When it is an electric buzzer. After having read the paper referenced by Stephen
Black below, I can only conclude that it is a myth that Pavlov never used something
he
referred to as a bell. However, it was far from a prototypical bell and might today
be
(and was even then) referred to as an electric buzzer. It certainly does not seem to
be the handbell that is often pictured in reference to Pavlov's work.
>From Thomas' paper, in the first quote on p.116, from a 1906 article in the journal
Science, the ringing of the bell is referred to as "violent" which would certainly
seem a
strange word to use in regard to a bell (I can imagine wildly thrashing a bell around
in
the air). The second and third quotes are virtually worthless as they were taken in
1923 and 1928 from the ultimate secondary source, Time magazine. Although
possibly technically correct in using the term "bell" to refer to an electric bell,
the Time
source may be the source that actually began to transform the bell from a minor
stimulus among many used by Pavlov to the premier status it enjoys today as the
paradigmatic stimulus Pavlov used. The fourth quote on p. 117 of Thomas, once again
from Science, refers specifically to the "electric bell".
The coup de grace of this argument comes from the quote provided by Michael Kane
taken from "Conditioned Reflexes," (Dover publications, 1960, paperback), on p.27:
"With another dog the loud buzzing of an electric bell set going 5 to 10 seconds after
administration of food failed to establish a conditioned alimentary reflex even after
374
combinations, whereas the regular rotation of an object in front of the eyes of the
animal, the rotation beginning before the administration of food, acquired the
properties
of a conditions stimulus after only 5 combinations. The electric buzzer set going
before the administration of food established a conditioned alimentary reflex after
only
a single combination."
Notice that this stimulus is referred to interchangeably here as an electric bell and
an
electric buzzer. I think this explains why others have said they saw no indication of
the use of a bell in Pavlov's writing when the word "bell" is clearly stated here.
They
didn't notice it because it was preceded by the word "electric" and it was referred
to,
in the same paragraph, as an electric buzzer.
This is more than just a distinction without a difference. A handbell would be
pictured
as providing a discrete unitary stimulus (the ringing of the bell once). A buzzer
fits
more in with a metronome as a stimulus that continues to sound over a period of time.
Since delay conditioning is most effective when the presentation of the CS begins
before and overlaps the presentation of the US, the metronome or buzzer is a much
better example of a delay CS than the single striking of a bell.
And, of course, the electric bell was not the first or most common or prototypical
stimulus used in Pavlov's lab so the question remains: How did Pavlov's research
come to be so closely associated with something that was rarely used and how did it
come to be represented as a bell instead of as an electric buzzer?
Rick
Stephen Black writes on 8 Nov 99,:
> On Mon, 8 Nov 1999, Michael Sylvester wrote:
>
> > did Pavlov use a bell or a metronome ?
>
> I've been meaning to drop a note to TIPS on this. Everyone knows that
> Pavlov used a bell, of course. And everyone who's been on TIPS for a while
> knows that that's not true, that he never used a bell. And in fact, his
> famous work _Conditioned Reflexes_ never mentions a bell, only a metronome
> and other assorted stimuli which I'd better not list without first
> checking up on.
>
> So "Pavlov's bell" appears to be a classic psychological myth. Or is
> it? I've since discovered a great paper with further details on the
> controversy, which comes to the conclusion that Pavlov did indeed use a
> bell, and its use was reported in _Science_ in 1906. As a bonus, the paper
> relates the story of Pavlov's mugging in New York City.
>
> The reference is:
>
> Thomas, R. (1997). Correcting some Pavloviana regarding "Pavlov's
> bell" and "Pavlov's "mugging". American Journal of Psychology,
> 110, 115-125.
>
> So this is a new one for me. I've discovered that a psychological myth is
> a myth. It's nice to go the other way for once.
Dr. Rick Froman
Psychology Department
Box 3055
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.jbu.edu/sbs/psych
Office: (501)524-7295
Fax: (501)524-9548
"Happiness is not found by searching, but by researching."
