User:Zigli Kwadzo Prince/sandbox

= DESCRIPTION PAVLOV’S CONDITIONING EXPERIMENT AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE TO BIOPSYCHOLOGY = “Humans display more conditioned fear when the conditioned stimulus in a fear conditioning paradigm is a picture of an individual from another race than when it is a picture of an individual from their own race. These results have been interpreted in terms of a genetic ‘‘preparedness’’ to learn to fear individuals from different social groups. However, the associability of conditioned stimuli is strongly influenced by prior exposure to those or similar stimuli”. This is an epitome of classical conditioning as described by Ivan Petrovich Pavlov.

Pavlov (1849–1936), a Russian scientist, performed extensive research on dogs and is best known for his experiments in classical conditioning (a process by which we learn to associate stimuli and, consequently, to anticipate events). Pavlov came to his conclusions about how learning occurs completely by accident. Pavlov was a physiologist, not a psychologist. Pavlov’s area of interest was the digestive system (Hunt, 2007). In his studies with dogs, Pavlov surgically implanted tubes inside dogs’ cheeks to collect saliva. He then measured the amount of saliva produced in response to various foods. Over time, Pavlov (1927) observed that the dogs began to salivate not only at the taste of food, but also at the sight of food, at the sight of an empty food bowl, and even at the sound of the laboratory assistants' footsteps. Salivating to food in the mouth is reflexive, so no learning is involved. However, dogs don’t naturally salivate at the sight of an empty bowl or the sound of footsteps.

These unusual responses intrigued Pavlov, and he wondered what accounted for what he called the dogs' “psychic secretions” [https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_1214-1#:~:text=In%20a%20classic%20experiment%2C%20Pavlov,an%20unconditioned%20response%20(UR). https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_1214-1#:~:text=In%20a%20classic%20experiment%2C%20Pavlov,an%20unconditioned%20response%20(UR).]. To explore this phenomenon in an objective manner, Pavlov designed a series of carefully controlled experiments to see which stimuli would cause the dogs to salivate. He was able to train the dogs to salivate in response to stimuli that clearly had nothing to do with food, such as the sound of a bell, a light, and a touch on the leg. Through his experiments, Pavlov realized that an organism has two types of responses to its environment: unconditioned (unlearned) responses, or reflexes, and conditioned (learned) responses.

In Pavlov’s experiments, the dogs salivated each time meat powder was presented to them. The meat powder in this situation was an unconditioned stimulus (UCS): a stimulus that elicits a reflexive response in an organism. The dogs’ salivation was an unconditioned response (UCR): a natural (unlearned) reaction to a given stimulus. Before conditioning, think of the dogs’ stimulus and response like this:  Meat powder (UCS) → Salivation (UCR)

In classical conditioning, a neutral stimulus is presented immediately before an unconditioned stimulus. Pavlov would sound a tone (like ringing a bell) and then give the dogs the meat powder The tone was the neutral stimulus (NS), which is a stimulus that does not naturally elicit a response. Prior to conditioning, the dogs did not salivate when they just heard the tone because the tone had no association for the dogs. Quite simply this pairing means:

Tone (NS) + Meat Powder (UCS) → Salivation (UCR)

When Pavlov paired the tone with the meat powder over and over again, the previously neutral stimulus (the tone) also began to elicit salivation from the dogs. Thus, the neutral stimulus became the conditioned stimulus (CS), which is a stimulus that elicits a response after repeatedly being paired with an unconditioned stimulus. Eventually, the dogs began to salivate to the tone alone, just as they previously had salivated at the sound of the assistants’ footsteps. The behavior caused by the conditioned stimulus is called the conditioned response (CR). In the case of Pavlov’s dogs, they had learned to associate the tone (CS) with being fed, and they began to salivate (CR) in anticipation of food. Tone (CS) → Salivation (CR)

Classical conditioning also applies to humans, even babies. For example, Sara buys formula in blue canisters for her six-month-old daughter, Angelina. Whenever Sara takes out a formula container, Angelina gets excited, tries to reach toward the food, and most likely salivates. Classical conditioning as well extends beyond the basic need to be fed and has broader significance in the field of psychology. (Bond and Siddle 1996) have offered a latent inhibition account for the finding of stronger fear conditioning to angry versus happy or neutral faces, which had previously been interpreted as evidence for prepared learning (Ohman & Dimberg, 1978). Bond and Siddle (1996) hypothesized that humans learn more easily to fear angry than happy or neutral faces simply because angry faces are less common, and in a study with different facial expressions found evidence in support of that hypothesis.

Similar to Pavlov’s dog, classical conditioning has been used to relate the obesity and food advertisement and “Pavlov’s results have obvious implications for the present epidemic of overeating and obesity. To a high degree, this situation is stimulated by the

advertisements of the food industry with the aim of developing expectations on delicious food products. Customers in a shop serving different delicacies may in some way resemble Pavlov’s dogs, as do children in front of all those sweets presented opposite the cashier in various supermarkets”.