On Feb 8, 2014, at 6:46 PM, Mike Palij wrote: > I suppose that Janet Leigh's shock at being stabbed in the shower > is a UCS and the shower is CS but doesn't really sound right to me.
Yes, I agree that my labeling of these objects as stimuli is not valid if we are designing and conducting an experimental study (e.g., see my previous comments about Watson & Rayner, 1920). On the other hand, when trying to explain the basics of classical (and operant) conditioning to intro-psych students, I am much more lax in my use of the terminology. One reason is that I want to make sure that students see the relevance of classical conditioning to their everyday lives. Another reason is that, at that level, few students appreciate the need to describe with extreme precision the stimuli being presented in a conditioning experiment. There are advantages and disadvantages to this strategy, of course; but it's an unavoidable dilemma, and I'm sure that different instructors draw the line at different points. And even I have wavered back and forth between precision in my use of the terminology and trying to make the material understandable/relevant/interesting to students at various levels. That issue also would make a fascinating thread, I think. Best, Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=34064 or send a blank email to leave-34064-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
