Browse chapters
7C · Behavior and behavior change
Attitude and behavior change
How behavior is learned (habituation, classical conditioning, operant conditioning, observational learning) and how attitudes change (the theories of persuasion and self-change).
Habituation, dishabituation & sensitization
The simplest learning: your response to a single repeated stimulus goes down (habituation), comes back when the stimulus changes (dishabituation), or ramps up after something threatening (sensitization). No association required.
- Habituation — a decrease in response to a stimulus after repeated, harmless exposure. You stop noticing the hum of an air conditioner. It's learning not to respond to something carrying no new information.
- Dishabituation — recovery of the response when the stimulus changes (the hum shifts pitch and you notice it again). It's specific to a change in the stimulus, not just the passage of time.
- Sensitization — the opposite of habituation: an increased, often generalized response after a strong or threatening stimulus. After a loud, frightening noise you startle more easily at small sounds.
How AAMC tests it
A scenario describes a response that fades with repetition and asks you to name it. The trap answers are sensory adaptation (a receptor-level phenomenon from 6A) and extinction (associative). Habituation is a behavioral/cognitive change, not a receptor fatiguing.
Don't confuse
Habituation (non-associative, one stimulus, response fades) vs. extinction (associative — a learned response fades because a pairing is broken). Getting used to a stimulus ≠ a learned relationship coming undone.
Classical (Pavlovian) conditioning
A neutral stimulus comes to trigger a response by being paired with a stimulus that already triggers it (Pavlov's dogs salivating to a bell).
In classical conditioning you learn a relationship between two stimuli. The five core terms are the most-tested vocabulary in the section — memorize them as a set, because questions almost always ask you to label one element inside a new scenario:
| Term | Definition | Pavlov example |
|---|---|---|
| Unconditioned stimulus (UCS/US) | naturally triggers a response, no learning | food |
| Unconditioned response (UCR/UR) | the natural, unlearned reaction | salivation to food |
| Neutral stimulus (NS) | initially produces no relevant response | the bell, before training |
| Conditioned stimulus (CS) | the once-neutral stimulus that now triggers a learned response | the bell, after pairing |
| Conditioned response (CR) | the learned response to the CS | salivation to the bell |
The UCR and CR are often the same behavior (salivation); what changes is what triggers it.
How AAMC tests it
The dominant item hands you a scenario (a patient, an ad, an animal) and asks "the ___ is the [CS/UCS/etc.]." Map every scenario back to the five terms. Acquisition is fastest when the CS precedes the UCS by a short interval (forward conditioning).
Acquisition, extinction, recovery, generalization, discrimination
The lifecycle of a conditioned response: it's learned (acquisition), fades without the UCS (extinction), can briefly return (spontaneous recovery), spreads to similar stimuli (generalization), or narrows to one (discrimination).
- Acquisition — the initial learning of the CS–UCS association.
- Extinction — the CR weakens and disappears when the CS is presented repeatedly without the UCS.
- Spontaneous recovery — after extinction and a rest, the CR briefly reappears when the CS returns; proof that extinction suppresses rather than erases.
- Stimulus generalization — stimuli similar to the CS also evoke the CR (a child conditioned to fear a white rat also fears a white rabbit).
- Stimulus discrimination — learning to respond only to the specific CS, not to similar stimuli; the opposite of generalization.
- Higher-order (second-order) conditioning — once a CS reliably produces a CR, pairing a new neutral stimulus with that CS makes the new stimulus a CS too, without ever touching the UCS.
How AAMC tests it
A response returns after a break → spontaneous recovery; a similar stimulus also triggers it → generalization; the subject responds to one cue but not a near-identical one → discrimination.
The Little Albert experiment
Watson & Rayner conditioned an infant to fear a white rat by pairing it (NS) with a loud noise (UCS); the fear (CR) generalized to other furry objects.
The classic demonstration of conditioned emotional responses in humans — and a staple research-ethics example. It also illustrates stimulus generalization (the fear spread from the rat to a rabbit, a coat, a Santa mask).
Taste aversion & biological preparedness
Some associations are learned far more easily than others. Taste aversion (the Garcia effect): get sick hours after a novel food and you form a strong aversion in a single trial across a long delay.
Biological preparedness means organisms are predisposed to link certain stimuli (taste↔nausea) much more readily than arbitrary ones. Taste aversion violates the usual rules — one trial, long CS–UCS delay — which is why AAMC uses it to test whether you know conditioning has biological limits rather than being a blank slate.
Operant (instrumental) conditioning
Behavior is shaped by its consequences: reinforcement increases a behavior, punishment decreases it.
Where classical conditioning links two stimuli, operant conditioning links a behavior to its consequence. The lineage: Thorndike's law of effect (responses followed by satisfying consequences become more likely) → B. F. Skinner, who formalized it with the operant chamber ("Skinner box"). The distinguishing test vs. classical: in operant learning the subject's own behavior produces the outcome.
How AAMC tests it
Three recurring item types — (1) classify a consequence into the reinforcement/punishment 2×2; (2) identify a reinforcement schedule and predict its response pattern; (3) tell operant from classical (does the learner's behavior cause the consequence, or are two stimuli just paired?).
The 2×2 (incl. the negative-reinforcement trap)
Two independent choices: increase vs. decrease behavior (reinforcement vs. punishment) and add vs. remove a stimulus (positive vs. negative). Negative reinforcement is not punishment — it removes something aversive to increase a behavior.
| Add a stimulus (positive) | Remove a stimulus (negative) | |
|---|---|---|
| Increase behavior (reinforcement) | Positive reinforcement — add something pleasant (treat for sitting) | Negative reinforcement — remove something aversive (the seatbelt alarm stops when you buckle) |
| Decrease behavior (punishment) | Positive punishment — add something aversive (a speeding fine) | Negative punishment — remove something pleasant (take away phone privileges) |
"Negative" means a stimulus is taken away, not that the outcome is bad. Escape learning ends an aversive stimulus already present; avoidance learning prevents it from starting — both run on negative reinforcement.
Don't confuse
Negative reinforcement vs. punishment is the #1 trap in 7C. The discriminator is direction of behavior: if the behavior goes up it's reinforcement (no matter what was added or removed); if it goes down it's punishment.
Primary vs. secondary reinforcers
A primary reinforcer is innately satisfying (food, water, warmth); a secondary (conditioned) reinforcer gains its power by association with a primary one (money, grades, tokens).
Reinforcement schedules
When reinforcement is delivered drives how a behavior is performed and how hard it is to extinguish. Variable-ratio is the most powerful (fast and extinction-resistant — think slot machines).
Continuous reinforcement (reward every time) gives the fastest acquisition but the fastest extinction. Partial (intermittent) schedules learn slower but resist extinction far better. The four:
| Schedule | Reinforcement after… | Response pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Fixed-ratio (FR) | a set number of responses | high rate, brief post-reward pause |
| Variable-ratio (VR) | an unpredictable number of responses | highest, steadiest rate; most resistant to extinction (gambling) |
| Fixed-interval (FI) | first response after a set time | "scalloped" — responding ramps up as the interval ends |
| Variable-interval (VI) | first response after a variable time | slow, steady responding |
How AAMC tests it
Give a description, ask for the schedule and its pattern. Memory hook: ratio → faster responding (reward depends on how much you do); variable → harder to extinguish (you never know when the next reward comes). So variable-ratio wins on both.
Shaping & successive approximations
Build a complex new behavior by reinforcing successive approximations — closer and closer attempts — that would never occur on their own.
Also know extinction (operant): when reinforcement stops, the behavior fades, often after a brief extinction burst (a spike in the behavior first). And the Premack principle: a more-preferred activity reinforces a less-preferred one ("play after homework").
Learned helplessness
After repeated unavoidable aversive events, an organism stops trying to escape even once escape is possible (Seligman's dogs). A major model for depression.
Instinctive drift
Conditioned behavior tends to drift back toward innate, species-typical patterns over time (Breland & Breland) — another sign that learning works within biological limits.
Cognitive learning: latent & insight
Cognition sits inside learning: latent learning is learning that stays hidden until there's a reason to use it; insight learning is a sudden "aha" solution rather than trial-and-error.
- Latent learning — Tolman's rats learned a maze's layout while wandering unrewarded, then ran it efficiently the moment food appeared, revealing a cognitive map they'd built all along. Learning without reinforcement.
- Insight learning — Köhler's chimps stacked boxes to reach a banana in a sudden leap, not gradual shaping.
How AAMC tests it
Both are offered as counterexamples to strict behaviorism — pick them when the scenario shows learning without visible reinforcement (latent) or a sudden solution (insight).
Observational learning (social learning)
Learning by watching others (models) rather than through consequences to yourself — Bandura's Bobo doll.
Albert Bandura's Bobo doll experiment is the landmark: children who watched an adult act aggressively toward an inflatable doll imitated it; those who saw the adult punished did so less. Key terms:
- Modeling — imitating an observed behavior. Bandura's four steps: attention → retention → reproduction → motivation.
- Vicarious reinforcement / punishment — seeing a model rewarded makes you more likely to imitate; seeing them punished, less likely. You learn from their consequences.
- Mirror neurons — fire both when you perform an action and when you watch someone else do it; a proposed neural basis for imitation and empathy.
- Biological, social, and cultural factors shape what is modeled and whether it's imitated (the model's status, similarity to the self, cultural norms).
How AAMC tests it
Media-violence, peer-influence, or skill-acquisition scenarios. The discriminator: did the learner experience the consequence directly (operant) or watch someone else experience it (observational/vicarious)?
Theories of attitude & behavior change
An attitude is an evaluation of a person, object, or idea, with three components — the ABC model: affective (feelings), behavioral (action tendencies), cognitive (beliefs). The tested question is when attitudes predict behavior and how they change.
Attitudes best predict behavior when the attitude is strong, stable, specific to the behavior, and accessible, when situational pressures are weak, and when the person is self-aware. AAMC likes scenarios where attitude and behavior diverge and asks why.
Related
Elaboration likelihood model
Persuasion takes two routes: central (deep processing of argument quality → durable change) or peripheral (superficial cues → weak, temporary change). Petty & Cacioppo.
The central route is used when the listener is motivated and able to think it through; it engages the content and quality of the argument and yields attitude change that lasts and resists counter-persuasion. The peripheral route is used when motivation or ability is low; it leans on cues like the speaker's attractiveness or credibility, catchy slogans, or the sheer number (not quality) of arguments, and produces fragile change.
How AAMC tests it
Classify a persuasion attempt: is the audience engaging with the substance (central) or being swayed by who's talking / how many points (peripheral)?
Cognitive dissonance
Holding inconsistent attitudes — or acting against your attitude — creates uncomfortable tension that people resolve by changing the attitude to fit the behavior. Festinger.
The classic insufficient-justification effect: people paid only $1 to lie that a boring task was fun later rated it more enjoyable than people paid $20 — with no external reason to justify the lie, they changed their attitude to reduce dissonance.
How AAMC tests it
Recognize dissonance when someone changes a belief to match an action they already took, especially under weak external justification.
Persuasion factors & techniques
Beyond the route, attitude change depends on the source (credibility, attractiveness), the message (quality, well-calibrated fear appeals), and the target (audience traits). Common techniques: foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face.
- Foot-in-the-door — a small request first makes a later large request more likely to be granted.
- Door-in-the-face — a large request that's refused makes a smaller follow-up more likely to be granted.
Don't confuse
Foot-in-the-door (small → large) vs. door-in-the-face (large → small) — the order and direction of the requests is the whole distinction.
Worked question
A toddler throws a tantrum in a store, and his mother quiets him by handing over candy. Over the following weeks, the mother hands over candy faster and faster at the first sign of a tantrum. The increase in the mother's candy-giving behavior is maintained by: