(Edward Tolman)
Tolman's name signifies the transition from classical to modern behaviorism (neobehaviorism). After his experiment in the early 1930s, the theoretical scheme of behaviorism changed, in which a stimulus immediately led directly to a response. Tolman says that there is something else between stimulus and response. S - ? – R. This means that the internal activity of the subject is allowed, the thought about the existence of the psychic is allowed. His main experiments were with latent (hidden, imperceptible) learning.
Lecture 6 (24.10.97) (top)
3. Subject and tasks of behavioral psychology. General overview about learning and its types. Understanding the Intervening Variable and Cognitive Maps (0:59)
There is a scheme of classical behaviorism S→R. And the scheme of modern behaviorism between S and R is an intermediate variable, the concept of which was proposed by E. Tolman in their experiments on latent learning.
Experiments. Three groups of animals take part, rats who have learned to run through a maze. Two groups were taken as control and one main experimental group. In order to understand the results there will be a table of two axes. On the X axis is the time of the experiment, which is measured in days, and the critical points are the first day - beginning, the 18th day - ending and in between the 11th day. Along the Y axis is the time it takes to run the maze, which is measured in minutes. The experimenter sets the learning criterion - 4 minutes, i.e. The experiment will continue until the rat runs the maze in 4 minutes. It’s important to mark 2 more points – 18 min. and 22 min.
The first control group learned normal conditions with reinforcements. On the first day they ran in 18 minutes, on the last they reached the criterion. Learning seems like hyperbole. The second group learned without reinforcement, without a bait at the exit. Then the results look like broken line or some random sequence. The travel time was distributed between 18 and 22 minutes. In other words, no externally observable learning occurred. The main third group learns without reinforcement within 10 days. And the results are exactly the same as those of the second group. Even if there is learning, it is not noticeable and does not manifest itself in external activity. On the 11th day they begin to give reinforcements. Watson was wrong, and the animals in this group reached the criterion in a week, not in 10 days. Experimental group reached the criterion faster than the control.
Interpretation. For the first 10 days Tolman suggests that subtle learning occurs there too. He proposes the concept of an intermediate variable, i.p. the stimuli in the two groups are the same, but the reactions are different. He proposes the cognitive learning hypothesis. Animals have a concept of a labyrinth. The rats remembered the maze. But Tolman we can only talk about behavior. He called the idea of a labyrinth a cognitive map - an idea of the terrain in which the subject operates.
In a decisive experiment, one must conclude which scheme is correct - Watson or Tolman. The labyrinth is filled with water. If the behavior is as Watson- this is a set of stimulus-reactive connections, then the rat jogged and now everything specific reactions have changed. But if there is a cognitive map, then there is no difference between running a maze and swimming. And the results revealed that the trained animals ran through the maze in the same way as they swam. Turned out to be right Tolman.
A new understanding of objectivity comes. A cognitive map cannot be observed externally, but Tolman argues that there must be a cognitive map. It is a necessary concept to explain behavior. Well, perhaps the most important difference between the classics and neobehaviorism. In classical behaviorism, the subject is devoid of internal activity, he is reactive. In modern times, he is active and constructs his own behavior. In behaviorism Watson– the behavior was a chain of reactions. And in neo-behaviorism Tolman– behavior is holistic in the sense that the subject himself, depending on the conditions, can actively select and build various sets motor reactions. For example, a traveling salesman has a set in his bag in various ways behavior to get to the target location.
This is called internal conditions of behavior. External conditions are a stimulus. Internal conditions– subjective goals, expectations, cognitive maps, independent inner life and many more etc. Even in the psychology of behavior it was not possible to do without internal activity, without mentioning the psyche. Tolman began to talk about the goals of animal behavior, there are cognitive maps, there is internal activity.
In domestic physiology there was Pavlov(analogue Watson in the USA), but there was also Bernstein(analogue Tolman in the USA), who proposed, in contrast to the Pavlovian reflex arc scheme, a reflex ring scheme, a closed arc Pavlova. After WWII Bernstein actively works with psychologists, with Leontyev, works to restore movements in wounded soldiers, writes a book about building movements. Bernstein was expelled from science, allowing him to teach only at the Institute of Physical Education. Another book about dexterity and its development. In Pavlovian sessions they tried to prove that there is no psychology. They want to keep the term psychology, but not science, and the main thing is that the subject has no internal activity, that a person is an automaton. Book Bernstein "On dexterity and its development".
Reflex ring diagram. At first reflex arc from three elements. The first is a sensory organ or afferent organ, essentially a receptor. This organ receives an external signal, a stimulus. The stimulus is then transmitted to the central regions nervous system. The receiving unit is called the re-encoding of the sensory signal into a motor signal. The latter is the organ of movement. Bernstein argues. Pavlov is right in his scheme. But in relation to their subjects, to the dogs who were in a clamped machine and in an isolated tower of silence. Anyone who sits in a tower of silence and is also clamped in a special machine, a reflex arc is applicable to these subjects. And if the dog is free, then the arc should close into a ring. To close into a reflex ring, it is necessary to take into account the outside world. But also changes in the motor organ. Feedback principle - the subject must receive feedback on how the movement is performed (the principle of reverse afferentation, reverse sensitivity, sensory corrections).
Bernstein's books are published in 47, in 48 the book of the founder of cybernetics is published Wiener, where the feedback principle is also stated and is the basis new science. But the first is neither one nor the other, physiologists believe that the feedback principle appeared earlier, it was discovered by P.K. Anokhin. Changes need to be taken into account outside world in order to perform the movements.
Correction means amendment. If there is a motion correction, then there is a standard, a certain program according to which the correction can be made. And let’s move on to the second drawing – the movement program and the principle of the subject’s activity. All four main blocks with the same names are transferred from the reflex ring. But in the very center a special block appears - the movement program. The subject is active. The program is not always conscious. All connections are the same, but at the end there are two flows - one flow is how the movement is required to be performed, and the second is how the movement is actually performed. These streams go to the comparison or comparison block. Bernstein will say that real movement always differs from the program, it never corresponds to the model, there is a difference, which is denoted by the letter “Δ”. And the message about the difference goes further to the re-encryption unit. Ring: in the center there is a source of activity, the required information goes to the comparison block, is compared here with real information and a message about the difference goes up.
(intervening variable) Intervening variable is an unobserved relationship between two observed variables. In plural our assumptions about the causes of people. behavior postulated intermediate psychol. variables that act as a link between stimulus and response. Let's look at an example. Imagine two boys on a playground. George pushes Sam, then Sam pushes George. At first glance, it appears that Sam's response (that he pushed George) was driven by the fact that George pushed him. However, to understand causation, we must assume the existence of P. p. Sam was pushed (this is a stimulus), and he thinks: “Yeah, George pushed me, which means I have the right to fight back” (P. p.), and pushes George (reaction). The introduction of P. p. allows us to understand why different people react differently to the same stimulus. Eg. William runs away when George tries to push him, and David, in a similar situation, laughs. Perhaps P. p. for William was his thought: “George is stronger than me. If I don’t run away, he’ll push me again.” David's laughter may be due to the fact that he explains George's behavior as his excessive playfulness or clumsiness. P. p. cannot be seen. We only see 2 things: the stimulus (George's push) and the response (the push back, running away, or laughing). Psychotherapists work with their clients, trying to understand P. p., leading to maladaptive reactions. Psychoanalysts may look for P. items associated with experiences acquired in early childhood. Cognitive therapists can help people replace unacceptable thinking points (negative cognitions) with more adaptive thinking points (eg positive cognitions). Thus, a client who is afraid of the dark can be taught to redefine darkness as promising rest and relaxation. Psychologists explain the sequence of people. behavior, postulating such P. items as personality traits or abilities, which are relatively stable characteristics of people. One can accept that Sam is pugnacious, William has low self-esteem, and David good feeling humor. The interpretation of the reaction depends on the P. item used. Imagine this situation: the child failed the exam. It can be assumed that P. p. is competence, motivation to study hard, or the support of loving parents. Which of these three variables - ability, motivation or parental support - was responsible for failing the exam? The therapist's help to the child in achieving success depends on how the P. p. is interpreted. Should the child be transferred to a lower grade, does he need some more serious motivation, or is it not the child's problem, and the therapist should work with the parents? If P. is chosen incorrectly, therapy may be ineffective. To assess P., psychologists use interviews and tests. In psychology theories postulate ego strength, locus of control, and cognitive dissonance as P. These unobservable variables are link between stimuli and reactions. Right choice P.P. allows you to better understand and more accurately predict behavior. RET by A. Ellis is based on the concept of changeability of cognitive P. p. See also Individual differences, Rational-emotive behavioral therapy M. Ellin
Under the pressure of the three problems noted above - memory, motivation and cognition, most of the creators of the so-called. supplemented Skinner's experiment. analysis of environmental and behavioral variables by intervening variables. Intermediate variables are theories. constructs, the meaning of which is determined through their connections with various environmental variables, whose general effects they are intended to summarize.
Tolman's expectancy theory. Thorndike, influenced by Darwin's premise of continuity of evolution, biologist. species, began the transition to a less mentalistic psychology. John B. Watson concluded it with a complete rejection of mentalistic concepts. Acting in line with the new thinking, Tolman replaced the old speculative mentalistic concepts with logically definable intermediate variables.
Regarding the subject of our discussion (reinforcement), Tolman did not follow Thorndike's example. Thorndike viewed the consequences of a response as being of utmost importance in strengthening the associative connection between stimulus and response. He called this the law of effect ( law of effect), which was the forerunner of modern reinforcement theory. Tolman believed that response consequences had effects other than learning. as such, but only on external expression underlying learning processes. The need to distinguish between learning and execution arose in the course of attempts to interpret the results of experiments on latent learning. As the theory developed, the name of Tolman's intermediate learning variable was changed several times, but the most appropriate name would probably be expectation(expectancy). Expectancy depended solely on the temporal sequence—or contiguity—of events in the environment rather than on the consequences of the response.
Physiological theory Pavlova. For Pavlov, as for Tolman, it was necessary and sufficient condition learning was the contiguity of events. These events are physiologist. are represented by processes occurring in those areas of the cerebral cortex, which are activated by indifferent and unconditioned stimuli. The evolutionary consequences of a learned response were recognized by Pavlov, but not tested experimentally. conditions, so their role in learning remains unclear.
Molecular theory of Ghazri. Like Tolman and Pavlov, and unlike Thorndike, Edwin R. Ghazri believed that contiguity was a sufficient condition for learning. However, co-occurring events were not determined by such broad (i.e., molar) events in the environment as Tolman argued. Each molar environmental event, according to Ghazri, consists of many molecular stimulus elements, which he called signals. Each molar behavior, which Ghazri called “action,” in turn consists of many molecular reactions, or "movements". If a signal is combined in time with movement, this movement becomes completely determined by this signal. Learning a behavioral action develops slowly only because most actions require learning of many component movements in the presence of many specific signals.
Hull's drive reduction theory. The use of intervening variables in learning theory reached its greatest development in the work of Clark L. Hull. Hull attempted to develop a general interpretation of behavioral changes resulting from both classical and operant procedures. Both the conjugation of stimulus and response and the reduction of drive entered as necessary components into Hull's concept of reinforcement.
Fulfillment of learning conditions affects the formation of an intermediate variable - habit ( habit). Habit was defined by Hull as a theory. a construct that summarizes the overall effect of a number of situational variables on a number of behavioral variables. The relationships between situational variables and the intervening variable (habit), and then between habit and behavior, were expressed in the form of algebraic equations. Despite the use of some of his intermediate variables in the formulation of physiologist. terms, experiment. research and Hull's theory were concerned exclusively with the behavioral level of analysis. Kenneth W. Spence, a Hull collaborator who contributed significantly to the development of his theory, was particularly careful in defining intermediate variables in purely logical terms.
Subsequent development
Although none of these theories of intermediate variables retained their significance in the second half of the 20th century, the subsequent development of technical sciences. influenced by two of them key features. All subsequent theories, as a rule, were based on mat. apparatus and considered a strictly defined range of phenomena - that is, they were “miniature” theories.
Hull's theory was the first step towards creating a quantitative theory of behavior, but it algebraic equations served only to briefly formulate the basics. concepts. The first ones are really swear words. T.n. were developed by Estes. Dr. quantitative theories, instead of using probability theory and math. statistics relied primarily on the theory of information processing. or computer models.
Within the framework of intervening variable theories, the most significant contribution to the development of the principle of reinforcement came from empirical research. Leon Karnina and related theories. works by Robert Rescola and Alan R. Wagner. In the classical conditioning procedure, an indifferent stimulus combined with a k.-l. other effective reinforcement, does not gain control over the reaction if the indifferent stimulus is accompanied by another stimulus, which already causes this reaction. At the behavioral level, a certain discrepancy ( discrepancy)between the reaction caused by reinforcement and the reaction that occurs during the presentation of this indifferent stimulus must be complemented by similarity ( contiguity), if we want learning to occur. In addition, the nature of this discrepancy must be precisely defined.
In terms of experimentation. behavior analysis theory. the work has become more obscene. character, although ch. arr. deterministic rather than probabilistic systems. Theoret. research here they developed in the direction from the analysis of a single reinforced reaction to multiple ones. reinforced reactions and the interaction of reinforced reactions with other reactions. In the most in a broad sense, these theories describe various reinforcers ( reinforcers)as causes causing a redistribution of the body’s reactions within the limits of possible behavioral alternatives. The redistribution that has occurred minimizes the change in the current reaction until a new operant conjugation is established ( operant contingency) and being sensitive to instantaneous value probability of reinforcement for each response. There is reason to believe that the work carried out by representatives of the theory of intermediate variables in the field of classical conditioning and experimental. analysts in the field of operant conditioning, leads to a common understanding of reinforcement, in which behavior is changed in order to minimize the network of discrepancies associated with the action of all excitatory stimuli present in a given environment.
see also Dual Process Learning Theory, Thorndike's Laws of Learning, Classical Conditioning, Operant Conditioning, Reinforcement Schedules, Learning Outcomes(I, II), Least Preferred Employee Scale
J. Donahue
Dream theories ( theories of sleep)
In the field of research sleep exists wide range theories: from private ones relating to specific aspects of sleep, such as communication R.E.M.-from dreams, to more general ones, the authors of which try to explain the need for sleep. This article is devoted to theories of the latter type, which can be divided into five general categories:
1. Recovery theories(Restorative Theories). Sleep is a necessary period of recovery from unhealthy or debilitating conditions that develop during wakefulness. This is the most ancient (proposed by Aristotle) and most widespread T. s. Living organisms go to bed when they are tired and wake up refreshed.
2. Defense theories(Protective Theories). Sleep helps avoid continuous and overstimulation. Pavlov, for example, considered sleep as a cortical inhibition that helps protect the body from overstimulation. Living organisms sleep not because they are tired or exhausted, but to protect themselves from exhaustion.
3. Energy Saving Theory(Energy Conservation Theory). This theory arose as a result of research. on animals, during which it was discovered strong connection between high levels of metabolic activity and total sleep time. Because sleep, like hibernation, reduces energy expenditure, animals with high levels of metabolic activity reduce their energy requirements by sleeping longer.
4. Theories of instinct(Instinctive Theories). In these theories, sleep is considered as a species-specific, morpho-physiologically realized instinct, triggered by environmental signals, necessarily causing a sleep reaction that is appropriate in a specific situation.
5. Theories of adaptation(Adaptive Theories). This category includes the most modern. theories of sleep, which consider sleep as an adaptive behavioral reaction. Proponents of this approach consider sleep to be a regular time-out response due to predation pressure ( predator pressures) and the need to get food. Thus, sleep does not seem to be a dangerous behavior (as in restoration theories), but rather a survival-enhancing response.
These theories are often combined. Thus, both defense and instinct theories can include the concept of restoration. For example, Pavlov recognized the function of restoration as part of his defense theory. Energy conservation theory and restoration theories can also be considered as protection theories. And the early version of adaptation theory included the concept of instinct as a mechanism of adaptation.
The theories of restoration and adaptation have, over time, come to represent the principal centers of opposition. The reasons for this are quite clear: each of the two theories fits well with certain areas of sleep phenomena. Recovery theory is consistent with the most important effects of sleep deprivation: when a person. or the animal is deprived of sleep, problems arise negative effects, and when they get enough sleep, these effects are reduced. Adaptation theory is consistent with a wide range of animal sleep data linking timing and total sleep duration to evolutionary pressures ( evolutionary pressures)habitat. For example, grazing herd animals, which are under strong pressure from predators, tend to sleep in short periods, interspersed with awakenings, and the total duration of their sleep is only about 4 hours a day. Gorillas, who experience virtually no predator pressure and have a limited need to search for food, sleep 14 hours a day.
Both of these approaches have encountered difficulties in explaining the empirical material. According to the recovery model, there should be a direct relationship between wake time and its consequences. However, it turned out that the increase in the effects of sleep deprivation is not linear, but wave-like. When subjects are deprived of sleep for two nights, they perform better on various tasks on the third day than on the second night. Sleep time should be directly related to recovery time. However, some animals recover the energy used up in 20 hours of wakefulness with just 4 hours of sleep, while others require at least 18 hours of sleep per day. Within-species individual differences in sleep patterns reveal the shortest recovery times for the longest periods of wakefulness in each 24-hour period. From research displaced sleep, for example, due to the transfer of people to another work shift, it is also known that sleep and sleepiness are influenced by the time of day. On the other hand, proponents of adaptation theories have offered no explanation at all for the effects of sleep deprivation and are faced with an unforeseen question, namely, why the animal simply “does not stop the behavior” ( nonbehave)or does not rest instead of sleep.
Both theories under consideration. positions have experienced certain difficulties in empirically substantiating the mechanisms underlying them. Since the very first systematic studies. sleep, attempts have not stopped to find a “toxin” or a substance of “depletion”, which naturally changes during wakefulness and shows the opposite change during sleep. On this moment It was never possible to discover such a substance, which, moreover, would have strictly a certain line changes depending on time. Theories of adaptation are forced to rely on an instinctive mechanism that is not strictly defined.
Since the 1960s Research has begun to expand. chronology or sleep time charts. From experiments conducted in an environment devoid of signs of the passage of time, and research. consequences of a shift in sleep time in a 24-hour cycle (for example, in connection with a transition to another work shift), it became obvious that sleep is a synchronous ( time-locked)system. Apparently, sleep can be viewed as an endogenously synchronized biology. rhythm organized on a 24-hour or circadian basis (lat. circa- about + dies- day) basis. It is becoming increasingly clear to adaptation theorists that the explanatory mechanism for choosing appropriate sleep times could be an endogenous biological mechanism. rhythm.
Alex Borbely and his colleagues proposed a two-factor theoretical model sleep. This model combines two components: the sleep requirement or restorative component and the time reference or circadian component. Sleep and wakefulness are determined by the need for sleep ( S), increasing during wakefulness and decreasing during sleep, and a circadian biologist. rhythm of drowsiness ( WITH), specified by the time component. This model, in a highly simplified form, is clearly presented in Fig. 1. For example, the trends depicted are clearly non-linear and the circadian component likely contains a positive component. However, the general relationships are correctly depicted in this figure.
Rice. 1. The relationship between the need for sleep ( SWITH) within a 24 hour period.
In Fig. Figure 1 shows a 24-hour period (from 8 a.m. to 8 a.m. the next morning). It is assumed that the individual was awake from 8 o'clock. morning until 12 o'clock. nights and slept from 12 o'clock. night until 8 o'clock. morning. The ordinate axis shows the levels of sleep propensity ( sleep tendencies), associated with both the need for sleep ( S), and with the circadian component ( WITH). In this example, drowsiness ( sleepiness), related to S, increases from 8 o'clock. morning to midnight and falls from midnight to 8 o'clock. next morning. Peak sleepiness associated with WITH-effect occurs at 4 hours. morning. The numbers below the graph are approximations of sleepiness trends due to two components ( S And WITH) and their combined action ( S+WITH). If the drowsiness threshold is 1 for waking up and 10 for falling asleep, according to the graph in Fig. 1 can be predicted highest probability waking up around 8 o'clock. in the morning, and falling asleep is around 12 o'clock. nights.
Inclusion of these two components into the theory, as well as a more detailed description of their relationships and functional aspects of the theories. constructs, advance theorizing from easy to use general principles to the possibility of predicting and testing constructs. For example, using this model, you can see that if you extend the time of wakefulness, say, to two days, the interaction of components S And WITH will give, in accordance with our data, a wave-like increase in drowsiness.
Rice. Figure 2 shows the effect of these constructs under conditions of night shift work. Our hypothetical worker sleeps from 8 o'clock. morning until 4 o'clock. day and works from midnight to 8 o'clock. morning. As in Fig. 1, here are the levels of sleep propensity associated with the constructs S And WITH and their combined action (the corresponding figures are indicated below the graph). In this case, the tendency to sleep during the daytime period (from 8 am to 4 pm), since it is not complemented by the circadian tendency, quickly decreases and reaches the awakening threshold. Since the decline in sleep propensity is likely to follow an exponential law, this allows us to predict less deep dream (lighter sleep)and premature awakenings for our shift worker, which is usually the case. Likewise, when working from midnight to 8 o'clock. morning, an increase in the tendency to sleep due to the action of the factor S in combination with the factor WITH, predicts increased sleepiness and associated decreased performance. Daan and Beersma presented an excellent demo C-S a model for analyzing the effects of sleep deprivation and changes in sleep time in the circadian cycle.
Rice. 2. The relationship between the need for sleep ( S) and the circadian rhythm of sleepiness ( WITH) with a shift work schedule.
Webb expanded this two-factor model to include a third factor, which predicted sleep onset and cessation along with characteristics of a particular sleep stage. According to Webb's model, as in the case of the two-factor model, sleep responses are predicted by the level of sleep need (defined as positive function wakefulness and negative function sleep time) and circadian time (defined by the current time within the 24-hour sleep-wake schedule). Additional component was the presence or absence of voluntary or involuntary behavior incompatible with the sleep reaction. In particular, this model requires an accurate indication of the time of previous wakefulness (or sleep), current moment time in the sleep-wake schedule (eg, 10 pm or 10 am) and behavioral variables (eg, whether the individual is physically relaxed or agitated, whether he is threatened or not). Under these conditions, this model allows one to predict the probability of sleep (or wakefulness) and its characteristics. Or if two variables are held constant, say current time is 11 pm and the individual is in a laboratory research situation, then the sleep response (eg, sleep onset latency) and its stages will be a direct function of the time of previous wakefulness.
It is clear that each of the three main determinants of the sleep response varies markedly depending on four additional factors: species differences, age, abnormalities of the central nervous system (caused, for example, by drugs or abnormalities) and individual differences. To obtain accurate and delayed predictions, each of the important parameters of the model must be determined in relation to a given biologist. kind, age level, the state of the central nervous system and taking into account established individual differences. Thus, an infant's sleep needs and circadian parameters are as different from those of a young adult as their sleep needs and circadian parameters are different from those of a rat. Within every species and every age group there is a wide range of consistent individual differences and, of course, an equally wide range of behavioral components.
see also Treatment of sleep disorders, Sleep, Circadian rhythm
W. B. Webb
Theories of dreams in ancient times ( ancient theories of dreams)
People who lived in ancient and ancient world, no doubt considered dreams very important part own life. Written evidence gives us a detailed understanding of the prophetic, religious and healing significance of dreams for the people of that time.
One of the first written evidence of this kind is the Assyrian epic of Gilgamesh, recorded in the 3rd millennium BC. e. Half-god, half-man, the hero of the epic appeared to his companion Enkidu during two dreams. Enkidu became the interpreter of Gilgamesh's dreams. These dreams were messages from the gods and guided the two friends in their risky adventures. The enduring significance of dreams for the Assyrians is also evident from the fact that the ruler of Assyria, Ashurbanipal, was guided by dreams when conducting his military campaigns in the 7th century. BC e. Clay cuneiform tablets found in Babylonia and Chaldea contain many descriptions and interpretations of dreams.
The earliest Egyptian papyri describe many recipes for inducing and interpreting dreams. The Old Testament story of Joseph interpreting Pharaoh's dreams also points to the special role of dreams in Egyptian culture.
Indian Upanishad records dating back to 1000 BC. e., contain detailed descriptions of dreams and discussions about their meaning for spiritual life.
In the opening part of the Iliad, Homer describes how Zeus sent Agamemnon a Dream (=dream character), which persuades him to go on a campaign against Troy. Dreams determine further development events in both the Iliad and the Odyssey, where Penelope dreams of her husband Odysseus returning from his travels. The ambiguity of Penelope's dreams forces Homer to figuratively divide them into dreams passing through the ivory gate (true dreams) and dreams passing through the horn gate (false dreams).
[According to the Russian translation of the Odyssey made by V. Zhukovsky, the opposite is true:
Two gates were created for the entry of disembodied dreams
Into our world: some are horny, others are from ivory;
Dreams that pass through ivory gates to us,
They are deceitful, unrealizable, and no one should believe them;
Those who enter the world through the horny gates,
Faithful; all the visions they bring come true.
Homer, Odyssey, XIX, 562-567. - Note scientific ed.]
The important role of dreams runs like a red thread throughout the entire Old Testament from the Book of Genesis to the Book of the Prophet Zechariah. The Lord spoke to Abraham at night, in a dream, informing him of the agreement (Covenant) between God and his people. He repeated his message to James in exactly the same way. Joseph taught the messages addressed to him in a less direct form; his dreams were more symbolic. His ability to interpret dreams made him an important person in Egypt. The great kings of Judah - Samuel, David and Solomon - saw great dreams. Dreams play a very important role in the chapters about Job and Daniel. In the books of the prophets Old Testament you can trace all the difficulties associated with the interpretation of dreams. Biblical characters had difficulty making connections between visions, dreams, and prophecies, as well as distinguishing between true and false dreams. The only criterion for the truth of such messages could be the connection between God and the person seeing the dream.
The important role of dreams can also be seen in the New Testament. An example of this is Joseph’s prophetic dream about the birth of Christ: “But when he thought this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said: Joseph, son of David! Do not be afraid to accept Mary your wife; for that which is born in Her is of the Holy Spirit.”
The Greek tradition somewhat modified the archaic Homeric ideas about dreams as supernatural revelations of the gods or outstanding personalities of the past. Starting around the 5th century. BC e., the Orphic idea of searching for an individual message with the gods, who could provide information for interpretation or direct use. By the 3rd century. BC. the Orphic tradition took shape into a public institution in the form of more than 400 “temples”, where every person. could come and talk about his dream, or go into sleep and “incubate” the dream, and then receive its interpretation in terms of possible remedies or plans for the future.
The interpretation of dreams can be found in the works of almost all the early Greek philosophers (eg Pythagoras, Heraclitus and Democritus). Plato also took dreams very seriously. This is clearly seen in the dialogue “Crito”, where Plato describes Socrates’ dream about his approaching death. In The Republic he discusses the manifestations of the darker, instinctual aspects of humans. in dreams.
The supernatural nature of the dream world is questioned in the works of only two great Greeks - Aristotle and Cicero. Both of them strongly rejected the supernatural prophetic nature of dreams. Aristotle considered dreams as residual sensory impressions and explained them unusual properties a decrease in the level of “judgment” during sleep and their uncontrolled “movements” and “collisions.” Cicero believed that dreams are “phantoms and visions.” He argued that they should not be given more attention, rather than the sensations present in a state of intoxication or insanity. According to Cicero, in order to check whether the voyage will be successful, it is better not to rely on dreams, but to consult with an expert in his field, for example, a navigator.
see also Myths, Dreams
W. B. Webb
Social learning theories ( social learning theories)
Personality theories from a social perspective. teachings are primarily theories learning. At the beginning of its formation, T. s. n. attached extreme important ideas of reinforcement, however modern. T.s. n. acquired a clearly expressed cognitive character. The importance of reinforcement was taken into account in concepts describing a thinking and cognizing person, who has expectations and ideas ( beliefs). Thus, the roots of modern T.s. n. can be traced back to the views of theorists such as Kurt Lewin and Edward Tolman. As for social and the interpersonal aspects of this theory, the work of George Herbert Mead and Harry Stack Sullivan should probably also be mentioned.
Currently, among the most influential social theorists. teachings include Julian Rotter, Albert Bandura and Walter Mischel. However, social The behaviorism of Arthur Staats bears some notable similarities to Bandura's work. Among the social theorists. teachings sometimes even include Hans Eysenck and Joseph Wolpe due to the nature of their therapies stemming from a learning model.
The formula of behaviorism was clear and unambiguous: “stimulus-response.”
Meanwhile, in the circle of behaviorists there appeared outstanding psychologists who questioned this postulate. The first of them was a professor at the University of Berkeley (California), an American Edward Tolman(1886-1959), according to which the formula of behavior should consist not of two, but of three members, and therefore look in the following way: stimulus (independent variable) - intermediate variables - dependent variable (response).
The middle link (intermediate variables) is nothing more than mental moments inaccessible to direct observation: expectations, attitudes, knowledge.
Following the behaviorist tradition, Tolman experimented with rats looking for a way out of a maze. The main conclusion from these experiments was that, based on the behavior of animals strictly controlled by the experimenter and objectively observed by him, it can be reliably established that this behavior is controlled not by the stimuli that are acting on them at the moment, but by special internal regulators. Behavior is preceded by a kind of expectations, hypotheses, and cognitive “maps.” The animal builds these “maps” itself. They guide him in the labyrinth. From them it, being launched into the labyrinth, learns “what leads to what.” The position that mental images serve as a regulator of action was substantiated by Gestalt theory. Taking her lessons into account, Tolman developed his own theory, called cognitive behaviorism.
Tolman outlined his ideas in the books “Target Behavior in Animals and Humans” and “Cognitive Maps in Rats and Humans.” Experimental work conducted mainly on animals (white rats), believing that the laws of behavior are common to all living beings, and can be most clearly and thoroughly traced on elementary levels behavior.
The results of Tolman's experiments, presented in his main work “Goal-directed behavior in animals and humans” (1932), forced a critical rethinking of the cornerstone scheme of behaviorism S R (“stimulus-response”).
The very idea of goal-directed behavior contradicted the programmatic guidelines of the founder of behaviorism, Watson. For classical behaviorists, goal-directed behavior implies the assumption of consciousness.
To this Tolman stated that it does not matter to him whether an organism has consciousness or not. As befits a behaviorist, he focused on external, observable reactions. He proposed that the causes of behavior included five major independent variables: environmental stimuli, psychological drives, heredity, prior learning, and age. The behavior is a function of all these variables, which can be expressed by a mathematical equation.
Between the observed independent variables and the resulting behavior, Tolman introduced a set of unobservable factors, which he called intervening variables. These intervening variables are actually determinants of behavior. They represent those internal processes, which relate the stimulus situation to the observed response.
However, while remaining in the position of behaviorism, Tolman was aware that since intermediate variables are not subject to objective observation, they are of no practical use to psychology unless they can be linked to experimental (independent) and behavioral (dependent) variables.
A classic example of an intervening variable is hunger, which cannot be observed in a test subject (whether animal or human). Nevertheless, hunger can be quite objectively and accurately linked to experimental variables, for example, to the duration of the period of time during which the body did not receive food.
In addition, it can be linked to an objective response or to a behavioral variable, such as the amount of food eaten or the rate of food absorption. Thus, this factor becomes available to quantitative measurement and experimental manipulations.
In theory, intervening variables have proven to be a very useful construct. However, the practical implementation of this approach required such enormous work that Tolman eventually abandoned all hope of “composing Full description at least one intervening variable."
The results obtained in the experiments forced Tolman to abandon the law of effect, which was fundamental for the entire behavioral doctrine, discovered by Thorndike. In his opinion, reinforcement has a rather weak effect on learning.
Tolman proposed his own cognitive theory learning, believing that repeated performance of the same task strengthens the emerging connections between environmental factors and the organism's expectations. In this way, the body learns about the world around it. Tolman called such connections created by learning Gestalt signs.
Historians of science boldly suggest that the father of behaviorism, John Watson, suffered specific disorder- an-ideism, that is, he was completely devoid of imagination, which forced him to interpret all observed phenomena purely literally.
Tolman in creative imagination you can’t refuse, however, he also based his theoretical reasoning on objectively observable phenomena. What did he see in his experiments that made him go beyond Watson's ideas?
Here is a rat running through a maze, randomly trying either successful (you can move on) or unsuccessful (dead end) moves. Finally she finds food. During subsequent passages of the maze, the search for food gives the rat's behavior purposefulness.
Each branching move comes with some expectations. The rat comes to “understand” that certain signs associated with the fork do or do not lead to the place where the desired food is located.
If the rat's expectations are met and it actually finds food, then the gestalt sign (that is, the sign associated with some choice point) receives reinforcement. Thus, the animal develops a whole network of gestalt signs at all choice points in the maze. Tolman called this a cognitive map.
This pattern represents what the animal has learned, not just a collection of some motor skills. IN in a certain sense, the rat acquires a comprehensive knowledge of its labyrinth, and in other conditions, of its other environment. Her brain develops something like a field map that allows her to move in the right direction without being limited to a fixed set of learned body movements.
In a classic experiment described in many textbooks, Tolman's ideas found clear and convincing confirmation. The maze used in this experiment was cross-shaped. Rats of the same group always found food in the same place, even if they had to different points At the entrance to the labyrinth it was sometimes necessary to turn not to the right, but to the left. The motor reactions, of course, were different, but the cognitive map remained the same.
The rats of the second group were placed in such conditions that they had to repeat the same movements each time, but the food was in a new place each time.
For example, starting at one end of the maze, a rat found food only by turning right at a certain fork; if the rat was started with opposite side, then in order to get to the food, she still needed to turn right.
The experiment showed that the rats of the first group - those who “studied” and “learned” the general scheme of the situation, orientated much better than the rats of the second group, which reproduced learned reactions.
Tolman suggested that something similar occurs in humans. A person who has managed to navigate a certain area well can easily go from one point to another along different routes, including unfamiliar ones.
Another experiment examined latent learning, that is, learning that cannot be observed while it is actually happening.
A hungry rat was placed in a maze and allowed to roam freely. For some time the rat did not receive any food, that is, no reinforcement occurred. Tolman was interested in whether any learning takes place in such an unreinforced situation.
Finally, after several non-reinforced trials, the rat was given the opportunity to find food. After this, the speed of completing the maze increased sharply, which showed the presence of some learning during the period of absence of reinforcement. This rat's performance very quickly reached the same level as that of rats that received reinforcement on every trial.
It would be wrong to perceive Tolman as a “rat mentor”, far from human problems. His article, revealingly titled “Cognitive Maps in Rats and Humans” (also available in Russian translation), became not only a collection of evidence against the S ® R scheme, but also a passionate appeal to reduce the level of frustration, hatred and intolerance generated in society by narrow cognitive maps.
In view of the fact that this classic text risks remaining outside the circle of interests of our psychologists, we will allow ourselves an extensive and, it seems, very important quotation. Noting the destructive nature often human behavior, Tolman ends his article with these words:
“What can we do about this? My answer is to preach the powers of the mind, that is, broad cognitive maps. Teachers can make children intelligent (that is, open their minds) if they ensure that no child is overmotivated or overly irritated. Then children will be able to learn to look around, learn to see that there are often roundabout and more careful paths to our goals, and learn to understand that all people are mutually connected to each other.
Let's try not to become over-emotional, not to be overly motivated to such an extent that we can only achieve narrow cards. Each of us must put ourselves in enough comfortable conditions to be able to develop broad maps, to be able to learn to live according to the reality principle and not according to the too narrow and immediate pleasure principle.
As a behaviorist, Tolman believed that initiating causal behavior and final resulting behavior must be objectively observable and capable of being described in operational terms. He proposed that the causes of behavior included five major independent variables: environmental stimuli, psychological drives, heredity, prior learning, and age. The behavior is a function of all these variables, which is expressed by a mathematical equation.
Between these observable independent variables and the resulting response behavior (the dependent observed variable), Tolman introduced a set of unobservable factors which he called intermediate variables 88. These intervening variables are actually the determinant of behavior. They represent those internal processes that link the stimulus situation to the observed response. The behaviorist formula S - R (stimulus - response) should now be read as S - O - R. Intermediate variables are everything that is connected with O, that is, with the organism, and forms a given behavioral response to a given irritation.
Because these intervening variables are not objectively observable, they are of no practical use to psychology unless they can be linked to experimental (independent) variables and to behavioral (dependent) variables.
A classic example of an intervening variable is hunger, which cannot be observed in a human or animal test subject. And yet, hunger can be quite objectively and accurately linked to experimental variables - for example, to the duration of the period of time during which the body did not receive food. In addition, it can be linked to an objective response or to a behavioral variable - for example, the amount of food eaten or the rate of food absorption. In this way, an unobserved intervention factor—hunger—can be accurately estimated empirically and therefore becomes available for quantitative measurement and experimental manipulation.
By defining independent and dependent variables, which are observable events, Tolman was able to construct operational descriptions of unobservable, internal states. He initially called his approach "operant behaviorism" before choosing the term "intervening variables."
Intervening variables have proven to be very useful for behavioral theory development to the extent that they have been empirically related to experimental and behavioral variables. However, such an enormous amount of work was required to make this approach comprehensive that Tolman eventually abandoned all hope of “compiling a complete description of even one intervening variable” (Mackenzie 1977, p. 146).
Learning theory
Learning played vital role in Tolman's goal-directed behaviorism. He rejected Thorndike's law of effect, arguing that reward or encouragement has little effect on learning. Instead, Tolman proposed a cognitive theory of learning, suggesting that repeated performance of the same task strengthens the connections created between environmental factors and the organism's expectations. In this way, the body learns about the world around it. Tolman called these connections created by learning Gestalt - signs that are developed during the repeated performance of an action.
Let's remember these ideas of Tolman and try to observe a hungry rat in a maze. The rat runs through the maze, sometimes exploring the correct and sometimes incorrect passages or even dead ends. Finally the rat finds food. During subsequent passages of the maze, the goal (search for food) gives purposefulness to the rat’s behavior. Each branch point has some expectations associated with it. The rat comes to understand that certain cues associated with the branch point do or do not lead to where the food is.
If the rat's expectations are met and it actually finds food, then the gestalt sign (that is, the sign associated with some choice point) receives reinforcement. Thus, the animal develops a whole network of gestalt signs at all choice points in the maze. Tolman called this a cognitive map. This diagram represents that. what the animal has learned is a cognitive map of the maze, and not a set of certain motor skills. In a sense, the rat gains a comprehensive knowledge of its maze or other environment. Her brain produces something like a field map, which allows her to move from point to point, not limited to a fixed set of learned body movements.
The classic experiment that confirmed Tolman's theory examined whether a rat in a maze was actually learning its cognitive map or simply memorizing a set of motor responses. A cross-shaped labyrinth was used. Rats of the same group always found food in the same place, even if in order to get to the food they sometimes had to turn left rather than right at different entry points. The motor reactions were different, but the food remained in the same place.
The rats of the second group had to always repeat the same movements, but the food was in a different place each time. For example, starting at one end of a plus maze, rats found food only by turning right at the choice point; If the rats entered the maze from the opposite side, then in order to find food, they still had to turn to the right.
The results of the experiment showed that rats from the first group, that is, those who studied the scene of action, oriented much better than rats from the second group, who learned the reactions. Tolman came to the conclusion that a similar phenomenon is observed among those people who know their neighborhood or city well. They can take different routes from one point to another because their brains have formed a cognitive map of the area.
Another experiment explored latent learning 89 - that is, learning that cannot be observed at the time when it actually occurs. A hungry rat was placed in a maze and allowed to roam freely. At first there was no food in the maze. Can a rat learn anything in the absence of reinforcement? After several unreinforced attempts, the rat was allowed to find food. After this, the rat's speed through the maze increased sharply, which showed the presence of some learning during the period of absence of reinforcement. This rat's performance very quickly reached the same level as that of rats that received reinforcement on every trial.