Book Review: Contemporary Learning Theories: Pavlovian Conditioning and the Status of Traditional Learning Theory
Book Review: Contemporary Learning Theories: Pavlovian Conditioning and the Status of Traditional Learning Theory
复制标题
书评：当代学习理论：巴甫洛夫条件作用和传统学习理论的地位
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1990
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Pearce
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Pearce
In their preface, the editors of this book argue that theories of learning have undergone a marked change in the last 10 to 15 years. The global theories of Hull and Tolman have been replaced by ones that are more specific and focussed. The aim of this two-volume series is to provide a readily accessible source to these more recent theories by asking “noted modern learning theorists” to provide a discussion of their recent research and theorizing. This first volume is concerned with two issues: theories of Pavlovian conditioning, to which seven chapters are devoted, and the current status of traditional learning theory, which is discussed in the final two chapters. The most appropriate chapter to consider first may be the one that opens the second section, as it is set firmly within the framework of traditional learning theory. In this chapter Levis provides a detailed account and development of Mowrer’s two-factor theory of avoidance learning, together with a spirited attack on more recent theorizing on this topic that emphasizes the importance of expectancies and species-specific defence reactions. Levis also broadens his attack to characterize modern learning theory as being “inundated by a lack of scientific rigor, by numerous surplus meaning concepts, and by largely untestable theoretical positions that fail to provide differential predictions” (p. 23 1). The remaining chapters provide an opportunity for these claims to be evaluated and for an assessment of the progress made by learning theory during the last 20 years or so. The other chapter in the second section is by Dickinson, who summarizes his work on instrumental conditioning. Experimental findings that are entirely compatible with two-factor theory are described, and they are accompanied by others that strongly indicate the need for theorists to take account of the way expectancies influence behaviour. A tantalizing feature of a book like this is that the juxtaposition of the ideas of different authors forcefully raises interesting questions, which are rarely answered. One would like to know, for example, how Levis reacts to the evidence that led Dickinson to propose that at least some instrumental behaviour is based on
