He does make a convincing case but he compares animal liberation with three other liberation movements. Singer tells us that animals do communicate with one another but since we do not speak the same language it is more difficult for us to understand and we cannot assume anything. “Other animals may communicate with each other, but not in the way we do.” (para. 13). He does convince me that there is an issue with us assuming things for the nonhumans because we do not know what they want.
Then Pavlov began to notice that the dogs began to salivate when he saw an empty plate, or when he saw the experimenter; the dogs even salivated at the sound of the foot steps from the experimenter as they were about to enter the room. Noticing these responses from the dogs, Pavlov decided to test his discovery of condition reflexes. In his experiments testing conditioned reflexes, before the experimenters would enter the room to feed the dogs Pavlov would have a light turned on or have a bell rung. At first the dogs had a neutral reaction to the light or bell because the dogs have not associated those stimuli with being feed. After many trials of pairing, with the light or the bell, with the food, eventually the dogs began to associate being feed with the stimuli if the light or the bell.
Learning is through operant, classical or instrumental conditioning. Behaviourists view instrumental and operant conditioning as having a slight difference on the constructs they observe for each of these. Cognitivists view learning as through classical conditioning, operant (instrumental) conditioning or observational learning. Ivan Pavlov a Russian psychologist studied classical conditioning, which is a valid means of learning to both groups. In his classic studies Pavlov rang a bell each time before giving his dogs food and eventually the dogs were conditioned to salivate when they heard the bell in expectancy of food.
In classical conditioning, Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936), conducted an experiment on the eating habits of dogs. In the experiment, Pavlov rang a bell whenever he gave his dog food. After repeating this procedure several times, he realized than whenever the bell rang, the dog could start salivating. The dog had associated food with the sound of the bell. Pavlov concluded that the dogs demonstrated classical condition, whereby the bell was a neutral stimulus and by itself could not produce a response such as salivating (Coon, Mitterer, Talbot & Vanchella, 2010).
Classical conditioning is a theory of learning founded by Ivan Pavlov, It is a way of learning through past association, he accidentally stumbled upon this theory as he was studying the digestive system of the dog and then applied it to human psychology. It involves an unconditioned stimulus and an unconditioned response. He tested his theory with a dog, food being the stimulant (UCS) and salivation being the response (UCR) and a bell as a neutral entity to which there was no response until combined with the food. The final test in the his theory is to reintroduce the the bell without food (UCS) and which this time causes the salivation (UCR). This reveals the dogs mind is remembering the past association with the bell and the food.
smiling) bring desirable responses from others and learn to repeat these behaviours to provoke the desired response. This theory can be primarily criticised as it is highly reductionist and breaks a highly complex behaviour down into stimuli and response pairs. Evidence for it came from Pavlov’s dogs, which primarily lacks relevance to the formation of attachment as it was studying classical conditioning in dogs. Where when a bell was rung before they would fed, and eventually the bell alone would cause them to salivate in the expectation of being fed. Whilst as a lab experiment it had high control it also lacked mundane realism which subtracts from its validity and it is highly questionable if this could be generalised to the development of attachment.
Pavlov used dogs to further prove his theory. He decided to use the tone of the bell (CS) and paired it with food (US) which caused the dogs to salivate (UR). After repeatedly pairing the bell with food, the bell alone caused the dogs to salivate (CR). The dogs orienting response – also referred to as the orienting reflex – to the tone of the bell is that they perk up their ears and turns its sensors to where the sound is coming from. After repeated presentation of the bell, the dogs then got used to the tone of the bell and ignores it because the stimulus is of no consequence, a process he refers to as habituation.
The rat learnt that by pressing the bar the food would appear and began to press it to get fed. This test made it clear with positive reinforcement it can influence future behaviour in this case the rats were given positive reinforcement of food for their bar pressing behaviour it encouraged the rats to press the bar to get food so this made the rats to press the bar again and again. Skinner came to the conclusion that animals are conditioned by the response they
Many people argue that it’s better to test on animals so that if anyone gets hurt it’s just an animal, not say, a father of two children. Animal testing is wrong and inhumane, but there are some instances where I would accept it as inevitable, for instance testing a drug to cure cancer. Testing a drug for something like cancer or stem cell research on an animal would be more tolerable. In some instances, we don’t have another way to test the effects of a particular
As parents we do not feel the need to explain ourselves but just to give them the final response which is no dog. This did not give the children any justification for the reason and simply angered them. This situation could have been better handled with critical and creative thinking. There would have been less arguing and protest had the children been given details rationalizing the decision. This would have helped them understand why bringing a dog into the home was not a good idea and possibly eased there hurt feelings.