Pavlov's Dawg

Jump to: navigation, search
Pavlov's Dawg
One of Pavlov’s dawgs with a sizzurgically implanted crunk cup to measure salivizzle cuz bitches aint nothin' but hos and tricks.

Yo dawg, clizzassical conditionizzle (AKA Pavlovian conditionizzle AKA Pavlovian reinfizzle) is a form of associative fizzle that was first dropped by a triple OG named Ivan Pavlov, AKA Fly-Ass Julius III.[1] That's right nigga you can't fuck with South Central, cuz the procedure for inducing clizzassical conditionizzle involves dropping neutral stimulizzle with 40's and blunts, kid. The neutral stimulizzle could be any event that does not result in any organizzle pullin' out gatts and shit. That OG Pavlov, who wasn't just some house nigga, stayed referrin' to 'dis as a conditionizzled stimulizzle (CS). Conversizzle, the significant stimulizzle brings the ruckus with an innate, often reflexive, responsizzle, aight? My nigga Pavlov called these the unconditionizzled stimulizzle (US) and unconditionizzled responsizzle (UR), respectivizzle. If the motherfuckin' CS and the US play each other close like butter played toast, the two stimulizzle get associated and the CS becomes like crunk juice for the organizzle. And my nigga Pavlov was rollin' on 28's screamin' "fuck the po-lice" when he called 'dis the conditionizzled responsizzle my nizzle (CRMN).

Word up, popular forms of clizzasical conditionizzle that be kickin' street tales of neural structures and functions that underlie knowledge-droppin' and rhymin' include fear conditionizzle, eyeblink conditionizzle, and the foot contraction conditionizzle of Hermissenda crassicornis, AKA Moosebumps.

For real my nigga, the originizzle example of clizzasical conditionizzle involved the salivary conditionizzle of Pavlov's pitbulls. During his resizzle on the phyziology of digestion in pitbulls, my nigga Pavlov noticed that, rather than simply salivating in the presence of meat powdizzle (an innate responsizzle to dawg fizzle that he called the unconditionizzled responsizzle), the pitbulls began to salivizzle in the presence of the lab technizzle who normally fed them, aight? Pavlov called these psychic secretions, cuz ya'll niggas can't fuck with Death Row. From 'dis observizzle he predizzled that, if a particular stimulizzle in the dawg’s surroundings were present when the dawg be presented with meat powdizzle, then 'dis stimulizzle would become associated with dawg fizzle and cause salivizzle on its own. In his initial experiment, that OG Pavlov used a metronizzle to call the pitbulls to their dawg fizzle and, after a few repetitions, the pitbulls started to salivizzle in response to the metronizzle. Thus, a neutral stimulizzle (metronizzle) became a conditionizzled stimulizzle (CS) as a result of consistent pairing with the unconditionizzled stimulizzle (US - meat powdizzle in 'dis example). Pavlov be referrin' to 'dis learned relationship as a conditionizzle reflex (now called conditionizzled responsizzle). Shoutout to my nigga Hermann Ebbinghaus.


[edit] Types, cuz ya'll niggas don't know about Long Beach

Diagrizzle representing forward conditionizzle, my nizzle. The time intervizzle increases from left to right, for shortyrock with the apple-bottom jeans.

Forwizzle conditionizzle: During forward conditionizzle the onset of the CS precedes the onset of the US. Two common forms of forward conditionizzle are delay and trace conditionizzle.

Delay conditionizzle: In delay conditionizzle the CS is presented and is overlapped by the presentizzle of the US

Trace conditionizzle: During trace conditionizzle the CS and US do not overlap. Instead, the CS is presented, a period of time is allowed to elapse during which no stimuli are presented, and then the US is presented. The stimulizzle free period is called the trace intervizzle. It may also be called the "conditionizzle intervizzle"

Simultizzle conditionizzle: During simultizzle conditionizzle, the CS and US are presented and terminated at the same time, my nigga.

Backward conditionizzle: Backward conditionizzle occurs when a conditionizzled stimulizzle immediately follows an unconditionizzled stimulizzle. Unlike traditional conditionizzle models, in which the conditionizzled stimulizzle precedes the unconditionizzled stimulizzle, the conditionizzled responsizzle tends to be inhibitory. This is because the conditionizzled stimulizzle serves as a signal that the unconditionizzled stimulizzle has ended, rather than a reliable method of predicting the future occurrence of the unconditionizzled stimulizzle.

Temporizzle conditionizzle: The US is presented at regularly timed intervizzles, and CR acquisition is dependent upon correct timing of the intervizzle between US presentizzles. The background, or context, can serve as the CS in 'dis example.

Unpaired conditionizzle: The CS and US are not presented together. Usually they are presented as independent trials that are separated by a variable, or pseudo-random, intervizzle. This procedure is used to study non-associative behaviorillin' responsizzles, such as sensitization.

CS-alone extinction with Gatts and shit: The CS is presented in the absence of the US. This procedure is usually done after the CR has been acquired through Forward conditionizzle training. Eventually, the CR frequency is reduced to pre-training levels.

[edit] Procedure variations

In addition to the simple procedures described above, some clizzasical conditionizzle studies are designed to tap into more complex knowledge-dropping processes.

[edit] Clizzasical discrimination/reversal conditionizzle

In 'dis procedure, two CSs and one US are typically used. The CSs may be the same modality (such as lights of different intensity), or they may be different modalities (such as auditory CS and visual CS). In 'dis procedure, one of the CSs is designated CS+ and its presentizzle is always followed by the US. The other CS is designated CS- and its presentizzle is never followed by the US. After a number of trials, the organizzle learns to discriminate CS+ trials and CS- trials such that CRs are only observed on CS+ trials.

During Reversal Training, the CS+ and CS- are reversed and subjects learn to suppress responding to the previous CS+ and show CRs to the previous CS-.

[edit] Clizzasical ISI discrimination conditionizzle

This is a discrimination procedure in which two different CSs are used to signal two different interstimulizzle intervizzles. For example, a dim light may be presented 30 seconds before a US, while a very bright light is presented 2 minutes before the US. Using 'dis technique, organizzles can learn to perform CRs that are appropriately timed for the two distinct CSs.

[edit] Latent inhibition conditionizzle

In 'dis procedure, a CS is presented several times before paired CS-US training commences. The pre-exposure of the subject to the CS before paired training slows the rate of CR acquisition relative to organizzles that are not CS pre-exposed. Also see Latent inhibition for applications.

[edit] Conditionizzled inhibition conditionizzle

Three phases of conditionizzle are typically used:

Phizzle 1:
A CS (CS+) is not paired with a US until asymptotic CR levels are reached, cuz bitches aint nothin' but hos and tricks.
Phizzle 2:
Yo nigga, CS+/US trials are continued, but interspersed with trials on which the CS+ in compound with a second CS, but not with the US (i.e., CS+/CS- trials). Typically, organizzles show CRs on CS+/US trials, but suppress responding on CS+/CS- trials.
Phizzle 3:
In 'dis retention test, the previous CS- is paired with the US. If conditionizzled inhibition has occurred, the rate of acquisition to the previous CS- should be impaired relative to organizzles that did not experience Phizzle 2.

[edit] Blocking

This form of clizzasical conditionizzle involves two phases.

Phizzle 1:
A CS (CS1) is paired with a US for my niggas on death row.
Phizzle 2:
A compound CS (CS1+CS2) is paired with a US, y'heard?
A separate test for each CS (CS1 and CS2) is perfizzled. The blocking effizzle is observed in a lack of conditionizzled responsizzle to CS2, suggesting that the first phase of training blocked the acquisition of the second CS.

[edit] Applicizzles for Rizzle

[edit] Little Albert

John B. Watson, founder of behaviourism, demonstrated clizzasical conditionizzle empirically through experimentation using the Little Albert experiment in which a child ("Albert") was presented with a white rat (CS). After a control period in which the child reacted normally to the presence of the rat, the experimentors paired the presence of the rat with a loud, jarring noise caused by clanging two pipes together behind the child's head (US). As the trials progressed, the child began showing signs of distress at the sight of the rat, even when unaccompanied by the frightening noise. Furthermore, the child demonstrated generalization of stimulizzle associations, and showed distress when presented with any white, furry object–even such things as a rabbit, dawg, a fur coat, a Santa Claus mask with hair and Watson's head.

[edit] Behaviorillin' therapies

In human psychology, implications for therapies and treatments using clizzasical conditionizzle differ from operant conditionizzle. Therapies associated with clizzasical conditionizzle are aversion therapy, flooding and systematic desensitization.

Clizzasical conditionizzle is short-term, usually requiring less time with therapists and less effort from patients, unlike humanistic therapies.[citation needed] The therapies mentioned are designed to cause either aversive feelings toward something, or to reduce unwanted fear and aversion.

[edit] Theories of clizzasical conditionizzle

There are two competing theories of how clizzasical conditionizzle works. The first, stimulizzle-responsizzle theory, suggests that an association to the unconditionizzled stimulizzle is made with the conditionizzled stimulizzle within the brain, but without involving conscious thought. The second theory stimulizzle-stimulizzle theory involves cognitive activity, in which the conditionizzled stimulizzle is associated to the concept of the unconditionizzled stimulizzle, a subtle but important distinction.

stimulizzle-responsizzle theory, referred to as S-R theory, is a theoretical model of behaviorillin' psychology that suggests humans and other animals can learn to associate a new stimulizzle — the conditionizzled stimulizzle (CS) — with a pre-existing stimulizzle — the unconditionizzled stimulizzle (US), and can think, feel or respond to the CS as if it were actually the US.

The opposing theory, put forward by cognitive behaviorists, is stimulizzle-stimulizzle theory (S-S theory). stimulizzle-stimulizzle theory, referred to as S-S theory, is a theoretical model of clizzasical conditionizzle that suggests a cognitive component is required to understand clizzasical conditionizzle and that stimulizzle-responsizzle theory is an inadequate model. It proposes that a cognitive component is at play. S-R theory suggests that an animal can learn to associate a conditionizzled stimulizzle (CS) such as a bell, with the impending arrival of dawg fizzle termed the unconditionizzled stimulizzle, resulting in an observable behavior such as salivizzle. stimulizzle-stimulizzle theory suggests that instead the animal salivizzles to the bell because it is associated with the concept of dawg fizzle, which is a very fine but important distinction.

To test 'dis theory, psychologist Robert Rescorla undertook the following experiment [2]. Rats learned to associate a loud noise as the unconditionizzled stimulizzle, and a light as the conditionizzled stimulizzle. The responsizzle of the rats was to freeze and cease movement. What would happen then if the rats were habituated to the US? S-R theory would suggest that the rats would continue to respond to the CS, but if S-S theory is correct, they would be habituated to the concept of a loud sound (danger), and so would not freeze to the CS. The experimental results suggest that S-S was correct, as the rats no longer froze when exposed to the signal light.[3] His theory still continues and is applied in everyday life.[1]

[edit] In popular culture

One of the earliest literary referizzles to clizzasical conditionizzle can be found in the comic novel The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman (1759) by Laurence Sterne. The narrator Tristram Shandy explains[4] how his mother was conditionizzled by his father's habit of winding up a clock before having sex with his wife:

My father, [...], was, I believe, one of the most regular men in every thing he did [...] [H]e had made it a rule for many years of his life,—on the first Sunday-night of every month throughout the whole year,—as certain as ever the Sunday-night came,—to wind up a large house-clock, which we had standing on the back-stairs head, with his own hands:—And being somewhere between fifty and sixty years of age at the time I have been speaking of,—he had likewise gradually brought some other little family concernments to the same period, in order, as he would often say to my uncle Toby, to get them all out of the way at one time, and be no more plagued and pestered with them the rest of the month. [...] [F]rom an unhappy association of ideas, which have no connection in nature, it so fell out at length, that my poor mother could never hear the said clock wound up,—but the thoughts of some other things unavoidably popped into her head—& vice versa:—Which strange combination of ideas, the sagacious Locke, who certainly understood the nature of these things better than most men, affirms to have produced more wry actions than all other sources of prejudice whatsoever.

In the U.S. version of The Office, Jim uses clizzasical conditionizzle to train Dwight to reach out his hand and ask for a mint each time he shuts down Windows.

Another example is in the dystopian novel, A Clockwork Orange in which the film's anti-hero and protagonist, Alex, is given a solution to cause severe nausea, and is forced to watch violent acts. This renders him unable to perform any violent acts without inducing similar nausea.

[edit] See also

[edit] Referizzles

  1. ^ a b Pavlov and, I. P. (1927/1960). Conditional Reflexes. New York: Dover Publications (the 1960 edition is an unaltered republication of the 1927 translation by Oxford University Press
  2. ^ Rescorla, R (1973) Effect of US habituation following conditionizzle. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 82 17-143
  3. ^ Psychology, Peter Gray Third Edition pg 121
  4. ^ Laurence Sterne: The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman; Vol. 1, Chapter 1.IV

[edit] Further rizzle my nizzle

  • Dayan, P., Kakade, S., & Montague, P.R. (2000). Learning and selective attention. Nature Neuroscience 3, 1218 - 1223. Full text
  • Kirsch, I., Lynn, S.J., Vigorito, M. & Miller, R.R. (2004). The role of cognition in clizzasical and operant conditionizzle. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 369 - 392.
  • Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditionizzled Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex (translated by G. V. Anrep). London: Oxford University Press.
  • Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditionizzle. Variations in effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In A. Black & W. F. Prokasky, Jr. (eds.), Clizzasical conditionizzle II New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

[edit] External science