Infant Learning and Habituation: Key Studies and Concepts in Respondent Learning

1. Chapter 5 Respondent Learning

2. Habituation – Infant Studies • Study conducted in the Soviet Union • Bronshtein and Petrova (1967) • Nonnutritive sucking habituated to repeated presentations of each of a variety of auditory stimuli (e.g., a whistle, a harmonica) in neonates as well as in older infants

3. Habituation – Infant Studies • In a classic U.S. study, Bridger (1961) found habituation of both accelerated heart rate and startle response to auditory stimulation in neonates • Jeffrey & Cohen (1971) found habituation in infants not only to auditory stimuli but to visual and olfactory stimuli as well

4. Habituation – Infant Studies • Habituation also demonstrated with fetuses • Madison, Madison and Adubato (1986) applied vibrating stimuli to abdomens of women between 28 and 37 weeks pregnant • After repeated presentations, fetal movements habituated

5. Habituation – 4 Requirements • decrement in responding • decrement must follow the repeated presentations of a particular stimulus • Initial S-R relation must be a reflex • decrement in responding must not be due to other processes (e.g., satiation, muscle fatigue)

6. Respondent Learning – Infant Studies • Little Albert (11-months old) • Watson and Rayner (1920) presented a friendly white rat and Albert played with it • Then, loud noise (striking a metal rod with a hammer) was paired with presentation of the rat • loud noise elicited crying • After pairings, rat alone elicited crying • Similar objects (e.g., cat, fur coat, Santa Claus mask) also elicited crying

7. Respondent Learning – Infant Studies • Spelt (1958) paired a loud clap (UCS) with vibrotactile stimulation (the NS) with 7-9 months of gestation fetuses • Eventually, the vibrotactile stimulus became a CS, eliciting fetal movements • Lipsitt and Kaye (1964) paired presentation of a tone (the NS) with the insertion of a nipple in the mouth (UCS) of newborns 3-4 days old • Eventually, the presentation of the tone alone (now a CS) elicited a sucking response.

8. Respondent Learning – Infant Studies • Coyle, Arnold, Goldberg-Arnold, Rubin, and Hall (2000) • measured baseline rates of sucking to either formula or water (formula was always preferred) • Then placed nice odor (strawberry or vanilla) on formula nipple while infant sucked to establish the smell (NS)-food (UCS) relationship  • More…

9. Respondent Learning – Infant Studies • To test that these odors were neutral stimuli, the nonpaired odor was then placed on a bottle nipple filled with water • Consumption of water actually dropped by about one-third with this novel olfactory stimulus • When the odor associated with the formula was placed on the water bottle, however, sucking and water consumption increased • Thus, a previously neutral stimulus (odor) became a CS for these infants.

10. Respondent Learning and CER • CER = conditioned emotional responding • respondent learning may explain emotional responses by children • boy who has been strongly yelled at for going outside without his pants may later blush (an emotional reflex) when he discovers that his pants are open (Bijou & Baer, 1978). • Many instances in which we cry, become fearful, anxious, hungry, or become sexually aroused can be trained and reversed in terms of respondent learning

11. Counter-conditioning of CER • Mary Cover Jones (1924) reported the case of Peter, who exhibited a fear of rabbits • She gave Peter candy to eat and then introduced a rabbit while Peter was eating the candy; led to elimination of Peter’s fear of rabbits. • Procedure also involved presenting the CS (rabbit) gradually and repetitively, to not elicit the fear response • At each session, the stimulus was moved closer and closer while Peter was eating, until the rabbit no longer trigger a negative emotion reaction.

12. End of Chapter 5