Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:52:15.585Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Signalization and Stimulus-Substitution in Pavlov's Theory of Conditioning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2014

Víctor García-Hoz
Víctor García-Hoz*
Affiliation:
Complutense University of Madrid
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Víctor García-Hoz, Departamento de Psicología Básica I, Facultad de Psicología, Campus de Somosaguas, 28223 – Madrid (Spain). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The concept of conditioning as signalization proposed by Ivan P. Pavlov (1927, 1928) is studied in relation to the theory of stimulus-substitution, which is also attributed to him. In the so-called theory of stimulus-substitution a distinction must be made between an empirical principle of substitution and an actual theory of substitution, which can adopt different forms. The Pavlovian theory of substitution—which conceives substitution as a substitution of the unconditioned stimulus (US) by the conditioned stimulus (CS) in the activation of the representation of the former—can be understood as an explanation or model of signalization. Signalization and substitution are answers to different questions, and the level of analysis to which signalization corresponds, is that which concerns the nature of conditioning as an operation of the animal in the environment.

El concepto del condicionamiento como señalización propuesto por Ivan P. Pavlov (1927, 1828) es estudiado en relación a la teoría de la sustitución del estímulo, también atribuída al fisiólogo ruso. En la así llamada teoría de la sustitución del estímulo debe hacerse una distinción entre un principio empírico de sustitución y una auténtica teoría de la sustitución, que puede adoptar formas diversas. La teoría pavloviana de la sustitución –que la concibe como una sustitución del estímulo incondicionado por el estímulo condicionado en la activación de la representación del primero– puede entenderse como una explicación o modelo de señalización. Señalización y sustitución son respuestas a diferentes preguntas y el nivel de análisis al que corresponde la señalización es el que concierne a la naturaleza del condicionamiento como una operación del animal en su medio ambiente.

Keywords

Pavlovian conditioningsignalizationsubstitutioncondicionamiento pavlovianoseñalizaciónsustitución
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 6 , Issue 2: Special Issue: A Century of Pavlovian Theory: The Madrid Lecture (Pavlov, 1903) , November 2003 , pp. 168 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boakes, R. A. (this issue). The impact of Pavlov on the psychology of learning in English-Speaking countries.Google Scholar
Hearst, E., & Jenkins, H. M. (1974). Sign-tracking: The stimulusreinforcer relation and directed action. Austin, TX: The Psychonomic Society.Google Scholar
Hilgard, E. R. (1936). The nature of the conditioned response: I. The case for and against stimulus-substitution. Psychological Review, 43, 366–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Ny, J. F. (1983). El condicionamiento y el aprendizaje. Barcelona, Spain: Península.Google Scholar
Mackintosh, N. J. (1974). The psychology of animal learning. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mackintosh, N. J. (1983). Conditioning and associative learning. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Marr, D. (1982). Vision. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.Google Scholar
Miller, R. R., & Matute, H. (1996). Animal analogues of causal judgment. In Shanks, D. R., Holyoak, K. J., & Medin, D. L. (Eds.), Causal learning. The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 34, pp. 133–166). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. Oxford, UK: Oxford University.Google Scholar
Pavlov, I. P. (1903/1928). Experimental psychology and psychopathology in animals. In Pavlov, I.P. (Aut.), Lectures on conditioned reflexes (Vol. I, pp. 47–60). New York: International.Google Scholar
Pavlov, I. P. (1906/1928). Scientific study of the so-called psychical processes in the higher animals. In Pavlov, I.P. (Aut.), Lectures on conditioned reflexes (Vol. I, pp. 81–96). New York: International.Google Scholar
Pavlov, I. P. (1928). Lectures on conditioned reflexes (Vol. 1). New York: International.Google Scholar
Rescorla, R. A. (1988). Pavlovian conditioning: It's not what you think it is. American Psychologist, 43, 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolman, E. C. (1932). Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Wagner, A. R., & Brandon, S. E. (1989). Evolution of a structured connectionist model of Pavlovian conditioning (AESOP). In Klein, S. B. & Mowrer, R. R. (Eds.), Contemporary learning theories: Vol. 2. Pavlovian conditioning and the status of traditional learning theory (pp. 149–189). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar