Advertisement

Learning & Behavior

, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 227–241 | Cite as

Cognitive versus stimulus-response theories of learning

  • Peter C. HollanEmail author
Article

Abstract

In his 1948 address to the Division of Theoretical-Experimental Psychology of the American Psychological Association, Kenneth W. Spence discussed six distinctions between cognitive and stimulus-response (S-R) theories of learning. In this article, I first review these six distinctions and then focus on two of them in the context of my own research. This research concerns the specification of stimulus-stimulus associations in associative learning and the characterization of the neural systems underlying those associations. In the course of describing Spence’s views and my research, I hope to communicate some of the richness of Spence’s S-R psychology and its currency within modern scientific analyses of behavior.

Keywords

Conditioned Stimulus Unconditioned Stimulus Taste Aversion Pavlovian Conditioning Sensory Precondition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adams, C. D. (1982). Variations in the sensitivity of instrumental responding to reinforcer devaluation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34B, 77–98.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, C. D., & Dickinson, A. (1981). Instrumental responding following reinforcer devaluation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33B, 109–121.Google Scholar
  3. Balleine, B. W., & Dickinson, A. (1991). Instrumental performance following reinforcer devaluation depends upon incentive learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40B, 279–296.Google Scholar
  4. Bernstein, I., & Koh, M. T. (2007). Molecular signaling during taste aversion learning. Chemical Senses, 32, 99–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Berridge, K. C. (2000). Measuring hedonic impact in animals and infants: Microstructure of affective taste reactivity patterns. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 24, 173–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brogden, W. J. (1947). Sensory pre-conditioning of human subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37, 527–539.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Colwill, R. M., & Rescorla, R. A. (1985a). Instrumental responding remains sensitive to reinforcer devaluation after extensive training. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 520–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Colwill, R. M., & Rescorla, R. A. (1985b). Post-conditioning devaluation of a reinforcer affects instrumental responding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 120–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colwill, R. M., & Rescorla, R. A. (1986). Associative structures in instrumental learning. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 20, pp. 55–104). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Colwill, R. M., & Rescorla, R. A. (1990). Effect of reinforcer devaluation on discriminative control of instrumental behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 40–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Colwill, R. M., & Triola, S. M. (2002). Instrumental responding remains under the control of the consequent outcome after extended training. Behavioural Processes, 57, 51–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cook, R. G., Riley, D. A., & Brown, M. F. (1992). Spatial and configural factors in compound stimulus processing by pigeons. Learning & Behavior, 20, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doty, R. W., & Giurgea, C. (1961). Conditioned reflexes established by coupling electrical excitation of two cortical areas. In J. F. Delafresnaye (Ed.), Brain mechanisms and learning (pp. 133–151). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Elliot, M. H. (1928). The effect of change of reward on the maze performance of rats. University of California Publications in Psychology, 4, 19–30.Google Scholar
  15. Finch, G. (1938). Salivary conditioning in atropinized dogs. American Journal of Psychology, 124, 136–141.Google Scholar
  16. Fowler, H., & Miller, N. E. (1963). Facilitation and inhibition of runway performance by hind- and forepaw shock of various intensities. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 56, 801–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Furuyashiki, T., Holland, P. C., & Gallagher, M. (2008). Rat orbitofrontal cortex separately encodes response and outcome information during performance of goal-directed behavior. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 5127–5138.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Galarce, E. M., Crombag, H. S., & Holland, P. C. (2007). Reinforcer-specificity of appetitive and consummatory behavior of rats after Pavlovian conditioning with food reinforcers. Physiology & Behavior, 91, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gallagher, M., McMahan, R. W., & Schoenbaum, G. (1999). Orbitofrontal cortex and representation of incentive value in associative learning. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 6610–6614.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Grill, H. J., & Norgren, R. (1978). The taste reactivity test: I. Mimetic responses to gustatory stimuli in neurologically normal rats. Brain Research, 143, 263–279.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Guthrie, E. R. (1935). The psychology of learning. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  22. Guthrie, E. R. (1946). Psychological facts and psychological theories. Psychological Bulletin, 43, 1–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Guzowski, J. F., & Worley, P. F. (2001). Cellular compartment analysis of temporal activity by fluorescent in situ hybidization (catFISH). In G. P. Taylor (Ed.), Current protocols in neuroscience (pp. 1–16). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Hatfield, T., Han, J.-S., Conley, M., Gallagher, M., & Holland, P. C. (1996). Neurotoxic lesions of the basolateral, but not central, amygdala interfere with Pavlovian second order conditioning and reinforcer devaluation effects. Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 5256–5265.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Holland, P. C. (1981a). Acquisition of representation mediated conditioned food aversions. Learning & Motivation, 12, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Holland, P. C. (1981b). The effects of satiation after first-and second-order appetitive conditioning. Pavlovian Journal of Biological Science, 16, 18–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Holland, P. C. (1990). Event representation in Pavlovian conditioning: Image and action. Cognition, 37, 105–131.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Holland, P. C. (1997). Brain mechanisms for changes in processing of conditioned stimuli in Pavlovian conditioning: Implications for behavior theory. Learning & Behavior, 25, 373–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Holland, P. C. (1998). Amount of training affects associatively-activated event representation. Neuropharmacology, 37, 461–469.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Holland, P. C. (2004). Relations between Pavlovian-instrumental transfer and reinforcer devaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 30, 104–117.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Holland, P. C. (2005). Amount of training effects in representation-mediated food aversion learning: No evidence of a role for associability changes. Learning & Behavior, 33, 464–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Holland, P. C., & Forbes, D. T. (1982). Control of conditional discrimination performance by CS-evoked event representations. Learning & Behavior, 10, 249–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Holland, P. C., & Gallagher, M. (2004). Amygdala-frontal interactions and reward expectancy. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 14, 148–155.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Holland, P. C., Lasseter, H., & Agarwal, I. (2008). Amount of training and cue-evoked taste-reactivity responding in reinforcer devaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 34, 119–132.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Holland, P. C., & Rescorla, R. A. (1975). The effect of two ways of devaluing the unconditioned stimulus after first- and second-order appetitive conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1, 355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Holland, P. C., & Straub, J. J. (1979). Differential effects of two ways of devaluing the unconditioned stimulus after Pavlovian appetitive conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 65–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Holland, P. C., & Wheeler, D. S. (in press). Representation-mediated food aversions. In S. Reilly & T. Schachtman (Eds.), Conditioned taste aversion: Behavioral and neural processes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  39. Johnson, A. W., Gallagher, M., & Holland, P. C. (2007, November). Examining the role of the basolateral amygdala in the expression of reinforcer devaluation. Poster presented at the 37th Annual Meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, San Diego.Google Scholar
  40. Kerfoot, E. C., Agarwal, I., Lee, H. J., & Holland, P. C. (2007). Control of appetitive and aversive taste-reactivity responses by an auditory conditioned stimulus in a devaluation task: A FOS and behavioral analysis. Learning & Memory, 14, 581–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kiefer, S. W., & Orr, M. R. (1992). Taste avoidance, but not aversion, learning in rats lacking gustatory cortex. Behavioral Neuroscience, 106, 140–146.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Kimble, G. A., & Perlmuter, L. C. (1970). The problem of volition. Psychological Review, 77, 361–384.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Koffka, K. (1935). The principles of Gestalt psychology. New York: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
  44. Kohler, W. (1940). Dynamics in psychology. New York: Liveright.Google Scholar
  45. Konorski, J. (1967). Integrative activity of the brain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  46. Lamprecht, R., & Dudai, Y. (2000). The amygdala in conditioned taste aversion: It’s there but where? In J. P. Aggleton (Ed.), The amygdala: A functional analysis (pp. 331–351). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Lee, H. J., Groshek, F., Petrovich, G. D., Cantalini, J. P., Gallagher, M., & Holland, P. C. (2005). Role of amygdalo-nigral circuitry in conditioning of a visual stimulus paired with food. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 3881–3888.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Loucks, R. B. (1935). The experimental delimination of neural structures essential for learning: The attempt to condition striped muscle responses to faradization of the sigmoid gyri. Journal of Psychology, 1, 5–44.Google Scholar
  50. Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Maddux, J.-M., & Holland, P. C. (2007, November). Lesions of the medial prefrontal cortex impair Pavlovian devaluation. Poster presented at the 37th Annual Meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, San Diego.Google Scholar
  52. Medina, J. F., Nores, W. L., Ohyama, T., & Mauk, M. D. (2000). Mechanisms of cerebellar learning suggested by eyelid conditioning. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 10, 717–724.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Miller, N. E. (1935). A reply to “Sign gestalt or conditioned reflex?” Psychological Review, 42, 280–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Osgood, C. E. (1953). Method and theory in experimental psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Packard, M. G., & McGaugh, J. L. (1996). Inactivation of hippocampus or caudate nucleus with lidocaine differentially affects expression of place and response learning. Neurobiology of Learning & Memory, 65, 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Parkinson, J. A., Roberts, A. C., Everitt, B. J., & di Ciano, P. (2005). Acquisition of instrumental conditioned reinforcement is resistant to the devaluation of the unconditioned stimulus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58B, 19–30.Google Scholar
  57. Pearce, J. M., & Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review, 106, 532–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Petrovich, G. D., Holland, P. C., & Gallagher, M. (2005). Amygdalar and prefrontal pathways to the lateral hypothalamus are activated by a learned cue that stimulates eating. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 8295–8302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Pickens, C. L. (2008). A limited role for mediodorsal thalamus in devaluation tasks. Behavioral Neuroscience, 122, 659–676.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Pickens, C. L., & Holland, P. C. (2004). Conditioning and cognition. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 28, 651–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pickens, C. L., Saddoris, M. P., Gallagher, M., & Holland, P. C. (2005). Orbitofrontal lesions impair use of cue-outcome associations in a devaluation task. Behavioral Neuroscience, 119, 317–322.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Pickens, C. L., Saddoris, M. P., Setlow, B., Gallagher, M., Holland, P. C., & Schoenbaum, G. (2003). Different roles for orbitofrontal cortex and basolateral amygdala in a reinforcer devaluation task. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 11078–11084.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Poldrack, R. A., & Packard, M. G. (2003). Competition among multiple memory systems: Converging evidence from animal and human brain studies. Neuropsychologia, 41, 245–251.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Rescorla, R. A. (1973). Effect of US habituation following conditioning. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 82, 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rescorla, R. A. (1974). Effect of inflation of the unconditioned stimulus value following conditioning. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 86, 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rescorla, R. A. (1975). Pavlovian excitatory and inhibitory conditioning. In W. K. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Vol. 2, pp. 7–35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  67. Rescorla, R. A. (1986). Two perceptual variables in within-event learning. Learning & Behavior, 14, 387–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rescorla, R. A. (1987). A Pavlovian analysis of goal directed behavior. American Psychologist, 42, 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rescorla, R. A. (1988). Pavlovian conditioning: It’s not what you think it is. American Psychologist, 43, 151–160.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Rescorla, R. A. (1994). Transfer of instrumental control mediated by a devalued outcome. Learning & Behavior, 22, 27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Reynolds, S. M., & Berridge, K. C. (2002). Positive and negative motivation in nucleus accumbens shell: Bivalent rostrocaudal gradients for GABA-elicited eating, taste “liking”/“disliking” reactions, place preference/avoidance, and fear. Journal of Neuroscience, 22, 7308–7320.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Rozeboom, W. W. (1958). “What is learned?” An empirical enigma. Psychological Review, 65, 22–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Saddoris, M. P., Gallagher, M., & Schoenbaum, G. (2005). Rapid associative encoding in basolateral amygdala depends on connections with orbitofrontal cortex. Neuron, 46, 321–331.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Schoenbaum, G., Chiba, A. A., & Gallagher, M. (1998). Orbitofrontal cortex and basolateral amygdala encode expected outcomes during learning. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 155–159.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Schoenbaum, G., Setlow, B., Saddoris, M. P., & Gallagher, M. (2003). Encoding predicted outcome and acquired value in orbitofrontal cortex during cue sampling depends upon input from basolateral amygdala. Neuron, 39, 855–867.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Siegel, S. (1967). Overtraining and transfer processes. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 64, 471–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Spence, K. W. (1936). The nature of discrimination learning in animals. Psychological Review, 43, 427–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Spence, K. W. (1948, September). Cognitive versus S-R theories of learning. Address to the Division of Theoretical-Experimental Psychology at the 56th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston.Google Scholar
  79. Spence, K. W. (1950). Cognitive versus stimulus-response theories of learning. Psychological Review, 57, 159–172.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Steinmetz, J. E., Lavond, D. G., & Thompson, R. F. (1989). Classical-conditioning in rabbits using pontine nucleus stimulation as a conditioned-stimulus and inferior olive stimulation as an unconditioned stimulus. Synapse, 3, 225–233.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Terry, W. S., & Wagner, A. R. (1975). Short term memory for “surprising” versus “expected” unconditioned stimuli in Pavlovian con- ditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1, 122–133.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Thomas, E. (1971). The role of postural adjustments in conditioning of dogs with electrical stimulation of the motor cortex as the unconditioned stimulus. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 76, 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Thompson, R. F. (1972). Sensory preconditioning. In R. F. Thompson & J. S. Voss (Eds.), Topics in learning and performance (pp. 105–129). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  84. Thompson, R. F., Thompson, J. K., Kim, J. J., Kripa, D. J., & Shinkman, P. G. (1998). The nature of reinforcement in cerebellar learning. Neurobiology of Learning & Memory, 70, 150–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals. Psychological Review Monograph Supplements, 2 (4, Whole No. 8).Google Scholar
  86. Tinklepaugh, O. L. (1928). An experimental study of representative factors in monkeys. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 8, 197–236.Google Scholar
  87. Tolman, E. C. (1932). Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: Appleton Century.Google Scholar
  88. Tolman, E. C. (1933). Sign-gestalt or conditioned reflex. Psychological Review, 40, 246–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 189–208.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Tolman, E. C., & Gleitman, H. (1949). Studies in learning and motivation: I. Equal reinforcements in both end-boxes, followed by shock in one end-box. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39, 810–819.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Tolman, E. C., Ritchie, B. F., & Kalish, D. (1946a). Studies in spatial learning: I. Orientation and the short-cut. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 13–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Tolman, E. C., Ritchie, B. F., & Kalish, D. (1946b). Studies in spatial learning: II. Place learning versus response learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 221–229.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Vidal-Gonzalez, I., Vidal-Gonzalez, B., Rauch, S. L., & Quirk, G. J. (2006). Microstimulation reveals opposing influences of prelimbic and infralimbic cortex on the expression of conditioned fear. Learning & Memory, 13, 728–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wagner, A. R., Thomas, E., & Norton, T. (1967). Conditioning with electrical stimulation of the motor cortex: Evidence of a possible source of motivation. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 64, 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Ward-Robinson, J., & Hall, G. (1996). Backward sensory preconditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22, 395–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Yamamoto, T. (2007). Brain regions responsible for the expression of conditioned taste aversion in rats. Chemical Senses, 32, 105–109.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Zener, K. (1937). The significance of behavior accompanying conditioned salivary secretion for theories of the conditioned response. American Journal of Psychology, 50, 384–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Zener, K., & McCurdy, H. G. (1939). Analysis of motivational factions in conditioned behavior: I. The differential effect of changes in hunger on conditioned, unconditioned, and spontaneous salivary secretion. Journal of Psychology, 8, 321–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychological and Brain SciencesJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimore

Personalised recommendations