This file covers OTL and compares and constrasts it to Classical conditioning. It also covers Taste aversion, with reference to the Garcia & Koelling 1966 experiment. See www.ePsychVCE.com for links to 2 separate Youttube clips made relating to these slides.

1. One trial learning (OTL) & Taste Aversion
• One trial learning involves a change in behaviour that occurs with
only 1 powerful experience.
• Taste Aversion is a conditioned response in which a person/ animal
establishes an association between a particular food & being/
feeling ill after having it in the past
• The association is usually as a result of a single (unpleasant)
experience & the particular food will be avoided in the future.

2. Similarity of OTL & classical conditioning
1. Both involve OTL and CC involve the pairing of the UCS &
CS to elicit a CR
2. Both OTL & CC involve reflexive responses
3. Both OTL & CC the learner is passive

3. OTL vs CC – Differences
Classical Conditioning One Trial learning
# of Responses take a number of
associations associations e.g. multiple parings of A change in behaviour occurs
the bell & the meat powder for after 1 association
Pavlov’s dog
Time lapse Often a large time lapse e.g. for
Almost immediate. E.g. sight/smell
between CS food poisoning, the CS
of meat powder (UCS) results in
& CR (contaminated food) can be
salivation (UCR).
presented up to 2 hours before
the CR (illness)
Extinction Can be extinguished relatively easily Highly resistant, response is
after presenting CS (e.g. bell) powerful i.e. feeling ill due to
without the UCS (meat powder) for eating contaminated food,
a handful of trials response will often last a life-
time.
General- CS can be easily generalised to Unlikely to be generalised. E.g. a
isation other stimuli. E.g. dog may salivate taste aversion to a meat pie (result
to sound of a phone (similar in of eating a contaminated one) to
sound to bell) other food.

4. Research by Garcia & Koelling (1966) – Part 1
Stage 1 Thirsty rats provided with saccharine flavoured water
paired with bright light flashed & clicking noise via 1 of 2
procedures (originally the NS).
Group 1: shocked (UCS)
Group 2: exposed to radiation via Xrays (UCS)
Stage 2 CR: Both groups avoided the Saccharine flavoured water
(Post (via smell)
Conditioning)
They had acquired a taste aversion of Saccharine
flavoured water (CS).

5. Research by Garcia & Koelling (1966) – Part 2
Stage 1 Thirsty rats provided with water via 1 of 2 procedures
• Saccharine flavoured water was provided with no bright light flashed or
clicking noise.
• Unflavoured water was paired with bright light and clicking noise
Stage 2 Group 1: Rats subjected to pain (UCR) via shocks (UCS) avoided water (CR)
(Post when paired with light and click (CS)
Conditioning) But they would drink saccharine flavoured water (when there was no light/
noise)
Group 2: Rats ill (UCR) originally from radiation (UCS)
would not drink (CR) saccharine flavoured water (CS)

6. Conclusions
• The rats had learned to
avoid the UCS (shock
or nausea inducing
drug) by avoiding the
water paired with this!
• Rats associated stimuli
in ways that foster
survival