Hull Theories
Hull Theories
Hull Theories
1884-1952
HULL
BACKGROUND
Born
1884 in Akron NY Graduated U. of Michigan in 1913 Ph.D. U. of Wisconsin 1918 1929-1952 Professor of Psychology at Yale Died 1952
Developed
Hypothetico-Deductive
System
approach to theory construction has been called HYPOTHETICAL DEDUCTION (logical deductive). has a logical structure of postulates and theorems. general statements about behaviour that cannot be directly verified.
Theory
Postulates-are
From the postulates, theorems are generated. Theorems are deduced from the postulates. Theorems can be tested.
HABIT STRENGTH
Refers
to the strength of the association between a stimulus and a response. the number of reinforced pairings between a stimulus and a response goes up, the habit strength of that association goes up.
As
5: Stimulus generalization.
REACTION POTENTIAL
Is a function of both HABIT STRENGTH and DRIVE. For a learned response to occur, HABIT STRENGTH has to be activated by DRIVE.
POSTULATE 8: Responding causes fatigue, which operates against the elicitation of a conditioned response.
REACTIVE INHIBITION
REMINISCENCE
MASSED
10: FACTORS TENDING TO INHIBIT A LEARNED RESPONSE CHANGE FROM MOMENT TO MOMENT.
OSCILLATION EFFECT
A
factor operating against the elicitation of a learned response, whose effect varies from moment to moment but always operates within a certain range of values. oscillation effect must be subtracted from the effective reaction potential which creates the MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL.
The
POSTULATE 11: MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL MUST EXCEED A CERTAIN VALUE BEFORE A LEARNED RESPONSE CAN OCCUR.
POSTULATE 11: MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL MUST EXCEED A CERTAIN VALUE BEFORE A LEARNED RESPONSE CAN OCCUR.
POSTULATE 12:THE PROBABILITY THAT A LEARNED RESPONSE WILL BE MADE IS A COMBINED FUNCTION OF THE MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL, THE OSCILLATION EFFECT, AND THE REACTION THRESHOLD.
13: THE GREATER THE VALUE OF THE MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL THE SHORTER THE LATENCY WILL BE THE LATENCY BETWEEN S AND R.
POSTULATE 14: THE VALUE OF THE MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL WILL DETERMINE RESISTANCE TO EXTINCTION.
POSTULATE 15: THE AMPLITUDE OF A CONDITIONED RESPONSE VARIES DIRECTLY WITH THE MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL.
POSTULATE 16: WHEN TWO OR MORE INCOMPATIBLE RESPONSES TEND TO BE ELICITED IN THE SAME SITUATION, THE ONE WITH THE GREATEST MOMENTARY EFFECTIVE REACTION POTENTIAL WILL OCCUR.
INCENTIVE MOTIVATION (K): In 1943, Hull treated the magnitude of reinforcement as a learning variable. The greater the amount of drive reduction, the greater the increase in habit strength. However, experiments indicated that performance was dramatically altered as the size of reinforcement was varied after learning was complete.
HULL (1952)
STIMULUS-INTENSITY
DYNAMISM (V):
An
intervening variable that varies along with the intensity of the external stimulus (S). greater the intensity of a stimulus, the greater the probability that a learned response will be elicited.
The
original theory was a drive reduction theory but he modified this to a drive stimulus reduction. concluded that drive reduction was too far removed from the presentation of the reinforcer to explain how learning could take place.
He
Replaced
is the conditioned response to stimuli, experienced prior to the ingestion of food. classical conditioning processes, stimuli prior to those occurring in the goal box to also become reinforcers, and then the stimuli before them, and so on.
via
ARE THREE KINDS OF VARIABLES IN HULLS THEORY: independent variables, which are stimulus events systematically manipulated by the experimenter.
1.
Intervening variables, which are processes thought to be taking place within the organism but are not directly observable. Dependent variables, which are some aspect of behaviour that is measured by the experimenter in order to determine whether the independent variables had any effect.
3.
No theory has been more thoroughly scrutinized, attacked, and dissembled more than Hulls.
CONTRIBUTIONS
One strength was the possibility of falsifying its various propositions. He was willing to take risks in theory construction. The drive reduction hypothesis was the first attempt to break from the imprecise definitions of satisfiers/reinforcers that characterized both Thorndikes and Skinners theories. He was also the first to make precise predictions about joint effects of learning and drive on behaviour and about the effects of fatigue (reactive and conditioned inhibition).
CRITICISMS
Little value in predicting behaviour outside of the laboratory. Insisting that all concepts of interest be operationally defined. For making inconsistent predictions. Hull did not revise his theory enough in the face of problematic data and may have ignored many contradictory results.