On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, James D. Dougan wrote:
> A tough question, which actually gets at the heart of some important
> theoretical issue. One could make an argument for either or both.
>
> If I had to choose one way or another, I would say classical. A
> conditioned stimulus (the whistle) is paired with an unconditioned stimulus
> (food) which normally elicits a feeding response. The whistle then comes
> to elicit feeding. This is a situation not unlike autoshaping.
>
> On the other hand, the whistle could be viewed as a discriminative stimulus
> which "sets the occasion" for feeding responses, in the sense that feeding
> behavior is likely to be reinforced following the whistle. In this case,
> it would be operant.
>
> Of course, a number of theorists have argued that these are essentially the
> same thing, but viewed from different perspectives.
>
> That probably confused you more....
>
> -- Jim
Just curious as to if Mowrer's two-factor theory of learning would
be applicable here. I am familiar with the two-factor as it pertains
to escape conditioning.
But it would seem that both conditioned elication and emitted-reinforcing
paradigms may be applicable here.
Michael Sylvester
Daytona Beach,Florida
