How is semantic generalization different from other examples of generalization?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com March 4, 2021, 6:07 pm ad1c9bdddf
Please refer to response file attached. I hope this helps and take care.
STIMULUS GENERALIZATION in Classical Conditioning: The closer a stimulus is on some PHYSICAL dimension to a Conditioned Stimulus, the greater will be the Conditioned Response. For example, the closer a melody is to the melody of "your song," the more that melody will make you feel the way "your song" makes you feel. For Pavlov, the closer the sound of the bell was to the original bell, the more likely the dog would salivate. What about stimuli that resemble conditioned stimuli SEMANTICALLY, rather than PHYSICALLY? Will a synonym cause you to feel feelings that the original causes? There is classic research on this question. A little thought reveals intriguing implications for advertising.
Conditioning of a reaction to a nonverbal stimulus; and subsequent generalization of the response to verbal signs representative of the original stimulus. The types include generalization from object to sign, from sign to sign, and from sign to object. Said another ways, it is centered on the concept of meaning rather than physical difference. Internal responses - thoughts, emotional reactions produce links between physically dissimilar words. ...
This solution responds to the question: How is semantic generalization different from other examples of generalization? Research validated, with references provided.