Differential outcomes effect

Last updated

The differential outcomes effect (DOE) is a theory in behaviorism, a branch of psychology, that shows that a positive effect on accuracy occurs in discrimination learning between different stimuli when unique rewards are paired with each individual stimulus. The DOE was first demonstrated in 1970 by Milton Trapold on an experiment with rats. [1] Rats were trained to discriminate between a clicker and a tone by pressing the left and right levers. Half of the rats were trained using the differential outcomes procedure (DOP), where the clicker was paired with sucrose and tone with food pellets. The remaining rats were trained with only sucrose or only food pellets. The rats trained with the DOP were significantly more accurate than those trained with only one type of reinforcement (common outcome). Since then it has been established through a myriad of experiments that the DOE exists in most species capable of learning. [2]

Contents

Definition

The DOE not only states that an association between a stimulus and a response is formed as traditional classical conditioning states, but that a simultaneous association is formed between a stimulus and a reinforcer in the subject. If one were to pair a stimulus with a reinforcer, that is known as a differential condition. When this is employed, one can expect a higher accuracy in tests when discriminating between two stimuli, due to this increased amount of information available to the subject than in a non-differential condition.

History

In 1970 the DOE was discovered by Trapold when testing the reasoning behind the theory. [1] He created an experiment where rats were taught to discriminate between a clicking noise and a tone. He associated the left bar with the clicking noise and the right bar with the tone. The experimental group was given sucrose for one response and food for the other. The control group was randomly given either food or sucrose for each response. The rats in the experimental group were able to discriminate between the two stimuli faster than the rats in the control group. [1]

The DOE was then found to exist in various species including but not limited to rats, [1] pigeons, [3] and horses [4] over the years and was then finally explored in humans by Pauline Maki, J. Bruce Overmier, Sandra Delos, and Arlyne Gutmann in 1995. [5] They tested children who were from 4 to 7 years old to discriminate between two different shapes. Children who were given either a reinforcer consisting of food for one response or given a verbal reinforcer for another response gave far more accurate answers than those who were given random reinforcers for different responses. [5]

Then in 2002, Odette Miller, Kevin Waugh, and Karen Chambers proved that the DOE exists in adults. [6] This experiment was novel because it first used average adults (college students) in the experiment, and had a complex discrimination task which required participants to be able to distinguish between 15 different Kanji characters. In prior experiments, participants were only required to discriminate between two different stimuli. For the participants in the group given a differential condition, each Kanji character was given a unique photo and prize for answering correctly. Participants in the group given a non-differential condition were given a random photo and prize for answering the question correctly. The group given a differential condition fared far better than those in the group with the non-differential condition, demonstrating that the DOE not only exists in adult humans but also can be applied to tasks requiring discrimination of more than two stimuli. [6]

A meta-analysis demonstrated that the DOP has a large effect on humans, demonstrating that effect in typically developing children and healthy adults. [7] More recently several studies have looked at the applications of the differential outcomes effect for populations with intellectual disabilities and pervasive developmental disabilities. [8] [9] Scientists have theorised that this procedure may be useful in overcoming barriers to learning.

Related Research Articles

Operant conditioning, also called instrumental conditioning, is a learning process where voluntary behaviors are modified by association with the addition of reward or aversive stimuli. The frequency or duration of the behavior may increase through reinforcement or decrease through punishment or extinction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Operant conditioning chamber</span> Laboratory apparatus used to study animal behavior

An operant conditioning chamber is a laboratory apparatus used to study animal behavior. The operant conditioning chamber was created by B. F. Skinner while he was a graduate student at Harvard University. The chamber can be used to study both operant conditioning and classical conditioning.

Classical conditioning is a behavioral procedure in which a biologically potent physiological stimulus is paired with a neutral stimulus. The term classical conditioning refers to the process of an automatic, conditioned response that is paired with a specific stimulus.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reinforcement</span> Consequence affecting an organisms future behavior

In behavioral psychology, reinforcement is any consequence that increases the likelihood of an organism's future behavior whenever that behavior is preceded by a particular antecedent stimulus. For example, a rat can be trained to push a lever to receive food whenever a light is turned on. In this example, the light is the antecedent stimulus, the lever pushing is the behavior, and the food is the reinforcement. Likewise, a student that receives attention and praise when answering a teacher's question will be more likely to answer future questions in class. The teacher's question is the antecedent, the student's response is the behavior, and the praise and attention are the reinforcements.

The experimental analysis of behavior is a science that studies the behavior of individuals across a variety of species. A key early scientist was B. F. Skinner who discovered operant behavior, reinforcers, secondary reinforcers, contingencies of reinforcement, stimulus control, shaping, intermittent schedules, discrimination, and generalization. A central method was the examination of functional relations between environment and behavior, as opposed to hypothetico-deductive learning theory that had grown up in the comparative psychology of the 1920–1950 period. Skinner's approach was characterized by observation of measurable behavior which could be predicted and controlled. It owed its early success to the effectiveness of Skinner's procedures of operant conditioning, both in the laboratory and in behavior therapy.

Behaviorism is a systematic approach to understand the behavior of humans and other animals. It assumes that behavior is either a reflex evoked by the pairing of certain antecedent stimuli in the environment, or a consequence of that individual's history, including especially reinforcement and punishment contingencies, together with the individual's current motivational state and controlling stimuli. Although behaviorists generally accept the important role of heredity in determining behavior, they focus primarily on environmental events. The cognitive revolution of the late 20th century largely replaced behaviorism as an explanatory theory with cognitive psychology, which unlike behaviorism examines internal mental states.

The law of effect is a psychology principle advanced by Edward Thorndike in 1898 on the matter of behavioral conditioning which states that "responses that produce a satisfying effect in a particular situation become more likely to occur again in that situation, and responses that produce a discomforting effect become less likely to occur again in that situation."

Conditioned taste aversion occurs when an animal acquires an aversion to the taste of a food that was paired with aversive stimuli. The Garcia effect explains that the aversion develops more strongly for stimuli that cause nausea than other stimuli. This is considered an adaptive trait or survival mechanism that enables the organism to avoid poisonous substances before they cause harm. The aversion reduces consuming the same substance in the future, thus avoiding poisoning.

Shaping is a conditioning paradigm used primarily in the experimental analysis of behavior. The method used is differential reinforcement of successive approximations. It was introduced by B. F. Skinner with pigeons and extended to dogs, dolphins, humans and other species. In shaping, the form of an existing response is gradually changed across successive trials towards a desired target behavior by reinforcing exact segments of behavior. Skinner's explanation of shaping was this:

We first give the bird food when it turns slightly in the direction of the spot from any part of the cage. This increases the frequency of such behavior. We then withhold reinforcement until a slight movement is made toward the spot. This again alters the general distribution of behavior without producing a new unit. We continue by reinforcing positions successively closer to the spot, then by reinforcing only when the head is moved slightly forward, and finally only when the beak actually makes contact with the spot. ... The original probability of the response in its final form is very low; in some cases it may even be zero. In this way we can build complicated operants which would never appear in the repertoire of the organism otherwise. By reinforcing a series of successive approximations, we bring a rare response to a very high probability in a short time. ... The total act of turning toward the spot from any point in the box, walking toward it, raising the head, and striking the spot may seem to be a functionally coherent unit of behavior; but it is constructed by a continual process of differential reinforcement from undifferentiated behavior, just as the sculptor shapes his figure from a lump of clay.

Extinction is a behavioral phenomenon observed in both operantly conditioned and classically conditioned behavior, which manifests itself by fading of non-reinforced conditioned response over time. When operant behavior that has been previously reinforced no longer produces reinforcing consequences the behavior gradually stops occurring. In classical conditioning, when a conditioned stimulus is presented alone, so that it no longer predicts the coming of the unconditioned stimulus, conditioned responding gradually stops. For example, after Pavlov's dog was conditioned to salivate at the sound of a metronome, it eventually stopped salivating to the metronome after the metronome had been sounded repeatedly but no food came. Many anxiety disorders such as post traumatic stress disorder are believed to reflect, at least in part, a failure to extinguish conditioned fear.

Behavioral momentum is a theory in quantitative analysis of behavior and is a behavioral metaphor based on physical momentum. It describes the general relation between resistance to change and the rate of reinforcement obtained in a given situation.

In behavioral psychology, stimulus control is a phenomenon in operant conditioning that occurs when an organism behaves in one way in the presence of a given stimulus and another way in its absence. A stimulus that modifies behavior in this manner is either a discriminative stimulus or stimulus delta. For example, the presence of a stop sign at a traffic intersection alerts the driver to stop driving and increases the probability that braking behavior occurs. Stimulus control does not force behavior to occur, as it is a direct result of historical reinforcement contingencies, as opposed to reflexive behavior elicited through classical conditioning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conditioned place preference</span> Pavlovian conditioning

Conditioned place preference (CPP) is a form of Pavlovian conditioning used to measure the motivational effects of objects or experiences. This motivation comes from the pleasurable aspect of the experience, so that the brain can be reminded of the context that surrounded the "encounter". By measuring the amount of time an animal spends in an area that has been associated with a stimulus, researchers can infer the animal's liking for the stimulus. This paradigm can also be used to measure conditioned place aversion with an identical procedure involving aversive stimuli instead. Both procedures usually involve mice or rats as subjects. This procedure can be used to measure extinction and reinstatement of the conditioned stimulus. Certain drugs are used in this paradigm to measure their reinforcing properties. Two different methods are used to choose the compartments to be conditioned, and these are biased vs. unbiased. The biased method allows the animal to explore the apparatus, and the compartment they least prefer is the one that the drug is administered in and the one they most prefer is the one where the vehicle is injected. This method allows the animal to choose the compartment they get the drug and vehicle. In comparison, the unbiased method does not allow the animal to choose what compartment they get the drug and vehicle in. Instead, the researcher chooses the compartments.

Discrimination learning is defined in psychology as the ability to respond differently to different stimuli. This type of learning is used in studies regarding operant and classical conditioning. Operant conditioning involves the modification of a behavior by means of reinforcement or punishment. In this way, a discriminative stimulus will act as an indicator to when a behavior will persist and when it will not. Classical conditioning involves learning through association when two stimuli are paired together repeatedly. This conditioning demonstrates discrimination through specific micro-instances of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. This phenomenon is considered to be more advanced than learning styles such as generalization and yet simultaneously acts as a basic unit to learning as a whole. The complex and fundamental nature of discrimination learning allows for psychologists and researchers to perform more in-depth research that supports psychological advancements. Research on the basic principles underlying this learning style has their roots in neuropsychology sub-processes.

Generalization is the concept that humans, other animals, and artificial neural networks use past learning in present situations of learning if the conditions in the situations are regarded as similar. The learner uses generalized patterns, principles, and other similarities between past experiences and novel experiences to more efficiently navigate the world. For example, if a person has learned in the past that every time they eat an apple, their throat becomes itchy and swollen, they might assume they are allergic to all fruit. When this person is offered a banana to eat, they reject it upon assuming they are also allergic to it through generalizing that all fruits cause the same reaction. Although this generalization about being allergic to all fruit based on experiences with one fruit could be correct in some cases, it may not be correct in all. Both positive and negative effects have been shown in education through learned generalization and its contrasting notion of discrimination learning.

James "Jim" A. Dinsmoor was an American experimental psychologist who published work in the field of the experimental analysis of behavior.

An antecedent is a stimulus that cues an organism to perform a learned behavior. When an organism perceives an antecedent stimulus, it behaves in a way that maximizes reinforcing consequences and minimizes punishing consequences. This might be part of complex, interpersonal communication.

Pavlovian-instrumental transfer (PIT) is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when a conditioned stimulus that has been associated with rewarding or aversive stimuli via classical conditioning alters motivational salience and operant behavior. Two distinct forms of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer have been identified in humans and other animals – specific PIT and general PIT – with unique neural substrates mediating each type. In relation to rewarding stimuli, specific PIT occurs when a CS is associated with a specific rewarding stimulus through classical conditioning and subsequent exposure to the CS enhances an operant response that is directed toward the same reward with which it was paired. General PIT occurs when a CS is paired with one reward and it enhances an operant response that is directed toward a different rewarding stimulus.

Association in psychology refers to a mental connection between concepts, events, or mental states that usually stems from specific experiences. Associations are seen throughout several schools of thought in psychology including behaviorism, associationism, psychoanalysis, social psychology, and structuralism. The idea stems from Plato and Aristotle, especially with regard to the succession of memories, and it was carried on by philosophers such as John Locke, David Hume, David Hartley, and James Mill. It finds its place in modern psychology in such areas as memory, learning, and the study of neural pathways.

J. Bruce Overmier is an American experimental psychologist, author, and academic. He is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Psychology at the University of Minnesota (UMN).

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Trapold, Milton A. (1970-05-01). "Are expectancies based upon different positive reinforcing events discriminably different?". Learning and Motivation. 1 (2): 129–140. doi:10.1016/0023-9690(70)90079-2. ISSN   0023-9690.
  2. ↑ Urcuioli, Peter J. (February 2005). "Behavioral and associative effects of differential outcomes in discrimination learning". Learning & Behavior. 33 (1): 1–21. doi: 10.3758/bf03196047 . ISSN   1543-4494. PMID   15971490. S2CID   29565288.
  3. ↑ Sherburne, Lou M.; Zentall, Thomas R. (December 1998). "The differential outcomes effect in pigeons is not reduced by eliminating response-outcome associations: Support for a two-process account". Animal Learning & Behavior. 26 (4): 378–387. doi: 10.3758/BF03199230 . ISSN   0090-4996. S2CID   53005289.
  4. ↑ Miyashita, Yukako; Nakajima, Sadahiko; Imada, Hiroshi (September 2000). "Differential outcome effect in the horse". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 74 (2): 245–253. doi:10.1901/jeab.2000.74-245. PMC   1284794 . PMID   11029025.
  5. 1 2 Maki, Pauline; Overmier, J. Bruce; Delos, Sandra; Gutmann, Arlyne J. (1995). "Expectancies as factors influencing conditional discrimination performance of children". The Psychological Record. 45 (1): 45–71.
  6. 1 2 Miller, Odette T.; Waugh, Kevin M.; Chambers, Karen (2002-07-01). "Differential Outcomes Effect: Increased Accuracy in Adults Learning Kanji with Stimulus Specific Rewards". The Psychological Record. 52 (3): 315–324. doi:10.1007/BF03395433. ISSN   2163-3452. S2CID   141282276.
  7. ↑ McCormack, Jessica C.; Elliffe, Douglas; Virués-Ortega, Javier (2019-06-27). "Quantifying the effects of the differential outcomes procedure in humans: A systematic review and a meta-analysis". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 52 (3): 870–892. doi:10.1002/jaba.578. ISSN   0021-8855. PMID   31243766. S2CID   195696351.
  8. ↑ Esevez, A.F.; Fuentes, L.J.; Overmier, J.B.; González, C. (2003). "Differential Outcomes Effect in Children and Adults With Down Syndrome". American Journal on Mental Retardation. 108 (2): 108–116. doi:10.1352/0895-8017(2003)108<0108:DOEICA>2.0.CO;2. PMID   12564943.
  9. ↑ McCormack, Jessica C.; Elliffe, Douglas; Virues-Ortega, Javier (2020-09-10). "Enhanced Tact Acquisition Using the Differential Outcomes Procedure in Children with Developmental and Intellectual Disability". The Psychological Record. 71 (1): 55–70. doi:10.1007/s40732-020-00429-8. ISSN   0033-2933. S2CID   256432145.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.