Theories of Conditioning

Pavlov’s Stimulus Substitution Theory

The Conditioned Stimulus (CS) acts as a substitute for the Unconditioned Stimulus
(UCS). A connection forms in the brain between the Conditioned Stimulus and the
Unconditioned Stimulus activation sites. When the Conditioned Stimulus is activated
alone, following acquisition, it will automatically activate the Unconditioned Stimulus
site in the brain. Therefore, the Conditioned Response should be most identical to the
Unconditioned Response (because the connection between UCS and UCR in the brain is
hardwired.)

Evidence that Support the Stimulus Substitution Hypothesis: Jenkins & Moore
Study

> one group of pigeons has CS (light) UCS (grain). It is showed that pigeons are
trying to “eat” the lit key (open beak and closed eyes) when they pecked.

> second group had CS (light) UCS (water) and showed that the pigeons is trying to
“drink” the lit key (closed beak and open eyes) when they pecked.

Evidence against Stimulus Substitution Hypothesis

Any study in which the elicited CR is different from the UCS.

e.g. when a light is paired with food, the rats will rear to the light (CR) but the UCR is
approach to the food dispenser.

Preparatory Response Theory

What is learned during Pavlovian Conditioning is a response that prepares the organism
for the appearance of the UCS. The response need not be identical to the UCR, and may,
under certain circumstances involve novel forms of behavior that are antagonistic to the
UCR.

Kimble’s Preparatory Model

His theory proposed that the CR is a response that serves to prepare the organism for the
upcoming UCS.

e.g. following acquisition of CR’s in eyeblink conditioning, the CR eyeblink may

actually prepare the person for the upcoming airpuff such that the eye would be partially
closed when the airpuff occurs.