Contrasting approaches to a theory of learning

Abstract

The general process view of learning, which guided research into learning for the first half of this century, has come under attack in recent years from several quarters. One form of criticism has come from proponents of the so-called biological boundaries approach to learning. These theorists have presented a variety of data showing that supposedly general laws of learning may in fact be limited in their applicability to different species and learning tasks, and they argue that the limitations are drawn by the nature of each species, adaptation to the particular requirements of its natural environment. The biological boundaries approach has served an important critical function in the move away from general process learning theory, but it is limited in its ability to provide an alternative to the general process approach. In particular, the biological boundaries approach lacks generality, it is in some respects subservient to the general process tradition, and its ecological content is in too many cases limited to ex post facto adaptive explanations of learning skills. A contrasting, ecological approach to learning, which can provide a true alternative to general process theory, is presented. The ecological approach begins by providing an ecological task description for naturally occurring instances of learning; this step answers the question: What does this animal learn to do? The next step is an analysis of the means by which learning occurs in the course of development, answering the question : How does the animal learn to do this? On the basis of such analyses, local principles of adaptation are formulated to account for the learning abilities of individual species. More global principles are sought by generalization among these local principles and may form the basis for a general ecological theory of learning.

Learning with arbitrary versus ecological conditioned stimuli: Evidence from sexual conditioning

“…As productive as that tactic has been, it has begged the question of how learning phenomena may be manifest in an organism's natural environment. For nearly 40 years, experimental psychologists focusing on learning mechanisms have had an uneasy coexistence with more ecologically minded investigators interested in how learning occurs in nature (Breland & Breland, 1961;Hinde & Stevenson-Hinde, 1973;Johnston, 1981). The strident tone of early discussions of these issues is not evident in more recent writings.…”

The evolution of multiple memory systems.

“…But the idea of adaptive specializations of learning in different species of animals has remained an influential one, even if unequivocal examples of it have been scarce (Shettleworth, 1983). Although most objections to general process theories of learning focus on differences between species (Holies, 1970;Garcia, Hankins, & Rusiniak, 1974;Hinde, 1973;Johnston, 1981;Seligman, 1970;Shettleworth, 1972), we will stress, as did Rozin and Kalat (1971), that these differences necessarily imply different memory systems within an animal's nervous system. Adaptive specializations, then, are memory capacities that are distinguishable from other kinds of memory and that are used in situations in which their rules of operation make them especially suitable for the solution of a particular environmental problem.…”

Behavior systems, associationism, and Pavlovian conditioning

“…Learning is embedded within a behavior system that inevitably influences the form, circumstances, speed, and maintenance of acquisition. The role of learning is assumed to have evolved in conjunction with the system and environment to facilitate the local fit of behavior and environment (Johnston, 1981;Nottebohm, 1972;Timberlake & Lucas, 1989;Tinbergen, 1951). A behavior system provides the initial perceptual, motor, and motivational conditions and operating characteristics that organize and direct learning and in turn are reorganized and modified by learning.…”