1 / 38

Clark Leonard Hull

Clark Leonard Hull. Hull Background. Born 1884 in Akron NY Graduated U. of Michigan in 1913 Ph.D. U. of Wisconsin 1918 1929-1952 Professor of Psychology at Yale Died 1952 Developed Hypothetico-Deductive System. Clark Hull. S E R = Reaction potential S H R = habit strength D = Drive

johana
Télécharger la présentation

Clark Leonard Hull

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Clark Leonard Hull

  2. HullBackground • Born 1884 in Akron NY • Graduated U. of Michigan in 1913 • Ph.D. U. of Wisconsin 1918 • 1929-1952 Professor of Psychology at Yale • Died 1952 • Developed Hypothetico-Deductive System

  3. Clark Hull • SER = Reaction potential • SHR = habit strength • D = Drive • IR = reactive inhibition • SIR = conditioned inhibition • SOR = oscillation effect • SLR = Threshold • StR = reaction time • p = response probability • n = trials to extinction • A = response amplitute

  4. Clark HullPostulate 1 & 2 • Sensing the External Environment and the Stimulus Trace • Stimulus Trace S-s-R • The Interaction of Sensory Impulses = 

  5. Clark Hull s1 S1 S2 s2 s r R S3 s3 S4 s4 S5 s5

  6. Clark HullPostulate 3 • Unlearned Behavior - an need arises an the individual has a hierarchy of responses patterns to take care of this need. These response patterns are innate and if the first response pattern doesn’t work then we go to the second.

  7. Clark HullPostulate 4 • Contiguity and Drive Reduction as Necessary Conditions for Learning • If a stimulus leads to a response and its satisfies a biological need (drive reduction) the S-R bond is strengthened. • The more often leads to a need satisfaction the stronger the bond (Habit Strength SHR) • Habit Strength or SHR = 1 - 10-0.0305N

  8. Clark HullPostulate 5 • Stimulus Generalization - a stimulus will elicit a conditioned response depending on how similar the stimulus is to the stimulus that was used during training (stimulus generalization) • SHR = generalized habit strength - transfer of training

  9. Clark HullPostulate 6 • Stimuli Associated with Drives - Primary motivation (D), at least that resulting from food deprivation, consists of multiplicative components: (1) the drive proper (D’) which is an increasing monotonic sigmoid function of h, the number of hours of food deprivation; and (2) a negative or inanition component () which is positively

  10. Clark HullPostulate 6 • accelerated montonic function of h decreasing from 1.0 to zero • D = D’ x  • where • D’ = 37.824 x 10-27.496*1/h+4.001 •  = 1 - .0000045h2.486

  11. Clark HullPostulate 6

  12. Clark HullPostulate 7 • Reaction Potential as a Function of Drive and Habit Strength - The likelihood of a learned response being made at any given moment is called reaction potential (SER) • SER = SHR x D

  13. Clark HullPostulate 8 • Responding Causes Fatigue, Which Operates Against the Elicitation of a Conditioned Response • Reactive inhibition (IR) • reminiscence effect - stop studying prior to test • massed vs. distributed practice

  14. Clark HullPostulate 9 • The Learned Response of Not Responding - fatigue is a negative drive state. • Conditioned Inhibition (SIR) • Effective reaction potential= ER = SHR x D - (IR + SIR)

  15. Clark HullPostulate 10 • Factors Tending to Inhibit a Learned Response Change from Moment to Moment - there is an “inhibitory potentiality” which varies from moment to moment and operates against the elicitation of a response • Oscillation effect (SOR) • This is a wild card in Hull’s theory

  16. Clark HullPostulate 10 • . • Momentary Effective Reaction Formation = SER • Momentary Effective Reaction Potential .SER = SHR x D - (IR + SIR) - SOR

  17. Clark HullPostulate 11 • Momentary Effective Reaction Potential Must Exceed a Certain Value Before a Learned Response Can Occur . • The value of SER must exceed the reaction threshold (SLR)

  18. Clark HullPostulate 12 • The Probability that a Learned Response Will Be Made Is a Combined Function of SER,SOR, and SLR • In the beginning of training the momentary reaction potential will be close to the threshold therefore the oscillation effect will play a role. As training goes on the oscillation effect will play less of a role.

  19. Clark HullPostulate 13 & 14 • The greater the Value of the Effective Momentary Reaction Potential the Shorter will be the Latency Between S and R • Latency = (StR) • The value of the Effective Momentary Reaction Potential will Determine Resistance to Extinction

  20. Clark HullPostulate 15 & 16 • The Amplitude of a Conditioned Response Varies Directly with the Effective Momentary Reaction Potential • When Two or More Incompatible Responses Tend to Be Elicited in the Same Situation, the One with the Greatest Effective Momentary Reaction Potential will Occur

  21. Clark HullChanges - 1952 • Performance is altered as a result of the size of the reinforcement, therefore Hull included incentive as a factor (K) • Crespi Effect - a rapid change in performance as a result of a change in the size of the reinforcement

  22. Clark Hullstimulus-intensity • Stimulus Intensity Dynamism • the greater the intensity of a sitmlus, the greater the probability that a learned response will be elicited .SER = [ SHR x D x V x K- (IR + SIR)] - SOR • Instead of drive reduction Hull decided that it should be drive stimulus reduction SD • Actual Drive does not leave for a while

  23. Clark HullrG • Fractional Antedating Goal Response rG • This is Hull’s “mental” component • rG ) - this concept involves both operant and classical conditioning. • A rat runs a T maze, no food is in the left wing and food is in the right wing. The rat will soon learn to go to the right

  24. Clark Hull rG • Turning the corner (since it always comes just prior to the reinforcement of food) becomes a secondary reinforcer. • But, it also becomes a conditioned stimulus for salivation • The corner therefore acts both as a conditioned stimulus and a secondary reinforcement.

  25. Clark Hull rG • Since the corner is a cs salivation follows, but the salivation becomes a secondary reinforcement as well since it is always followed by food. • Likewise one could say that a variety of internal stimului (kinesthetic receptors) result in muscle twitches etc becoming secondary reinforcers, and keep the animal moving forward

  26. Clark Hull rG SD1SD2SD3 R1 R2 R3 R4 rG-sG rG-sG rG-sG

  27. Clark HullHabit Family Hierarchy • The habit family hierarchy simply refers to the fact that in any learning situation, any number of responses are possible and the one that is most likely is the one that brings about reinforcement most rapidly and with the least amount of effort. • If one way is blocked we try another

  28. Clark HullHabit Family Hierarchy SD1 SD2 SD3 R1 R1 R1 rG-sG rG-sG rG-sG R2 R2 R2 R3 R3 R3

  29. Mowrer • Mowrer went through a series of transitions in his theory. • Two factor theory - worked with avoidance conditioning • Animal learns to avoid a shock because a bell sounds and warns the animal of the shock. The anima must perform a behavior to avoid the shock.

  30. Mowrer • Sign learning - bell which tells animal to avoid the shock acts as a “sign” or warning. Thus Mowrer referred to it as “sign learning” • Once the animal is warned of the shock it must perform a behavior to avoid the shock thus this is operant conditioning that Mowrer called “solution learning”

  31. Mowrer • Mowrer went on to note that many emotions can be explained with the two factor theory • Decremental Learning is a stimulus that reduces a drive reduction like eating vs. Incremental Learning where a stimulus increases a drive like shock • One can experience the emotion of hope if a bell sounds just prior to food or of disappointment if the bell sounds just prior to the removal of food

  32. Mowrer • Eventually Mowrer considered all learning “sign learning”. • Mowrer felt that even proprioceptive stimuli come to give a sign of what to expect and there was not the need for solution learning.

  33. Kenneth Spence • Spence believed in latent learning - no reinforcement is necessary in order to learn. • Supported Aristotles law of contiguity • Supported Aristotles law of frequency • Incentive Motivation - Spence strongly believed in (K) Incentive Motivation • K was the energizer of learned behavior

  34. Kenneth Spence • He believed that rG-sG • Spence therefore had the momentary effective reaction potential equal to:(D + K) x SHR - IN • Spence felt that an organism will make a response even if there is no reinforcement for doing so

  35. Kenneth Spence • Extinction - frustration competition theory of extinction • extinction does not occur because of fatigue as Hull suggests but rather because frustration of not receiving a reinforcer competes with the reinforcer. Spence felt that we have a primary frustration when we do not receive reinforcement and like a fractional antedating goal response we build a fractional antedating frustration response.

  36. Abram Amsel • Examined Spence’s idea that frustration causes extinction • Amsel and Roussel showed that animal increases responding before decreasing responding during extinction frustration effect • Bower showed that the larger the reinforcer the faster the extinction, assumably from frustration.

  37. Abram Amsel • Analyzed partial reinforcement effect - (extinction is slower when organism is being reinforced with a partial reinforcement) • Developed fractional antedating frustration response

  38. Neal Miller • Visceral Conditioning and Biofeedback

More Related