Fractional antedating goal response hull
Latent learning is said to demonstrate the importance of cognition in learning as well as a limitation of behavioral theory.
Specifically, the procedure and results of the experiments of Tolman and Honzik (1930a, 1930b) are presented to show the necessity of cognitive factors for explaining learning (Tolman's cognitive map) and to show that behavioral explanations are inadequate due to their insistence that reinforcement is necessary for learning to occur.
The topic is discussed in the first introductory textbook written explicitly for high school courses (Blair-Broeker & Ernst, 2003) and in European introductory psychology textbooks (e.g., Bottone, 2001).
The present paper, then, has as its general purpose to assess the scholarship in introductory psychology textbooks' treatment of the topic of latent learning.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Robert Jensen, Department of Psychology, California State University, Sacramento, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, California 95819, e-mail: [email protected] This paper critically assesses the scholarship in introductory psychology textbooks in relation to the topic of latent learning.
Latent learning is a topic that has received consistent attention in generations of introductory textbooks and is the focus of the present paper.
Deriving their theories from the classical conditioning principles discovered by Ivan Pavlov, the S-R theorists viewed behavior (the R) to have become associated with some event or aspect of the environment (the S) that was present when the R occurred.
A review of the treatment of latent learning in 48 introductory psychology textbooks published between 19, with 21 of these texts published since 1999, reveals that the scholarship on the topic of latent learning demonstrated in introductory textbooks warrants improvement.
One of Hull's great strengths was his skill in systematically crafting experimental tests of the numerous hypotheses he developed to verify his system.
His investigations allowed him to provide an explanation for maze learning in general (Hull, 1934a, 1934b) as well as the theoretically more challenging latent learning (Hull, 1952, pp. For Hull, what occurred during latent learning was the establishment and modification of S-R associations due to a change in the excitatory, or reaction, potential (s Er) of a “bit of learned behavior” (Hull, 1952, p. Hull viewed the reaction potential as a multiplicative function of the strength of the drive, the intensity of the stimulus, the motivating strength of the incentive, and, finally the habit strength of the particular response.
Implications of the presence of these errors for students and the discipline are considered.
Lastly, remedies are offered to improve the scholarship found in introductory psychology textbooks.