I am a humble monkey, sitting up in here again But then came the day I climbed out of these safe limbs... Now I am the proudest monkey you've ever seen... --Dave Matthews Band Proudest Monkey
Re: Quick question on learning
At 8:30 AM -0600 3/20/01, Jean Edwards wrote: Good morning all: A student asked a question regarding the use of "invisible" fences. A dog wears a collar that delivers a mild shock whenever the dog crosses over the boundary and learns not to cross the boundary. Is this an example of operant or classical conditioning? I answered that it was operant conditioning (positive punishment) because the shock follows the behavior and decreases it. Just wanted to double check that my answer is correct. It's both operant (punishment for a certain behavior) and classical, if you consider the association of the shock with the collar. It is good example of punishment well used, in that it is consistent, occurs immediately upon performance of the behavior, and is unlikely to be associated (via classical conditioning) with the owner. I expect however, that one of the flaws of punishment still pertains: it merely suppresses the behavior, rather than eliminating it. If it is turned off AND the dog discovers it no longer works, the previous behavior is likely to be reinstated. I would appreciate comment from others who know of evidence regarding this. -Chuck - Chuck Huff Psychology Department - Associate Professor St.Olaf College - Tutor in the Paracollege 1520 St. Olaf Avenue - 507.646.3169 Fax: 646.3774 Northfield, MN 55057-1098 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stolaf.edu/people/huff/
RE: Quick question on learning
Hi Jean, I would make a slightly different analysis of this application. My fence works by emitting an audible beep before the dog reaches the "boundary." If the dog continues to approach the boundary the collar then produces a shock. During training we were instructed to make sure that the dog experienced at least two trials in which the beep was followed by a shock. In this case the beep becomes a discriminatory stimulus for the contingency which is approach the boundary (operant response) and get shocked (punishment). (The beep also becomes a CS for the shock UCS.) The dog should learn an avoidance response (just as they do in a classic shuttle box paradigm) and stay away from the boundary. Of course my dog learned that the shock was tolerable as long as there was a squirrel, rabbit, dear, vegetation, or gravel on the other side of the barrier. Eventually (48 hours or so), he also learned to reduce or avoid the shock by jumping just as he reached the barrier. Then he would be "trapped" outside of our yard. I hope this helps. Dennis Dennis M. Goff Dept. of Psychology Randolph-Macon Woman's College Lynchburg, VA 24503 -Original Message-From: Jean Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 9:30 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Quick question on learning Good morning all: A student asked a question regarding the use of "invisible" fences. A dog wears a collar that delivers a mild shock whenever the dog crosses over the boundary and learns not to cross the boundary. Is this an example of operant or classical conditioning? I answered that it was operant conditioning (positive punishment) because the shock follows the behavior and decreases it. Just wanted to double check that my answer is correct. Thanks to those who take the time to reply. JL Edwards[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick question on learning
Dear Tipsters, Search the TIPS archives for this one! There was a long discussion of this very point some (two?) years ago. Stuart ___ Stuart J. McKelvie, Ph.D.,Phone: (819)822-9600 Department of Psychology, Extension 2402 Bishop's University, Fax: (819)822-9661 3 Route 108 East, Lennoxville, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Quebec J1M 1Z7, Canada. Bishop's University Psychology Department Web Page: http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy ___
Re: Quick question on learning
Jean, The electric collars typically give off a warning tone when the dog gets close to the fence area. I would probably argue that the tone is a discriminative stimulus, setting the occasion for the punishment of the operant. One could argue, of course, that the tone is a classically conditioned aversive stimulus eliciting a "fear" response. -- Jim At 08:30 AM 3/20/2001 -0600, Jean Edwards wrote: Good morning all: A student asked a question regarding the use of "invisible" fences. A dog wears a collar that delivers a mild shock whenever the dog crosses over the boundary and learns not to cross the boundary. Is this an example of operant or classical conditioning? I answered that it was operant conditioning (positive punishment) because the shock follows the behavior and decreases it. Just wanted to double check that my answer is correct. Thanks to those who take the time to reply. JL Edwards mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick question on learning
When an event is both classical and operant conditioning, it is called biconditioning. I think the author of the article on biconditioning is Williams. Food poisoning is another example of biconditioning. The postingestional consequences are the operant, the restaurant or the flavor associated with the food are classically conditioned. At 09:01 AM 3/20/01 -0600, Chuck Huff wrote: At 8:30 AM -0600 3/20/01, Jean Edwards wrote: Good morning all: A student asked a question regarding the use of "invisible" fences. A dog wears a collar that delivers a mild shock whenever the dog crosses over the boundary and learns not to cross the boundary. Is this an example of operant or classical conditioning? I answered that it was operant conditioning (positive punishment) because the shock follows the behavior and decreases it. Just wanted to double check that my answer is correct. It's both operant (punishment for a certain behavior) and classical, if you consider the association of the shock with the collar. It is good example of punishment well used, in that it is consistent, occurs immediately upon performance of the behavior, and is unlikely to be associated (via classical conditioning) with the owner. I expect however, that one of the flaws of punishment still pertains: it merely suppresses the behavior, rather than eliminating it. If it is turned off AND the dog discovers it no longer works, the previous behavior is likely to be reinstated. I would appreciate comment from others who know of evidence regarding this. -Chuck - Chuck Huff Psychology Department - Associate Professor St.Olaf College - Tutor in the Paracollege 1520 St. Olaf Avenue - 507.646.3169 Fax: 646.3774 Northfield, MN 55057-1098 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stolaf.edu/people/huff/ *** Dr. Joyce Johnson Assistant Professor of Psychology Developmental/ Experimental Centenary College of Louisiana PO Box 41188 2911 Centenary Blvd. Shreveport, LA 71134-1188 homepage: http://www.centenary.edu/~jjohnson office 318 869 5253 FAX 318 869 5004 Attn: Dr Johnson, Psychology
Re: Quick question on learning
At 09:01 AM 3/20/01 -0600, Chuck Huff wrote, with respect to invisible dog fences: It's both operant (punishment for a certain behavior) and classical, if you consider the association of the shock with the collar. The latter would be true if the collar is only used in the context in which the dog is likely to get zapped. If the dog always wears the collar (which would protect against an unpredictable bolt through the front door), it wouldn't seem that there would be an association for the dog between the collar and the shock. Of course, other stimuli in the yard environment that predict shock may be classically conditioned here. -Mike Michael J. Kane Department of Psychology P.O. Box 26164 University of North Carolina at Greensboro Greensboro, NC 27402-6164 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 336-256-1022 fax: 336-334-5066
Re: Quick question on learning
At 8:30 AM -0600 3/20/01, Jean Edwards wrote: Good morning all: A student asked a question regarding the use of "invisible" fences. A dog wears a collar that delivers a mild shock whenever the dog crosses over the boundary and learns not to cross the boundary. Is this an example of operant or classical conditioning? I answered that it was operant conditioning (positive punishment) because the shock follows the behavior and decreases it. Just wanted to double check that my answer is correct. Thanks to those who take the time to reply. JL Edwards The correct answer is: yes. _Both_ operant and classical (respondent) conditioning are involved. The initial effect is probably respondent: the pain of the shock elicits reflexes which then become conditioned responses elicited by stimuli paired with the shock (e.g., the sight of the fence). Then, behaviors which avoid the shock are negatively reinforced (turning away from the fence) and behaviors which result in contact with it are punished by their consequences. * PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Psychology Dept Minnesota State University, Mankato * * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * *http://www.mankato.msus.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html*
Re: Quick question on learning
- Chuck Huff wrote: I expect however, that one of the flaws of punishment still pertains: it merely suppresses the behavior, rather than eliminating it. If it is turned off AND the dog discovers it no longer works, the previous behavior is likely to be reinstated. I would appreciate comment from others who know of evidence regarding this. As a long-time Invisible Fence user, I can attest that, indeed, some dogs frequently "test" to see if it's still working, and the minute the battery dies, they're off in a flash. Ditto if the system fails because of power failure, accidentally cutting the wire, etc. (Sadly, that happened to one of our dogs who ran into the road and, well, you can figure the rest...) Many of the systems now have alerts built in to let you know if they're not working. And the Invisible Fence people recommend you be on a "battery program" so that you are automatically sent a new battery for the collar every three months or however often you need it. (They're very helpful working with you to make sure the system works. Nice folks.) But having the behavior (leaving the yard) be reinstated isn't a problem. The second you put a new battery in (or fix whatever is wrong with the system) you bring the dog back near the boundary, and he hears the signal warning him. The dog immediately knows he's back to Square One behaviorally speaking and doesn't really need to be retrained. I'm a huge fan of this system, and always use it in class as an example of conditioning. Beth Benoit Daniel Webster College College for Lifelong Learning Portsmouth NH campuses
