Context blocking in rat autoshaping: Sign-tracking versus goal-tracking

Prior experience of unsignaled food can interfere with subsequent acquisition by birds of autoshaped key-pecking at a signal light. This has been understood to indicate that unsignaled food results in context conditioning, which blocks subsequent learning about the keylight-food relationship. In the present experiment with rats lever insertion as the conditioned stimulus (CS) preceded sucrose delivery as the unconditioned stimulus (US). Half the rats initially received unsignaled USs in the conditioning context, while the remainder did not. Both lever-presses (sign-tracking) and magazine-entries (goal-tracking) were recorded. Under immediate reinforcement conditions, prior unsignaled US interfered with sign-tracking, but had no effect on goal-tracking. In two further groups, a trace condition prevented development of sign-tracking. In this case, prior context conditioning interfered with goal-tracking. These results suggest that interference with sign-tracking may reflect response competition, while interference with goal-tracking under trace conditions may reflect failure to acquire a CS-US association.     

Duration of signals for intertrial reinforcement and nonreinforcement in random control procedures

In the random control procedure, responding to a conditioned stimulus (target CS) is prevented when the probability of unsignaled, unconditioned stimuli (USs) in the intertrial interval (ITI) is equal to the probability of the US in the presence of the target CS. Three experiments used an autoshaping procedure with White Carneaux pigeons to examine the effects of the temporal duration of signals for the ITI USs (cover CSs) and for concomitant periods of nonreinforcement. In Experiment 1, a short duration cover, but not a long duration cover, resulted in responding to the target CS. In Experiment 2, an explicit CS- cue during periods of nonreinforcement did not affect target acquisition. In Experiment 3, a long CS-, but not a short cover CS, was a sufficient condition for the acquisition of responding to the target CS. These results imply that the acquisition of responding to a target CS requires a discriminable period of nonreinforcement that is long relative to the target CS duration.     

Analyzing the random control procedure: Effects of paired and unpaired CSs and USs on autoshaping the chick's key peck with heat reinforcement

A series of five experiments using a total of 264 subjects investigated the effects of paired and unpaired key light (CS) and heat (US) stimuli on autoshaping the chick's key peck. Experiment 1 established that paired presentations of CS and US promoted a more rapid rise in key pecking than did randomly presented CSs and USs and that the specific sequence of stimuli under the random control procedure affected key pecking performance. Experiment 2 used a trace conditioning procedure to determine the role of the CS-US interval on autoshaping and to define empirically unpaired CSs and USs. Key pecking declined as the trace delay interval was increased from 0 to 25 sec; at 25 sec, no conditioning of key pecking occurred. Experiments 3–5 assessed the effects on autoshaped key pecking of (a) number of daily CS-US pairings, (b) added unpaired CS presentations, and (c) added unpaired US presentations, since paired and random control schedules differed in all of these respects. Reduction in the number of CS-US pairings slowed the acquisition of key pecking as did the concurrent addition of nonreinforced CSs and unsignaled USs. These results support theories of association formation that stress the effects of both paired and unpaired CSs and USs.     

Effect of signaling intertrial unconditioned stimuli in autoshaping

Context-unconditioned-stimulus (US) associations have been suggested as the mediator of the response decrement that occurs when extra USs are added to the intertrial intervals (ITIs) of an otherwise standard Pavlovian conditioning situation. The present autoshaping experiments were concerned with the effect of signaling those extra USs, since such signaling might be expected to lessen their ability to condition the context. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that signaling the ITI USs did reduce their detrimental effects on responding to the conditioned stimulus (CS). To determine whether that reduction was due to an impact of signaling on the target-CS-US association or on performance to the target-CS, Experiment 3 examined responding to differentially trained CSs in a common context, as well as responding to identically trained CSs in differentially trained contexts. Whether the CS was tested in a context of relatively high or low associative strength, more responding occurred to the CS trained with signaled, as compared with unsignaled, ITI USs; further, there was more responding to that CS in the more highly valued context. The pattern of results suggests that contextual value does interact with CS-US learning and may also affect performance to the CS.     

Non-differential return of fear in humans after a reinstatement procedure

The present experiment investigated reinstatement of fear in humans using a differential fear conditioning preparation. In this experiment, one neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus; CS+) was paired with an aversive stimulus (unconditioned stimulus; US) during the acquisition phase, while another neutral stimulus was not (CS−). This procedure led to a difference in responding between the CS+ and the CS− (i.e., differential conditioning). After this acquisition phase, an extinction phase followed, during which both CSs were presented without the US, resulting in a decrease in differential conditioned responding. Reinstatement refers to the return of extinguished conditioned responses due to the experience of US-only trials after the extinction phase. This phenomenon was investigated by presenting half of the participants (reinstatement group) with unpredictable USs after the extinction phase. The control group did not receive these USs after the extinction procedure. The results show that return of fear was clearly apparent after the reinstating USs. This return of fear was, however, not limited to the CS+. An increase in ‘conditioned’ responding was also observed for the control stimulus. This interesting observation will be discussed against the background of a number of recent theoretical conceptualizations of reinstatement.     

Evaluative conditioning without directly experienced pairings of the conditioned and the unconditioned stimuli

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is the valence change of a stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) that is due to the previous pairing with another stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, US). We investigated whether EC can occur also when the CS–US pairings are not experienced directly by the participant but are implied by other events that the participant encounters. In two experiments, positive USs were presented in some trials and negative USs in other trials. Afterwards, participants were given information from which it was possible to conclude that CSs were covertly present during these trials. Finally, the valence of these CSs was registered using both implicit (Implicit Association Test, affective priming) and explicit measures (valence ratings). In line with the assumption that EC effects can be based on CS–US pairings that are not directly experienced, the valence of the CSs changed in the direction of the US with which they were covertly paired. This effect was observed both on explicit and on implicit measures. We argue that several aspects of our results are in line with propositional models of EC and fit less well with association formation models.     

Reinstatement of fear in humans: autonomic and experiential responses in a differential conditioning paradigm

The present study investigated reinstatement of fear in humans using an aversive differential conditioning paradigm. Two neutral human face pictures were presented during habituation, acquisition, extinction, and postreinstatement phases. One picture served as a conditioned stimulus (CS) reinforced by an unconditioned stimulus (US) in the form of electrical stimulation (CS+) and the second picture as a control stimulus that was never reinforced (CS-). The prediction that in a reinstatement manipulation a previously extinguished fear response in humans can be reinstated in a reinstatement group by the mere presentation of three unpredicted electrical stimulations (USs) was tested. Participants in the control group were not exposed to unpredicted USs and no reinstatement effect was expected. Outcome measures included subjective US expectancy ratings and skin conductance responses. Results showed non-selective return of the fear response due to fear recovery associated with both CSs (CS+/CS-) in the reinstatement group. Unexpected fear recovery was observed for both CSs (CS+/CS-) in control participants. Results are discussed with respect to context conditioning, fear generalisation, and anxiety-related cognitive mechanisms underlying fear recovery after extinction.     

A new tool for assessing context conditioning induced by US-unpredictability in humans: The Martians task restyled

Unpredictability of an unconditioned stimulus (US) typically produces context conditioning in animals and humans. We modified the Martians task - a computer game measuring learning of Pavlovian associations through conditioned suppression - for assessing context conditioning in humans. One between-subjects and one within-subjects study are reported. Both experiments comprised four conditions: a predictable (Paired) condition in which the conditioned stimulus (CS) signaled the US, a neutral condition (No-US), one unpredictable condition in which the CS did not signal the US (Unpaired) and another one in which only unsignaled, temporally unpredictable USs were presented (US-only). Results showed more contextual conditioned suppression in the unpredictable conditions compared to the predictable condition. In contrast, more cued conditioned suppression occurred in the Paired condition than in the Unpaired condition. Consistent with animal research, context conditioning was increased by unpredictability. These data support the Martians task as a promising tool to extend research on human context conditioning.     

Is evaluative conditioning really resistant to extinction? Evidence for changes in evaluative judgements without changes in evaluative representations

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is defined as the change in the evaluation of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a positive or negative unconditioned stimulus (US). Although several individual studies suggest that EC is unaffected by unreinforced presentations of the CS without the US, a recent meta-analysis indicates that EC effects are less pronounced for post-extinction measurements than post-acquisition measurements. The disparity in research findings suggests that extinction of EC may depend on yet unidentified conditions. In an attempt to uncover these conditions, three experiments (N = 784) investigated the influence of unreinforced post-acquisition CS presentations on EC effects resulting from simultaneous versus sequential pairings and pairings with single versus multiple USs. For all four types of CS–US pairings, EC effects on self-reported evaluations were reduced by unreinforced CS presentations, but only when the CSs had been rated after the initial presentation of CS–US pairings. EC effects on an evaluative priming measure remained unaffected by unreinforced CS presentations regardless of whether the CSs had been rated after acquisition. The results suggest that reduced EC effects resulting from unreinforced CS presentations are due to judgement-related processes during the verbal expression of CS evaluations rather than genuine changes in the underlying evaluative representations.     

One but not the same: Evaluative conditioning with mixed-valence USs

In evaluative conditioning (EC), the pairing of a positively or negatively valenced stimulus (US) with another neutral stimulus (CS) leads to a corresponding change in liking of the CS. EC research so far has concentrated on using unambiguously positive or negative USs. However, attitude objects often possess multiple features that can be positive and negative at the same time. The present research addresses the question of how EC is affected by using such mixed-valence stimuli as USs. In two studies, USs of mixed valence (i.e., positive behavior and membership in a negative group or vice versa) were paired with affectively neutral CSs. Interestingly, results showed that the mixed-valence USs were evaluated according to the valence of the behavioral information. In contrast, the evaluation of associated CSs was more strongly influenced by the valence of the group information that was presented about the USs. Possible explanations as well as implications for EC research are discussed.     

Associative effects of US preexposure: modulation of conditioned responding by an excitatory training context

In two experiments we examined factors that contribute to retarded emergence of conditioned responding to a conditioned stimulus (CS) trained in a context in which unsignaled unconditioned stimuli (USs) had previously been administered. In both experiments water-deprived rats were used in a conditioned lick suppression task to measure the conditioned response elicitation potential of the CS and the training context. From Experiment 1 we determined that nonreinforced exposure to the excitatory context after US preexposure and prior to CS-US pairings in that context eliminated the conditioned response deficit observed on a subsequent test of the CS. The recovery from the US preexposure deficit was nearly as great in animals that received nonreinforced exposure to the excitatory training context after the CS-US pairings but prior to the ultimate test of the CS. From Experiment 2 we determined that the recovery induced by contextual deflation after CS training was specific to deflation of the context in which the CS was trained as opposed to another excitatory context. In total, these experiments suggest that context-US associations partially mask the expression of a learned CS-US association. These results are discussed in terms of recent models of conditioned response generation.     

Extinction of likes and dislikes: effects of feature-specific attention allocation

The evaluative conditioning (EC) effect refers to the change in the liking of a neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) due to its pairing with another stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, US). We examined whether the extinction rate of the EC effect is moderated by feature-specific attention allocation. In two experiments, CSs were abstract Gabor patches varying along two orthogonal, perceptual dimensions (i.e. spatial frequency and orientation). During the acquisition phase, one of these dimensions was predictive of the valence of the USs. During the extinction phase, CSs were presented alone and participants were asked to categorise the CSs either according to their valence, the perceptual dimension that was task-relevant during the acquisition phase, or a perceptual dimension that was task-irrelevant during the acquisition phase. As predicted, explicit valence measures revealed a linear increase in the extinction rate of the EC effect as participants were encouraged to assign attention to non-evaluative stimulus information during the extinction phase. In Experiment 1, Affect Misattribution Paradigm (AMP) data mimicked this pattern of results, although the effect just missed conventional levels of significance. In Experiment 2, the AMP data revealed an increase of the EC effect if attention was focused on evaluative stimulus information. Potential mechanisms to explain these findings are discussed.     

Conditioned fear extinction and reinstatement in a human fear-potentiated startle paradigm

The purpose of this study was to analyze fear extinction and reinstatement in humans using fear-potentiated startle. Participants were fear conditioned using a simple discrimination procedure with colored lights as the conditioned stimuli (CSs) and an airblast to the throat as the unconditioned stimulus (US). Participants were extinguished 24 h after fear conditioning. Upon presentation of unsignaled USs after extinction, participants displayed significant fear reinstatement. In summary, these procedures produced robust fear-potentiated startle, significant CS+/CS- discrimination, within-session extinction, and significant reinstatement. This is the first demonstration of fear extinction and reinstatement in humans using startle measures.     

Is the devil in the detail? Evidence for S-S learning after unconditional stimulus revaluation in human evaluative conditioning under a broader set of experimental conditions

Whether valence change during evaluative conditioning is mediated by a link between the conditional stimulus (CS) and the unconditional stimulus (US; S-S learning) or between the CS and the unconditional response (S-R learning) is a matter of continued debate. Changing the valence of the US after conditioning, known as US revaluation, can be used to dissociate these accounts. Changes in CS valence after US revaluation provide evidence for S-S learning but if CS valence does not change, evidence for S-R learning is found. Support for S-S learning has been provided by most past revaluation studies, but typically the CS and US have been from the same stimulus category, the task instructions have suggested that judgements of the CS should be based on the US, and USs have been mildly valenced stimuli. These factors may bias the results in favour of S-S learning. We examined whether S-R learning would be evident when CSs and USs were taken from different categories, the task instructions were removed, and more salient USs were used. US revaluation was found to influence explicit US evaluations and explicit and implicit CS evaluations, supporting an S-S learning account and suggesting that past results are stable across procedural changes.     

I like it because I said that I like it: evaluative conditioning effects can be based on stimulus-response learning

Evaluative conditioning (EC) effects are often assumed to be based on a learned mental link between the CS (conditioned stimulus) and the US (unconditioned stimulus). We demonstrate that this link is not the only one that can underlie EC effects, but that if evaluative responses are actually given during the learning phase also a direct link between the CS and an evaluative response-a CS-ER link-can be learned and lead to EC effects. In Experiment 1, CSs were paired with USs and participants were asked to evaluate the pairs during the conditioning phase. Resulting EC effects were unaffected by a later revaluation of the USs, suggesting that these EC effects can be attributed to CS-ER learning rather than to CS-US learning. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1 with the difference that no evaluative responses were given during the learning phase. EC effects in this study were influenced by US revaluation, suggesting that these EC effects are mainly based on CS-US learning. In Experiment 3, it was shown that EC effects can be found even if the USs are entirely removed from the procedure and the CSs are only paired with enforced evaluative responses. Together the experiments show that the valence of a stimulus can change because of a contingency with an evaluative response. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved).     

Formation of tone-US associations does not interfere with the formation of context-US associations in pigeons

In four experiments we investigated whether signaled and unsignaled US presentations resulted in differential context conditioning. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that the presence of a tone during grain presentation facilitated the formation of tone-food associations in pigeons. Experiment 2 also showed that the acquisition of associative value by the tone did not diminish associations between context and the unconditioned stimulus (US). Experiment 3 showed that signaled USs did not interfere with the acquisition of context-US associations, and Experiment 4 showed that even when the signal was extensively pretrained, context-US associations could not be blocked. The results of these experiments are inconsistent with conditioning models that require competition between cues and contexts for associative value.     

Event representation in Pavlovian conditioning: image and action

In a typical Pavlovian conditioning experiment, a relatively insignificant event, the conditioned stimulus (CS), is paired with a biologically more meaningful event, the unconditioned stimulus (US). As a consequence of those pairings, the CS is thought to acquire response characteristics of the US. In this article I describe experiments with rats that suggest that under some circumstances, the CS acquires control of perceptual processing of the US, in the absence of that US itself. I present three kinds of evidence for this surrogate processing, which I liken to imagery or hallucination: (1) CSs come to control specific, sensory-evaluative responses normally evoked only by the USs; (2) CSs can substitute for USs in the establishment of new learning about those USs themselves; (3) CSs can substitute for USs in the modulation of conditioning to other events, either overshadowing (interfering) or potentiating learning, in the same manner as the USs themselves. Finally, I compare these data with evidence for conditioned sensation and imagery in humans, and suggest that imagery may be a very basic process, evolutionarily derived from perceptual and conditioning processes adapted to deal with remote or absent objects.     

Evaluative conditioning without directly experienced pairings of the conditioned and the unconditioned stimuli

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is the valence change of a stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) that is due to the previous pairing with another stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, US). We investigated whether EC can occur also when the CS-US pairings are not experienced directly by the participant but are implied by other events that the participant encounters. In two experiments, positive USs were presented in some trials and negative USs in other trials. Afterwards, participants were given information from which it was possible to conclude that CSs were covertly present during these trials. Finally, the valence of these CSs was registered using both implicit (Implicit Association Test, affective priming) and explicit measures (valence ratings). In line with the assumption that EC effects can be based on CS-US pairings that are not directly experienced, the valence of the CSs changed in the direction of the US with which they were covertly paired. This effect was observed both on explicit and on implicit measures. We argue that several aspects of our results are in line with propositional models of EC and fit less well with association formation models.     

动物信号追踪和目标追踪行为及其神经机制

信号追踪和目标追踪的实质是条件刺激和非条件刺激结合诱导的条件性接近反应.条件刺激的预测作用和诱因作用是信号追踪和目标追踪的重要机制;伏隔核、中央杏仁核和前扣带回在信号追踪和目标追踪过程中具有重要作用;然而,大脑皮层和海马损伤对两者影响较小.DA功能降低可损害信号追踪获得和表达;而脑内DA含量增加可提高目标追踪.未来的研究中,应该规范条件刺激和非条件刺激的类型和设置方法,针对不同的研究目的个别地或同时地测量信号追踪和目标追踪.     

What do memory data tell us about the role of contingency awareness in evaluative conditioning?

Evaluative conditioning (EC) refers to the effect that pairings of a conditioned stimulus (CS) with a valenced unconditioned stimulus (US) lead to changes in the evaluation of the CS. There have been recurring debates about whether EC requires awareness of the contingency between CSs and USs during learning. We argue that the memory performance data obtained in the standard paradigm remain ambiguous about the role of contingency awareness during the encoding of CS–US pairings. First, memory performance data are unable to distinguish between encoding-related versus retrieval-related effects. Second, the relation between memory performance and evaluation is correlational, which limits conclusions about causal relations between memory performance and EC effects. These ambiguities imply that any possible data pattern can be interpreted in at least two different ways. It is concluded that a resolution of the current debate requires alternative approaches in which contingency awareness is experimentally manipulated during the encoding of CS–US pairings.