1 Trial learning and taste aversion - VCE U4 Psych


Published on

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.

Published in: Health & Medicine, Business
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

1 Trial learning and taste aversion - VCE U4 Psych

  1. 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. 2. Similarity of OTL & classical conditioning1. Both involve OTL and CC involve the pairing of the UCS & CS to elicit a CR2. Both OTL & CC involve reflexive responses3. Both OTL & CC the learner is passive
  3. 3. OTL vs CC – Differences Classical Conditioning One Trial learning # of Responses take a number ofassociations 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/smellbetween 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. 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. 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. 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