Classical conditioning: what does the cue predict?

Classical conditioning: what does the cue predict?

Identify stimulus–stimulus learning and distinguish acquisition, extinction, generalization and discrimination.

Question and prediction

Does presenting a tone and food equally often guarantee that the tone predicts food?

Predict which schedule makes the tone more informative: food only after tone, or food equally often with and without tone.

Mechanism and evidence

Classical conditioning concerns learning relationships between stimuli. In a standard food example, food is an unconditioned stimulus and salivation to food is an unconditioned response. After learning, a previously neutral cue can become a conditioned stimulus and elicit a conditioned response. The learned response need not be an exact copy of the original response. This differs from operant learning, in which a behavior’s consequences change its future likelihood.

The timing and predictive relationship matter. Extinction occurs when a conditioned cue is repeatedly presented without the expected unconditioned stimulus and responding declines. That decline does not establish that the original learning has been erased; responding can return under some circumstances. Generalization refers to responding to related cues, while discrimination involves different responses to cues with different histories.

The fictional schedule separates pairing from predictive information. In A, food follows 8 of 10 tones and occurs in 2 of 10 no-tone periods. In B, food follows 8 of 10 tones and occurs in 8 of 10 no-tone periods. Both include eight tone-food pairings, but the tone adds more information in A. The difference between conditional proportions is 0.6 in A and 0 in B. This is a teaching measure of contingency, not a universal equation for response strength.

Use observations of responding to test the prediction rather than assuming the schedule determines an exact amount of learning. Attention, prior learning, timing and species can matter. Do not recreate fear-conditioning experiments or condition classmates. The source cards supply the full safe analytic task, and the conclusions concern a mechanism rather than a person’s emotional health.

Inspect the relationships

Schedule	Food after tone	Food without tone	Difference
A	.8	.2	.6
B	.8	.8	0

Predict before interpreting: which cue reduces uncertainty more?

Worked example

A: P(food|tone)=8/10=.8 and P(food|no tone)=2/10=.2, difference .6. B: .8−.8=0. The tone is more informative in A despite equal pairing counts. These schedules support a prediction to test, not measured conditioned responses.

Your investigation

Label unconditioned stimulus/response and conditioned stimulus/response in a food-and-tone diagram. Calculate both schedule contrasts. Write 180 words explaining why equal pairing counts do not establish equal prediction, then design a response measure without administering stimuli.

Unfamiliar transfer

Responding falls during cue-alone trials but returns later. Which claim is too strong? Explain your reasoning before checking feedback.

Reading

OpenStax Psychology 2e: classical conditioning. The records below are original fictional teaching cases, not research results from this source.

Fictional schedule A 10 tone periods: food in 8. 10 no-tone periods: food in 2. Period lengths are equal.

Fictional schedule B 10 tone periods: food in 8. 10 no-tone periods: food in 8. Equal period lengths; no behavioral response measurements supplied.