Klassisches Konditionieren Informell

Eine mï¿12liche informelle Beschreibung davon, was klassiches Konditionieren ist, findet sich auf der Seite von Steve Booth-Butterfield [24]:
http://www.as.wvu.edu/~sbb/comm221/chapters/pavlov.htm Fr Pawlow selbst siehe Pawlow gesammelte Schriften 1998 [205], Pawlow (1927)[206], Pawlow (1928)[207]

Unter der ï¿12erschrift Components of Classical Conditioning schreibt Steve Booth-Butterfield:

The easiest place to start is with a little example. Consider a hungry dog who sees a bowl of food. Something like this might happen:

$Food \longrightarrow Salivation$

The dog is hungry, the dog sees the food, the dog salivates. This is a natural sequence of events, an unconscious, uncontrolled, and unlearned relationship. See the food, then salivate. Now, because we are humans who have an insatiable curiosity, we experiment. When we present the food to the hungry dog (and before the dog salivates), we ring a bell. Thus,

$\{Bell, Food\} \longrightarrow Salivation$

We repeat this action (food and bell given simultaneously) at several meals. Every time the dog sees the food, the dog also hears the bell. Ding-dong, Alpo. Now, because we are humans who like to play tricks on our pets, we do another experiment. We ring the bell (Ding-dong), but we don't show any food. What does the dog do? Right,

$Bell \longrightarrow Salivate$

The bell elicits the same response the sight of the food gets. Over repeated trials, the dog has learned to associate the bell with the food and now the bell has the power to produce the same response as the food. (And, of course, after you've tricked your dog into drooling and acting even more stupidly than usual, you must give it a special treat.) This is the essence of Classical Conditioning. It really is that simple. You start with two things that are already connected with each other (food and salivation). Then you add a third thing (bell) for several trials. Eventually, this third thing may become so strongly associated that it has the power to produce the old behavior.

Now, where do we get the term, "Conditioning" from all this? Let me draw up the diagrams with the official terminology.

1. $Food \longrightarrow Salivation$
2. $Unconditioned Stimulus (US) \longrightarrow Unconditioned Response (UR$

Unconditioned simply means that the stimulus and the response are naturally connected. They just came that way, hard wired together like a horse and carriage and love and marriage as the song goes. Unconditioned means that this connection was already present before we got there and started messing around with the dog or the child or the spouse. Stimulus simply means the thing that starts it while response means the thing that ends it. A stimulus elicits and a response is elicited. (This is circular reasoning,... Another diagram, Conditioning Stimulus

1. $Bell \&Food \longrightarrow Salivation$
2. $Unconditioned Stimulus (US) \longrightarrow Unconditioned Response (UR)$

We already know that Unconditioned means unlearned, untaught, preexisting, already-present-before-we-got-there. Conditioning just means the opposite. It means that we are trying to associate, connect, bond, link something new with the old relationship. And we want this new thing to elicit (rather than be elicited) so it will be a stimulus and not a response. Finally, after many trials we hope for,

1. $Bell \longrightarrow Salivation$
2. $Conditioned Stimulus (CS) \longrightarrow Conditioned Response (CR)$

Let's review these concepts:

1. Unconditioned Stimulus (US): a thing that can already elicit a response.
2. Unconditioned Response (UR): a thing that is already elicited by a stimulus.
3. Unconditioned Relationship: an existing stimulus-response connection.
4. Conditioning Stimulus (CS): a new stimulus we deliver the same time we give the old stimulus.
5. Conditioned Relationship: the new stimulus-response relationship we created by associating a new stimulus with an old response.

There are two key parts. First, we start with an existing relationship, Unconditioned Stimulus --> Unconditioned Response. Second, we pair a new thing (Conditioning Stimulus) with the existing relationship, until the new thing has the power to elicit the old response.

Soweit diese informelle Beschreibung.