Some factors related to pseudo-conditioning.

Abstract

The purpose of the present experiment was to determine whether some of the principles of Pavlovian conditioning may also be operating in the process which has been called pseudoconditioning.If a series of fairly strong unconditioned stimuli is presented alone and that series is followed by a previously neutral stimulus, it is found that this previously neutral stimulus now produces a response similar to the one given to the unconditioned stimulus-this, although the two stimuli have never been paired. This phenomenon, now called pseudo-conditioning, first was observed as the result of controls which were run in some typical conditioning experiments (i,10, II,12,13,14,15). That such a modification of behavior could occur through the mere presentation of the unconditioned stimulus alone was obviously significant in the interpretation and evaluation of most conditioning experiments. Despite this fact, only an occasional investigator in the field of conditioning employed this control. The term pseudo-conditioning was not applied until 1938, when Grether (4) observed the phenomenon in experiments with monkeys, named it, and pointed out its importance. Since that time, there have been a few studies directed specifically towards determining the functional characteristics of pseudo-conditioning itself (2,3,5,6,7,8,9).Several interpretations of pseudo-conditioning have been offered, all of them being at a definitely speculative level.One hypothesis advanced by Sears (10) and supported by Harlow (5), is couched in neurological terms and assumes that the phenomenon of pseudo-conditioning is a cortical dominant, brought about, in this case, by external stimulation rather than by the hormal or visceral afferent stimulation to which the dominant is usually attributed. No experimental evidence is offered as crucial support for this theory, nor does the experiment herein reported either support or refute it.A second interpretation of pseudo-conditioning assumes that the repeated presentation of the unconditioned stimulus develops an 'attitude of expectancy' in the organism (4,6). Once this attitude of expectancy has been established, and apparently because the

Adaptive Behavior and Learning

“…An experiment by Wickens and Wickens (1942) is a neat demonstration of the role of confusion or generalization in these effects. They trained two groups of rats in a box with two chambers to run to the second chamber when shocked in the first.…”

Invertebrate Learning and Behavior Taxonomies

“…There seems to be no sufficient reason for giving it a new name" (1956, p. 85). Similarly, Wickens and Wickens (1942) have regarded pseudoconditioning as a case of true conditioning, and Kimble suggests that "pseudoconditioning may be a part of all conditioning in which a noxious stimulus is employed" (I 961, p. 62).…”

Effect of CS quality on human foot withdrawal conditioning

“…Pseudo conditioning is said to be either (1) a form of sensitization, (2) a generalization from UCS to CS, (3) a phenomenon resulting from increased attitude of expectancy (Harlow & Toltzien, 1940), or (4) a form of true conditioning (Wickens & Wickens, 1942). Increased sensitization is a more likely cause although this is mere speculation.…”