Öğrenmede Bağlam

Yıl 2005, Sayı: 14, 111 - 127, 01.12.2005

Hakan Çetinkaya

Öz

Sunulan metin ile öğrenmede bağlamın rolüne ilişkin kısa ve genel bir gözden geçirmenin yapılması amaçlanmıştır. Öğrenmede bağlama ilişkin etkiler uzun zamandan beri çalışılmakla beraber, bağlamın öğrenmede oynadığı role ilişki sistematik açıklama çabaları ancak son 20 yıldır geliştirilmektedir. Metinde, bağlam ve bağlama ilişkin uyarıcılar incelikli ve kapsamlı olarak tartışılmıştır. Daha sonra da işlevsel bakış açısından, organizma için bağlamın nasıl algılandığı ve organizma için ne ifade ettiği incelenmiştir. Yine işlevsel bir yaklaşımla, bağlama ilişkin üç ana işlev (bir CS olarak bağlam, bir modülatör olarak bağlam ve ve bir durum kurucu olarak bağlam) tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bağlam ve öğrenme, CS-US bağıntısı, Bağlam-US bağıntıları, durum kurucular, hızlandırma ve ketleme

Context Where Learning Takes Place

Öz

This compilation is to provide a brief and general review of the main functions of context in learning. Although the role of context in learning has been studied by learning theorists for decades, only in the last 20 years has an attempt for a systematic account of such a role been developed. In the manuscript, definition of contex and its component stimuli were done comprehensively. Then from the functional perspective, how an organism perceives the context was elaborated. Three main functions of the context (e.g. As a CS, as a modulator, and as an occasion setter) were identified and detailed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Contex in learning, CS-US association, Context-US associations, occasion setters, facilitation and inhibition

Kaynakça

• Archer, T., Sjöden, P., & Nilsson, L. (1985). Contextual control of tasteaversion conditioning and extinction. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and learning. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum.
• Baker, A.G. & Mackintosh, N.J. (1979). Preexposure to the CS alone, US alone, or CS and US uncorrelated: Latent inhibition, blocking by context or learned irrelevance? Learning and Motivation, 10, 278-294.
• Balsam, P. (1982). Bringing the background to the foreground: The role of contextual cues in autoshaping. In M. Commons, R. Herrnstein, & A.R.
• Wagner (Eds.). Quantitative analyses of behavior: Acquisition. Vol.3. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
• Balsam, P. (1984). Relative time in trace conditioning. In J. Gibbon & L. Allan (Eds.). Timing and time perception. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
• Balsam, P. (1985). The functions of context in learning and performance. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and learning. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum.
• Balsam, P. (1988). Selection, representation, and equivalence of controlling stimuli. In R. C. Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, and R.D.
• Luce (Eds.). Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology. New York: Wiley-Interscience. Balsam, P. & Gibbon, J. (1988). Formation of tone-US associations does not interfere with the formation of context-US associations in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 401-412
• Bouton, M. E. & King, D.(1986). Effect of context in performance to conditioned stimuli with mixed histories of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 12, 4-15.
• Bouton, M. E. & Swartzentruber, D. (1986). Analysis of the associative and occasion setting properties of context participating in pavlovian discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 12, 333-350.
• Domjan, M. (2005). The essentials of conditioning and learning. Belmont, CA:Thomson Wadsworth. Eckerman, D. A., Lanson, R. N. & Cumming, W. (1968). Acquisition and maintenance of matching without a required observing response.
• Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11, 435-441. Fanselow, M. (1990). Factors governing one trial contextual conditioning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 18, 264-270. Fanselow, M. & Tighe, T. (1988). Contextual conditioning with massed versus distributed unconditional stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 187-199.
• Flaherty, C., Grigson, P., & Brady, A. (1987). Relative novelty of conditioning context influences directionality of glicemic conditioning. Journal of Experimental psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 13, 144-149.
• Gibbon, J. & Balsam, P. (1981). Spreading association in time. In C.M. Locurto, H. S. Terrace, and J. Gibbon. (Eds.)., Autoshaping and conditioning theory. (Pg. 219-253). New York: Academic Press.
• Gibson, J. J. (1960). The concept of stimulus in psychology. American Psychologist, 15, 694-704. Gray, J. A. (1979). Ivan Pavlov. New York: Penguin.
• Hearst, E. (1988). Fundamentals of learning and conditioning. In R.C. Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, and R. D. Luce (Eds.). Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology.New York: Wiley-interscience.
• Helmstetter, F. J. & Fanselow, M. (1989). Differential second-order aversive conditioning using contextual stimuli. Animal Learning & Behavior, 17, 205-212.
• Helson, H. (1959). Adaptation level theory. In S. Koch (Ed.). Psychology: A study of a science. New York: McGraw Hill. Holland, P. (1983). "Ocassion-setting" in pavlovian feature positive discriminations. In M.L. Commons, R.J. Herrnstein, and A. R. Wagner (Eds.). Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol IV. Discrimination processes. Cambridge, M. A: Ballinger.
• Holland, P. & Lamarre, J. (1984). Transfer of inhibition after serial and simultaneous feature negative training. Learning and Motivation, 15, 219-243.
• Hull, C. L. (1939). The problems of stimulus equivalence in behavior theory. Psychological Review, 46, 9-30.
• Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-CenturyCrofts.
• Hull, C. L. (1952). A behavior system. New Haven: Yale University Press. Hulse, S. H., Cynx, J., & Humpal, J. (1985). Pitch context and pitch discrimination in birds. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Kamin, L. J. (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention and conditioning. In B. A. Campbell and R. M. Church (Eds.). Punishment and aversive behavior. (pg. 279-296). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
• Konorski, J. (1967). Integrative activity of the brain: An interdisciplinary approach. Chicago University of Chicago Press.
• Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298.
• Mackintosh, N. J. (1977). Stimulus control: Attentional factors. In W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.). Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Matzel, L. D., Brown, A. M., & Miller, R. (1987). Associative effects of US preexposure: Modulation of conditioned responding by an excitatory training context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 13, 65-72.
• Melton, A. W. (1956). Present accomplishments and future trends in problem solving and learning theory. American Psychologist, 11, 278-281.
• Miller, R. R. & Matzel, L. D. (1988). The comparator hypothesis: A response rule for the expression of associations. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 22, 51-92.
• Miller, R. R. & Schachtman, T. R. (1985). The several roles of context at the time of retrieval. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Nadel, L., Willner, J. & Kurz, E. M. (1985). Cognitive maps and environmental context. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and learning. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
• Olton, D. S. (1978). Characteristics of spatial memory. In S. H. Hulse, H. Fowler, and W. K. Honig (Eds.). Cognitive processes in animal behavior. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum.
• Pavlov, I. P. (1902). The work of the digestive glands. London: Griffin.
• Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.
• Perkins, C. C. & Weyant, R. G. (1958). The interval between training and test trial as a determiner of the slope of generalization gradients. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 51, 596-600.
• Randich, A. & Ross, R. (1985). Contextual stimuli mediate effect of pre and post-exposure to the US on conditioned suppression. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and Learning. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum.
• Rescorla, R.A. (1985). Conditioned inhibition and facilitation. In R. R. Miller and N. S. Spear (Eds.). Information processing in animals: Conditioned inhibition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Rescorla, R. A. (1986). Extinction of facilitation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 12, 16-24.
• Rescorla, R. A. (1987). Facilitation and inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes., 13, 250-259.
• Rescorla, R. A.(1988). Facilitation based on inhibition. Animal Learning and Behavior, 16, 169-176.
• Rescorla, R. A., Durlach, P. J., & Grau, J. W. (1985). Contextual learning in pavlovian conditioning. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Rescorla, R. A. & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black and W. F. Prokasy (Eds.). Classical conditioning. II: Current research and theory. (pg. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
• Rilling, M. (1977). Stimulus control and inhibitory processes. In W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.). Handbook of operant behavior Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Ross, R. T. & Holland, P. (1981). Conditioning of simultaneous and serialpositive discriminations. Animal Learning & Behavior, 9, 293-303.
• Schmajuk, N. A. & Holland, P. C. (1998). Occasion setting: Associative learning and cognition in animals. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms. New York: AppletonCentury-Crofts.
• Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary? Psychological Review, 57, 193-216.
• Skinner, B.F. (1959). A case history in scientific method. In S. Koch (Ed.). Psychology: A study of a science. New York: McGraw Hill.
• Solomon, R. L. & Corbit, J. D. (1974). An opponent process theory of motivation: Temporal dynamics of affect. Psychological Review, 81, 119-145.
• Spence, K. W. (1936). The nature of discrimination learning in animals. Psychological Review, 43, 427-449.
• Staddon, J. E. R. & Ettinger R. H. (1989). Learning. An introdction to the principles of adaptive behavior. San Diego: Harcout Brace Jovanovich.
• Thomas, D. R. (1985). Contextual stimulus control of operant responding in pigeons. In P. Balsam and A. Tomie (Eds.). Context and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Animal intelligence: Experimental studies. New York: McMillan.
• Thorndike, E. L. (1913). The original nature of man. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University Press.
• Todes, D. (2000). Ivan Pavlov: Exploring the animal machine. Oxford University Press.
• Tolman, E. C. (1932). Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
• Tomie, A. (1981). Effects of unpredictable food on the subsequent acquisition of autoshaping: Analysis of the context blocking hypothesis. In C. M. Locurto, H. S. Terrace and J. Gibbon (Eds.). Autoshaping and conditioning theory. New York: Academic Press.
• Wagner, A. (1978). Expectancies and the priming of STM. In S. H. Hulse, H. Fowler, and W. K. Honig (Eds.). Cognitive aspects of animal behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Wagner, A. R. (1981). SOP: A model for automatic memory processing in animal behavior. In N. E. Spear and R. R. Miller (Eds.). Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Williams, D. A., Frame, K. A., & LoLordo, V. M. (1991). Reexamination of contextual conditioning with massed versus distributed unconditioned stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 17, 202-209.
• Witcher, E. S. & Ayres, J. J. (1984). A test of two methods of extinguishing Pavlovian conditioned inhibition. Animal Learning & Behavior, 12, 149-156.