Biological constraints on instrumental and classical conditioning: Retrospect and prospect

Abstract

The adequacy of traditional approaches to the study of animal learning to account fully for learning phenomena has been seriously questioned during the past decade. Critics of traditional analyses advocated a biological orientation to the interpretation of associative processes and introduced a variety of concepts intended to provide a new framework for the study of animal learning. This promise of a reorientation of the field has not been realized. The concepts of biological constraints, adaptive specializations, and situation specificity of learning have had a less profound influence on the general process approach to instrumental and classical conditioning than anticipated. The present paper makes explicit the conceptual bases of the original biological approaches to learning, identifies reasons why they failed to change fundamentally the study of instrumental and classical conditioning, and proposes an alternative approach to the use of ecological and evolutionary principles in studies of conditioning. We suggest a renewed comparative approach to the study of learning phenomena that avoids many of the difficulties inherent in earlier formulations by providing (1) a strategy for the discovery of adaptive specializations in learning, (2) an ecological framework for the discussion of these adaptive specializations, and (3) a renewed emphasis on the study of species differences in learning.Investigators of animal learning have traditionally assumed that general laws could be discovered through intensive study of learning in arbitrary situations. This belief was seriously called into question during thelast decade (Bolles, 1970;Hinde & StevensonHinde, 1973;Rozin & Kalat, 1971;Seligman, 1970; Seligman & Hager, 1972;Shettleworth, 1972). Criticism of the traditional approach was stimulated by observations of learning phenomena that were contrary to widely espoused general principles of association learning and that appeared to illustrate biological constraints on instrumental and classical conditioning. It was frequently suggested that there was a need for a new framework for the study of animal learning integrated with considerations of ecological adaptation and evolutionary history.Within a few years, biological constraints were treated as a major problem in animal learning (e.g., Adams, 1976;Bolles, 1975;Hall, 1976;Houston, 1976;Morgan & King, 1975; Schwartz, 1978;Tarpy & Mayer, 1978). Extensive discussion of the issue suggested that a revolution in the study of learning was in the making. The expectation was that investigators would be compelled to abandon traditional approaches to the study of instrumental and classical conditioning in favor of more biologically oriented strategies sensitive to the possibility that specialized mechanisms had evolved to facilitate learning in biologically important situations.Although such concepts as biological constraints and adaptive specializations had significant influence in other areas, consideration of recent major developments in the study of animal learning suggests t...

Selective associations in the observational conditioning of fear in rhesus monkeys.

“…Domjan and Galef (1983), for example, outlined a strategy that includes, first, the identification of different selective pressures acting on phylogenetically similar forms; second, the formation of hypotheses concerning different associative processes likely to stem from the observed selective pressures; and third, demonstration of a correlation between behavioral elaborations and selective pressures. (Note that by observing the first two steps, the commonly observed ex post facto nature that frequently characterizes theorizing about the phylogeny of target behaviors is avoided.)…”

“…Research in this area has often been placed in broader theoretical contexts such as preparedness, belongingness, or biological constraints on learning. (For recent reviews, see Domjan, 1983;Domjan & Galef, 1983;Johnston & Pietrewicz, 1985;LoLordo & Droungas, 1989;Ohman, 1986;Ohman, Dimberg, & 6st, 1985). However, because of the controversies generated by use of these frameworks, most contemporary research in this area has employed the more theoretically neutral term selective association.…”

Experimental evolution of prepared learning

“…Taste obviously predicts the onset of gastric illness more reliably than flashing lights, after we have Garcia's result in hand. In response to this unsatisfying situation, several authors have argued that the study of preparedness needs a clear-cut predictive theory (3,18,19). Without such a predictive theory to guide them, investigators seem to have lost interest in further empirical studies of preparedness (see refs.…”

Editorial Commentary

“…However, various authors have shown that a reasonable rapprochement between the constraints of literature and process-oriented theory can be effected (e.g., Domjan & Galef 1983;Garcia & Holder 1985). It is quite possible that one or a small number of learning mechanisms serve a wide range of uses in different species.…”