5.3 Classical Conditioning

The son of a village priest, Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936) had planned to devote his life to the church. He changed his mind at a young age, however, when he discovered his love for science. His primary interest was physiology, a branch of biology that investigates the physical and chemical mechanisms underlying life’s processes. Although he won a Nobel Prize in 1904 for his research on the physiology of digestion, Pavlov’s most enduring legacy was his trailblazing research on learning (Fancher & Rutherford, 2012).

What Salivating Dogs Can Teach Us

Pavlov spent the 1890s studying the digestive system of dogs at Russia’s Institute of Experimental Medicine (Watson, 1968). One of his early experiments involved measuring how much dogs salivate in response to food. Initially, the dogs salivated as expected, but as the experiment progressed, they began salivating to other stimuli as well. After repeated trials with an assistant giving a dog its food and then measuring the dog’s saliva output, Pavlov noticed that instead of salivating the moment it received food, the dog began to salivate at the mere sight or sound of the lab assistant arriving to feed it. The assistant’s footsteps seemed to act like a trigger (the stimulus) for the dog to start salivating (the response). The dog was associating the sound of footsteps with the arrival of food; it had been conditioned to associate the sights and sounds with eating. The dog had learned to salivate when exposed to these stimuli, much like you might respond when seeing a sign for a favorite restaurant or a dessert you love.

Pavlov had discovered how associations develop through the process of learning, which he referred to as conditioning. He was so intrigued by his discovery that he decided to shift the focus of his research to investigate the dogs’ salivation (which he termed “psychic secretions”) in these types of scenarios (Fancher & Rutherford, 2012, p. 248; Watson, 1968).

Tick Tock Pavlov conditioned his dogs to salivate in response to auditory stimuli, such as bells, tones, and ticking metronomes. A metronome is a device that musicians often use to maintain tempo. This “old-fashioned” metronome has a wind-up knob and a pendulum that ticks at various speed settings. Modern metronomes are digital and often come with additional features such as adjustable volume.

Galina Ermolaeva/Dreamstime.com

Pavlov followed up on his initial observations with numerous studies in the early 1900s, examining the link between stimulus (for example, the sound of human footsteps) and response (the dog’s salivation). The type of behavior Pavlov was studying (salivating) was not voluntary; it was involuntary or reflexive (Pavlov, 1906). The connection between food and salivating is innate or universal, whereas the link between the sound of footsteps and salivating is learned. Learning has occurred whenever a new, nonuniversal link between stimulus (footsteps) and response (salivation) is established.

Many of Pavlov’s studies had the same basic format (Infographic 5.1). Prior to the experiment, the dog had a tube surgically inserted into its cheek to allow for the precise collection of its saliva. When the dog salivated, instead of the secretions being swallowed, they were emptied from that tube into a measuring device so Pavlov could figure out exactly how much the dog was producing.

Because Pavlov was interested in exploring the link between a stimulus and the dog’s response, he had to pick a stimulus that was more controlled than the sound of someone walking into a room. Pavlov used a variety of stimuli, such as sounds from a metronome, a buzzer, and the tone of a bell, which under normal circumstances have nothing to do with food. In other words, they are neutral stimuli in relation to food and responses to food.

A typical Pavlovian experiment using the tone of a bell and meat powder went something like this: A dog was placed alone in a soundproof room and outfitted with equipment designed to keep it from moving around. On numerous occasions during an experimental trial, Pavlov and his assistants presented the dog with the sound of the tone, and then moments later gave the dog some meat powder. Each time the tone was sounded, the assistant would wait a couple of seconds and then offer the dog the meat powder. All the while, its saliva was being measured. As predicted, the dog learned to pair the sound of the tone with the meat powder. We know the procedure resulted in learning because after repeating the tone–food pairing several times, when only the sound of the tone was played, with no meat powder nearby, the dog salivated anyway. The dog had been conditioned to associate the sound of the tone with food.

Time for Some Terms

Now that you know Pavlov’s basic research procedure, it is important to learn the specific terminology psychologists use to describe what is happening (Infographic 5.1). Before the experiment began, the sound of the tone was a neutral stimulus—something in the environment that does not normally cause a relevant automatic or reflexive response. In the current example, salivation is the relevant automatic response associated with food; dogs do not normally respond to the sound of a tone by salivating. But through experience, the dogs learned to link this neutral stimulus (the tone) with another stimulus (food) that prompts an automatic, unlearned response (salivation). This type of learning is classical conditioning, which occurs when an originally neutral stimulus is conditioned to elicit or induce an involuntary response, such as salivation, eye blinks, and other types of reflex reactions.

At the start of Pavlov’s experiment, before the dogs were conditioned or had learned anything about the neutral stimulus, they salivated when they smelled or were given food. The food is called an unconditioned stimulus (US) because it automatically triggers a response without any learning needed. Salivation by the dogs when exposed to food is an unconditioned response (UR) because it doesn’t require any conditioning (learning); the dog just does it automatically. The salivation (the UR) is an automatic response elicited by the smell or taste of food (the US). After conditioning has occurred, the dog responds to the sound of the tone almost as if it were food. The tone, previously a neutral stimulus, has now become a conditioned stimulus (CS) because it triggers the dog’s salivation. When the salivation occurs in response to the sound of the tone, it is called a conditioned response (CR); the salivation is a learned response.

The pairings of the neutral stimulus (the tone) with the US (the meat powder) occur during the acquisition or initial learning phase. Some points to remember:

INFOGRAPHIC 5.1: Learning Through Classical Conditioning

During his experiments with dogs, Ivan Pavlov noticed them salivating before food was even presented. Somehow the dogs had learned to associate the lab assistant’s approaching footsteps with eating. This observation led to Pavlov’s discovery of the process of classical conditioning, in which we learn to associate a neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus that produces an automatic, natural response. The crucial stage of this process involves repeated pairings of the two stimuli.

Credits: McDonald’s logo, © Graham Oliver/Alamy; Historic photo of Pavlov’s dog experiment, Science Source; French fries in a red box, Shutterstock; Jack Russell terrier, Thinkstock; Bell, Thinkstock; Dog bowl, Thinkstock

• The meat powder is always a US (the dog never has to learn how to respond to it).
• The dog’s salivating is initially a UR to the meat powder, but eventually becomes a CR as it occurs in response to the sound of the tone (without the sight or smell of meat powder).
  

  CONNECTIONS

  In Chapter 1, we discussed extraneous variables, which are characteristics of the environment or participants that interfere with the outcome of research. Pavlov had to consider the sight and smell of meat powder as potential extraneous variables that could affect the conditioning procedure. He went to great lengths to control these variables so they did not interfere with measurements of the dependent variables.

• The US is always different from the CS; the US automatically triggers the response, but with the CS, the response has been learned by the organism.

In order to determine the proper label of a response, you must know what caused that response. Knowing what elicited the response will help determine whether it is conditioned or unconditioned.

Pavlov’s work paved the way for a new generation of psychologists who considered behavior to be a topic of objective, scientific study. His disdain for psychology and its early methods of introspection made him reluctant to pursue the surprising observation he made in the laboratory. Pavlov held firm to his belief that scientists should focus only on observable behaviors; his work transformed our understanding of learning and our approach to psychological research.

Nuts and Bolts of Classical Conditioning

We have learned about Pavlov’s dogs and their demonstration of classical conditioning. We have described the process by which classical conditioning occurs and the terminology associated with that process. Now it’s time to take our learning to the next level and examine some of the principles that guide the process.

Layland Masuda/Shutterstock

What would happen if a dog in one of Pavlov’s experiments heard a slightly higher-frequency tone? Would the dog still salivate? Pavlov (1927/1960) asked this same question and found that a stimulus similar to the CS caused the dogs to salivate as well. This is an example of stimulus generalization. Once an association is forged between a CS and a CR, the learner often responds to similar stimuli as if they are the original CS. Here’s an example: When Pavlov’s dogs learned to salivate in response to a metronome ticking at 90 beats per minute, they also salivated when the metronome ticked a little more quickly (100 beats per minute) or slowly (80 beats per minute; Hothersall, 2004). Their response was generalized to metronome speeds ranging from 80 to 100 beats per minute. Many of you may have been classically conditioned to salivate at the sight of a tall glass of lemonade. Stimulus generalization predicts you would salivate when seeing a shorter glass of lemonade, or even a mug, if you knew it contained your favorite lemonade. Someone who has been bitten by a small dog may subsequently react with fear to all dogs, big and small. This would suggest she has generalized her fear, responding in this way to dogs of all sizes, even though the original CS was a small dog.

Next let’s examine what happens when Pavlov’s dogs are presented with two stimuli that differ significantly. You may be surprised to learn that the dogs can tell them apart. If you present the meat powder with a high-pitched sound, the dogs will associate that pitch with the meat powder. They will then only salivate in response to that pitch, but not to low-pitched sounds. The dogs in the experiment are displaying stimulus discrimination, the ability to differentiate between a particular CS and other stimuli sufficiently different from it. Pavlov’s dogs exhibited stimulus discrimination; with enough training, they could differentiate among various pitches, or high and low tones (Watson, 1968). Someone who’s been stung by a bee might only become afraid at the sight of bees (and not flies, for example) because he has learned to discriminate among the stimuli represented by the wide variety of flying insects. He has only been conditioned to experience fear in response to bees.

Once the dogs associate the sound of the tone with meat powder, can they ever listen to its sound without salivating? The answer is yes—if they are repeatedly exposed to the sound of the tone without the meat powder. If the CS is presented time and again without being accompanied by the US, the association may fade. The CR decreases and eventually disappears in a process called extinction. In general, if dogs are repeatedly exposed to a CS (for example, a metronome or ringing bell) without any tasty treats to follow, they produce progressively less saliva in response to the stimulus and, eventually, none at all (Watson, 1968).

Take note: Even with extinction, the connection is not necessarily gone forever. We’ve already observed how Pavlov (1927/1960) used classical conditioning with a dog to form an association between a bell ringing and meat powder. Once the sound of the bell was associated with the salivation, he stopped presenting the meat powder, and the association was extinguished (the dog didn’t salivate in response to the sound of the bell). Two hours following this extinction, Pavlov presented the tone again and the dog salivated because of a process called spontaneous recovery. With the presentation of a CS after a period of rest, the CR reappears. The link between the sound of the bell and the food was simmering beneath the surface. The dog had not “forgotten” the association when the pairing was extinguished. Rather, the CR was “suppressed” during the extinction, when the dog was not being exposed to the US. The association was not completely lost, as evidenced by its return 2 hours later when the bell (the CS) sounded in the absence of food (the US). Let’s return to that refreshing glass of lemonade—perhaps a summer drink you do not get to enjoy for 9 months out of the year. It is possible that your CR (salivating) will be suppressed through the process of extinction (from September to the end of May), but when June rolls around, spontaneous recovery may find you once again salivating at the sight of that tangy sweet drink.

After acquisition has occurred, is it possible to add another layer to the conditioning process? Suppose the sound of the tone has become a CS for the dog, such that every time the tone sounds, the dog has learned to salivate. Once this conditioning is established, the researcher can add a new neutral stimulus, such as a light flashing, every time the dog hears the sound of the tone. After pairing the sound and the light together (without the meat powder anywhere in sight or smell), the light will become associated with the sound and the dog will begin to salivate in response to seeing the light alone. This is called higher order conditioning (Figure 5.1). With repeated pairings of the CS (the tone) and a new neutral stimulus (the light), the second neutral stimulus becomes a CS as well. When all is said and done, both stimuli (the sound and the light) have gone from being neutral stimuli to conditioned stimuli, and either of them can elicit the CR (salivation). But in higher order conditioning, the second neutral stimulus is paired with a CS instead of being paired with the original US (Pavlov, 1927). In our example, the light is associated with the sound, not with the food directly.

FIGURE 5.1Higher Order ConditioningOnce a learned association has been made through classical conditioning, the new conditioned stimulus can be used to acquire new learned associations.
Here, when a conditioned stimulus (such as a bell that now triggers salivation) is repeatedly paired with a neutral stimulus (NS) such as a flashing light, the dog will learn to salivate in response to the light—without food ever being present! These multiple layers of learning help us understand how humans learn associations between many different stimuli.

Jack Russell terrier: Thinkstock; Bell: Thinkstock; Dog bowl: Thinkstock

Humans also learn to salivate when presented with stimuli that signal the delivery of food. Next time you are really hungry and begin to open the wrapper of your favorite granola bar or energy snack, notice what’s going on inside your mouth. You have come to associate the wrapper (CS) with the food (US), leading you to salivate (CR) at the unwrapping of the bar. Or perhaps your mouth begins to water when you prepare food, or when you are exposed to stimuli associated with making food. Let’s say your nightly routine includes making dinner during television commercial breaks. Initially, the commercials are neutral stimuli, but you may have gotten into the habit of preparing food only during those breaks. Making your food (CS) causes you to salivate (CR), and because dinner preparation always happens during commercials, those commercials will eventually have the power to make you salivate (CR) as well, even in the absence of food. Here we have an example of higher order conditioning, wherein additional stimuli elicit the CR.

Classical conditioning is not limited to examples of salivation. It affects you in ways you may not even realize. Think of what happens to your heart rate, for example, when you walk into a room where you have had a bad experience. See TABLE 5.1 for some additional real-life applications of classical conditioning. Now let’s observe how classical conditioning might apply to Ivonne’s experiences.

From Dogs to People: Extending Pavlov’s Understanding

Getting in the water has always made Ivonne uneasy, making her muscles tighten and her heart pump faster. She experiences this physiological fear response (the UR) because she feels disoriented when her ears, which she uses for navigation, are submerged. This disorientation would be considered the unconditioned stimulus (US). During a period of acquisition, Ivonne begins to associate the smell of chlorine (a neutral stimulus) with the disorientation she feels (US) while swimming. Every time she goes to the pool, the odor of chlorine is in the air. With repeated pairings of the chlorine smell and the disorientation she feels when swimming, the neutral stimulus becomes linked with the US. Now, simply catching wind of chlorine evokes the same physiological response as the disorientation she feels when in the water. The chlorine odor goes from being a neutral stimulus to a conditioned stimulus that elicits the now conditioned response of her fear reaction.

Now let’s explore a more hypothetical situation. If Ivonne were to smell dishes rinsed in a bleach solution or chlorine-smelling household cleaners, she might have a CR, suggesting stimulus generalization has occurred. This explains how we can react in ways that make no sense whatsoever to us; Ivonne may wonder to herself why she is reacting so strongly to those dishes.

Smells Like Chlorine Although Ivonne has now completed over 20 triathlons, she is not particularly comfortable with the swimming portion of the event. Just smelling chlorinated pool water makes her heart beat faster and her muscles tense—physiological responses resulting from classical conditioning. How might this reaction be eliminated? If Ivonne were to stay away from the pool for some period of time, the association between the chlorine smell and the disorientation she feels in the water may fade in a process called extinction.

Michael S. Wirtz, Used with permission of Philadelphia Inquirer. Copyright © 2013. All rights reserved.

Stimulus discrimination also applies to Ivonne’s example. A gym locker room is filled with all sorts of odors: hair spray, shampoo, and sweaty socks, just to mention a few. Of all the scents in the locker room, chlorine is the only one that gets her heart racing. The fact that Ivonne can single out this one odor even when bombarded with multiple other smells and sounds demonstrates her ability to differentiate the CS from other extraneous stimuli.

It would be nice for Ivonne if the smell of chlorine no longer made her heart race. There are two ways that she could get rid of this classically conditioned response. First, she could stop swimming for a very long time, and the association might just fade away through extinction. But quite often avoidance does not extinguish a classically conditioned response, as the possibility of spontaneous recovery always exists. (Recovery in this sense means recovering the conditioned response of fear, not the more familiar sense of “getting better.”) And clearly, this approach is not practical for Ivonne.

The second option is to pair a new response with the US or the CS. For example, Ivonne could practice relaxation skills and positive race visualization that includes a successful completion of the swim, until swimming itself no longer triggers the anxiety. With this accomplished, the chlorine would cease to stir up anxiety as well. Alternatively, Ivonne could work on her response to chlorine by gradually exposing herself to the smell while staying in a state of relaxation, thus preventing the learned anxiety and fear response. In Chapter 14, we will see how these techniques are actually used in therapy to help individuals struggling with anxiety and fear.

Yuck: Conditioned Taste Aversion

Have you ever experienced food poisoning? After falling ill from something you ate, whether it was sushi, uncooked chicken, or tainted peanut butter, you probably steered clear of that particular food for a while. This is an example of conditioned taste aversion, a powerful form of classical conditioning that occurs when an organism learns to associate the taste of a particular food or drink with illness. A grizzly bear avoids poisonous berries after vomiting all day from eating them. Often it only takes a single pairing between a food and a bad feeling—that is, one-trial learning—for an organism to learn its lesson. In the case of the bear, the US is the poison in the berries; the UR is the vomiting. After acquisition, the CS would be the sight of the berries, and the CR would be a nauseous feeling, as well as avoiding the berries in the future.

Avoiding foods that induce sickness has adaptive value, meaning it helps organisms survive, upping the odds they will reproduce and pass their genes along to the next generation. According to the evolutionary perspective, humans and other animals have a powerful drive to ensure that they and their offspring reach reproductive age, so it’s critical to steer clear of tastes that have been associated with illness.

American psychologist John Garcia and his colleagues provided a demonstration of taste aversion in their well-known studies with laboratory rats (Garcia, Ervin, & Koelling, 1966). Garcia and the other researchers designed a series of experiments to explore how rats respond to eating and drinking foods associated with sickness. In one study, the researchers provided the animals with flavored water followed by injections of a drug that upset their stomachs. The animals rejected the flavored drink thereafter.

Here’s an example with humans: Imagine that you eat a foot-long hot dog a few hours before coming down with a stomach virus that’s coincidentally spreading throughout your school. The hot dog wasn’t the culprit—and you might even be aware of this—but the thought of eating another one would probably still make you feel sick. Physical experiences like this can sometimes be so strong that they override our knowledge of the facts.

The rats in Garcia’s studies seemed naturally inclined to link their “internal malaise” (sick feeling) to tastes and smells and less likely to associate the nausea to other types of stimuli related to their hearing or vision, such as noises or things they saw (Garcia et al., 1966). This is clearly an adaptive trait, because nausea typically results from ingesting food that is poisonous or spoiled. In order to survive, an animal must be able to recognize and shun the tastes of dangerous substances. Garcia’s research highlights the importance of biological preparedness, the predisposition or inclination of animals (including people) to form associations through classical conditioning. Now, let’s examine how conditioned taste aversion can be used to save endangered species.

didn’t SEE that coming

Rescuing Animals with Classical Conditioning

Using your newfound knowledge of conditioned taste aversion, imagine how you might solve the following problem: An animal is in trouble in Australia. The northern quoll, a meat-eating marsupial that might be described as a cute version of an opossum, is critically endangered because a nonnative “cane toad” is invading its territory. Cane toads may look delicious (at least to the quolls, who eat them right up), but they pack a lethal dose of poison—often enough to kill a quoll in just one eating. Wherever the toads have settled, quoll populations have diminished or disappeared (O’Donnell, Webb, & Shine, 2010). The quolls are now in danger of becoming extinct. How would you save them, using your knowledge of conditioned taste aversion?

Learning to the Rescue Australia’s northern quoll (left) is threatened by the introduction of an invasive species known as the cane toad (right). The quolls eat the toads, which carry a lethal dose of poison, but they can learn to avoid this toxic prey through conditioned taste aversion (O’Donnell et al., 2010).

left: Eric and David Hosking/CORBIS; right: Chris Mattison/FLPA/Science Source

Remember that conditioned taste aversion occurs when an organism rejects a food or drink after consuming it and becoming very sick. To condition the quolls to stop eating the toxic toads, you must teach them to associate the little amphibians with a tummyache. You could do this by feeding them toads with the poisonous parts removed, but laced with a nausea-causing drug. A group of researchers from the University of Sydney recently used this approach with the quolls, and the strategy turned out to be quite successful. Quolls that were submitted to conditioned taste aversion were less likely than their unconditioned comrades to eat the poisonous toads and die (O’Donnell et al., 2010).

EATING A POISONOUS TOAD CAN TAKE A QUOLL!

Similar approaches are being tried across the world. In Africa, researchers have found that conditioned taste aversion makes lions avoid beef. Dining on cattle is a risky business for African lions, which often get killed by farmers trying to protect their livelihood (Platt, 2011, December 27). Faced with a similar problem, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is using taste aversion to discourage endangered Mexican wolves from feasting on livestock in New Mexico and Arizona (Bryan, 2012, January 28).

As you see, lessons learned by psychologists working in a lab can have far-reaching consequences. The principles of psychology may even be used to manipulate the immune system.

Little Albert and Conditioned Emotional response

So far, we have focused on the classical conditioning of physical responses—salivation, nausea, and increased heart rate. We have also described some of the emotional reactions classical conditioning can produce, through the pairing of a stimulus with an emotional response. We call this a conditioned emotional response: an emotional reaction acquired via classical conditioning.

One famous illustration of conditioned emotional response is the classic “Little Albert” study by John B. Watson and Rosalie Rayner (Watson & Rayner, 1920). Little Albert was an 11-month-old baby who initially had no fear of rats. When he saw the white rats scurrying about Watson and Rayner’s lab, he didn’t seem the least bit scared. In fact, he was rather intrigued and sometimes would reach out to touch them. But all this changed when the researchers began making a loud sound (a US for a fear response in younger children) every time he reached for the rat by banging a hammer against a steel bar (Harris, 1979). (This type of study would be considered unethical by today’s standards and would consequently not be allowed at research institutions.) After seven pairings of the loud noise and the appearance of the rat, Little Albert began to fear rats and generalized this fear to other furry objects, including a sealskin coat and a rabbit (Harris, 1979).

Poor Albert “Little Albert” was an 11-month-old baby who developed a fear of rats through his participation in an ethically questionable experiment by John B. Watson and Rosalie Rayner (Watson & Rayner, 1920). Watson and Rayner repeatedly showed the child a rat while terrifying him with a loud banging sound. Albert quickly learned to associate the sight of the rat with the scary noise, and his resulting fear of rats is known as a conditioned emotional response.

Archives of the History of American Psychology, The Center for the History of Psychology, The University of Akron

Let’s use the Little Albert example to review the terminology of classical conditioning. When Little Albert heard the loud bang, it was an unconditioned stimulus (US) that elicited fear, the unconditioned response (UR). Through conditioning, the sight of the rat became paired with the loud noise, and thus the rat went from being a neutral stimulus to a conditioned stimulus (CS). Little Albert’s fear of the rat became a conditioned response (CR).

Nobody really knows much about what happened to Little Albert after he spent time as Watson and Rayner’s research subject. Some psychologists believe Little Albert’s true identity is still unknown (Powell, 2010; Reese, 2010). More recent evidence suggests his real identity was Douglas Merritte, who at age 6 died of hydrocephalus (Harris, 2011), leaving us uncertain about the long-term effects of his exposure to this type of unethical conditioning.

Real-Life Examples of Classical Conditioning

The Little Albert study would never happen today; at least, we hope it wouldn’t. Today’s psychologists conduct research according to stringent ethical guidelines, and instilling terror in an innocent baby would not be considered acceptable. However, it is not too far out to imagine a similar scenario playing out in real life. Imagine a toddler who is about to reach for a rat on the kitchen floor. The parent sees this happening and shouts “NO!” It would not take many pairings of the toddler reaching for the rat and the parent shouting for the child to develop a fear of the rat. In this real-world scenario, you would be hard-pressed to find someone who would say the parent’s behavior was unethical.

How does classical conditioning affect your own life? Perhaps you know a dog or cat that starts to salivate every time you turn on an electric can opener. It doesn’t matter if you are opening a can of tuna fish, black beans, or coffee; the pet starts salivating (the CR) in anticipation of eating. The sound of the can opener is a neutral stimulus to begin with, but becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) through repeated pairings with food (the US). Here’s another example: Have you ever been taking a shower when someone flushes a toilet in a nearby bathroom? Depending on the plumbing in a building, flushing can divert cold water away from the shower, making the stream blistering hot for a few seconds. The first time you hear the toilet flush (neutral stimulus) and the water temperature rises (US), you might not make a connection. But after getting burned a few times and jerking away from the stream of water (UR), you begin to associate the sound of the toilet flushing (CS) with the unpleasant heat. Now, whenever you’re in the shower and hear the toilet flush, you flinch in anticipation (CR).

Classical conditioning may also have applications in marketing and sales (TABLE 5.1). Some research suggests that advertisements might instill emotions and attitudes toward product brands through classical conditioning, and that these responses can linger as long as 3 weeks (Grossman & Till, 1998). In one study, participants were shown pictures of pleasant scenes, such as tropical scenery, a snow-covered mountain, and a panda in a natural setting, paired with a fictitious mouthwash brand. Participants who were exposed to pairings of the fictitious brand of mouthwash (originally a neutral stimulus) and the favorable pictures (the US) were more likely to retain a positive enduring attitude (now the CR) toward the mouthwash (which became a CS) than participants who were exposed to the same pictures in random order. In other words, the researchers were able to create “favorable attitudes” toward the fictitious brand of mouthwash by pairing pictures of the mouthwash with scenery that induced positive emotions. The study did not address whether this favorable attitude leads to a purchase, however.

Does Sexy Sell? Reality TV icon Kim Kardashian performs in a salad commercial for Carl’s Jr. Restaurant. Research suggests that advertisements may instill attitudes toward brands through classical conditioning (Grossman & Till, 1998), but how do these attitudes affect sales? Now that is a question worth researching.

Doria Anselmo/Carls Jr/Splash/Newscom

Do you think you are susceptible to this kind of conditioning? We would venture to say that we all are. Complete the following Try This to see if we are correct.

Remember that classical conditioning is a type of learning associated with automatic (or involuntary) behaviors. You don’t “learn” to go out and buy a particular brand of mouthwash through classical conditioning. Classical conditioning can influence our attitudes toward products, but it can’t teach us voluntary behaviors. Well then, how do we learn these deliberate behaviors? Read on.