Really confused about classical conditioning...

[sandi]

We did this a while back and now Im a little confused on classical conditioning principles

In classical conditioning do we say that the association occurs between the UCS and the CS
 however in aversion therapy this changes and the association formed is now between the USC and the CR?

[aaackk]

pretty sure thats an error.

its NS + UCS --> UCR
after repeated associations
NS becomes the CS
then CS --> CR

[Felicity Wishes]

The association is ALWAYS made between two unrelated things; the unconditioned stimulus and the neutral stimulus. So therefore, the neutral stimulus also becomes associated with the unconditioned response. Overall, after conditioning the NS becomes the CS which produces the CR.

I know that my text book made a few mistakes with Classical Conditioning so be wary of that.

Note: The CS and the CR do not occur during acquisition, only AFTER. The 'C' for conditioned represents the association.
Classical conditioning is my favourite topic so feel free to ask me anything else. 

[sandi]

so that means even in aversion therapy, the pairing and learnt association is between the UCS and the CS. But what do you mean that the CS and CR do not occur during Acquisition?

thanks

[Felicity Wishes]

so that means even in aversion therapy, the pairing and learnt association is between the UCS and the CS. But what do you mean that the CS and CR do not occur during Acquisition?

thanks

No, the pairing is between the UCS and the NS.

Here,

Before conditioning
The UCS causes the UCR
the NS causes no response

During conditioning (acquisition)
The UCS and the NS are paired together and this pairing causes the UCR

After conditioning (the association has been made)
The NS is now conditioned so it is called the CS and it produces the CR (which was originally the UCR)

[sandi]

I see...

Does that mean that even in taste aversion(one-trial learning), the UCS(nausea- causing virus) and the CS(food) is what the learner learns an association for?
Because in the Grivas it appears as though they are saying that an association is formed between the food and the feeling of being ill or nauseous??

[HiddenUser]

Yes but it is only AFTER association/acquisition has occurred that the NS is changed to a CS.

[Felicity Wishes]

I see...

Does that mean that even in taste aversion(one-trial learning), the UCS(nausea- causing virus) and the CS(food) is what the learner learns an association for?
Because in the Grivas it appears as though they are saying that an association is formed between the food and the feeling of being ill or nauseous??

I use Grivas and it explains Classical Conditioning weirdly. Not going to lie.

Not quite... I'll explain it to you the way I understand it. (Pretty much what HiddenUser said)

Before conditioning
UCS (food poisoning or bad substance in food) produces the UCR (sickness)
NS (The food) 

During conditioning (only needs to happen once, hence the name one trial learning)
The UCS and the NS are associated together which produces the expected nausea or sickness

After  conditioning:
The person associated the food (NS because CS) with the feeling of nausea (CR)
So therefore the food (CS) produces feelings of disgust, associated with the nausea and therefore, the person develops a taste aversion to the food because of that one experience.

[Scooby]

For some reason, Grivas refer to the NS as the CS, even though the NS doesn't become the CS until after acquisition 

[Felicity Wishes]

For some reason, Grivas refer to the NS as the CS, even though the NS doesn't become the CS until after acquisition 

YES! It makes me overly frustrated!