Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
333 FINAL;
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| restitution overcorrection | Requiring the disruptor to correct the consequence of his misbehavior by having him restore the situation to a state vastly improved from that which existed before the disruption EX: cleaning up the mess of spilled milk and the entire table. |
| positive practice overcorrection | Requires the disruptor to practice an appropriate alternative response several times EX: practice walking in a straight line down the hallway |
| avoidance behavior | Engagement in a behavior that allows one to prevent contact with the aversive stimulus. Student brings all of his books with him EX(does not go to locker) in order to avoid being bullied. |
| escape behavior | Engagement in a behavior to terminate an aversive stimulus that has already begun. EX: Walking out of a boring lecture. Coming inside from the cold and wet day. |
| mower's two factor theory of avoidance | factor 1- classical conditioning produces a response. bully (NS): hit (US)--fear(UR), bully (CS)-- fear (CR). Factor 2:operant conditioning maintains the response. Thinks about bully(DS), gets books now(response)--reduction in fear(conseq.) |
| one process theory | Avoidance equates to decreased exposure to an aversive stimulus. The behavior of avoidance is negatively reinforced and we should not assume that the feeling of fear is negatively reinforced |
| shuttle avoidance procedure | first escapes shock then learns to avoid shock |
| animal avoidance and human phobias | Humans avoid both the US (being beat) and the CS (bullies). Animals only seem to avoid the US (being shocked). Animals – the avoidance does not condition as quickly. |
| Stampfl (1987) conveyor belt study | Shock in dark place.ran back after getting near darker walls. Learned that running back would stop the CB. 2nd trial, learned that u run back 10 times to stop the CB. Jump off the CB early in order to stop,run a shorter distance,less effort to avoid. |
| Results of the conveyor belt study | under these conditions 1 – Avoided the CS and the US 2 – Only required 1 trial for avoidance to occur. 3 – Avoidance occurred on every subsequent trial – approximately 1,000 times. |
| concurrent schedule of reinforcement | Two schedules are in effect at the same time and the subject is free to switch from one response alternative to the other |
| matching law | Law is a mathematical statement describing the relationship between the rate of responding and the rate of reward. Developed by Herrnstein. If a behavior is reinforced 70% of the time then that behavior is likely to be chosen 70% of the time. |
| Human example of matching law (conger & killen) | 3 college students in one group. Discussed drug use. 2 confederates and 1 subject per group. Confederate 1 = provide reinforcement “Yeah, that’s a good point”, 82% of the time. Confederate 2 = provide reinforcement only 38% of the time. |
| results of human example | Subject spent 78% of the time talking with con. 1. Subject spent 29% of the time talking with con. 2. After 15 minutes conf. 1 and 2 changed frequency of reinforcement (confederate 2 provided more).Subject followed and changed pattern of conversation. |
| overmatching | higher rate of responding for the better of the two schedules than the matching law predicts Example – Respond to lever A 80% of the time even though the law predicts 70% of the time. |
| Why does overmatching occur? | occurs when it is costly for a subject to switch to the less preferred response alternative. Slot machines are on opposite sides of the casino = Spend more time (than predicted) at the one with the more frequent payoff. |
| undermatching | Responses made by the subject are less than expected based upon the rate of reinforcement. Even though predicted rate is 70% only chose 50% |
| why does undermatching occur? | there is little effort involved in switching back and forth. Slot machines are right next to one another. you maximize your chances of winning on both machines by rapidly switching back and forth. |
| Bias | subject may have a special preference(more highly valued reinforcer) for one of the choices. a rat may prefer the R lever over the L lever or a pigeon may prefer a red key over a green key |
| Ratio versus interval schedules | animals do not match when given concurrent ratio schedules. Instead they respond solely to the schedule with the lower response effort ratio. Example – FR 4 versus FR 6 – Which one? |
| what impacts our ability to delay gratification | maturation and experience, stress levels, disability, and structures that include subgoals. |
| Social facilitation | Seeing others behavior prompts us to do something we already know how to do. |
| true imitation | By watching another we learn a new behavior that we have never performed before. |
| self efficiency | Individual is also more likely to engage in a behavior if they believe that they have the skills to engage in the behavior and impact an outcome. |
| Bobo doll studies | Multiple groups of boys and girls Observed person hitting doll Film of person hitting doll Person in cat costume hitting doll Nothing (control) Reinforcement or punishment occurred. provided time with child by placing them in a room with the doll. |
| Bobo doll study results | experimental groups hit doll more than the control group. Boys were more likely to be aggressive then girls. Male models produced more hitting imitation. |
Created by:
amac
Popular Psychology sets