Effects of recent exposure to a conditioned stimulus on extinction of Pavlovian fear conditioning

In six experiments we studied the effects of a single re-exposure to a conditioned stimulus (CS; "retrieval trial") prior to extinction training (extinction-reconsolidation boundary) on the development of and recovery from fear extinction. A single retrieval trial prior to extinction training significantly augmented the renewal and reinstatement of extinguished responding. Augmentation of recovery was not observed if the retrieval and extinction training occurred in different contexts. These results contrast with those reported in earlier papers by Monfils and coworkers in rats and by Schiller and coworkers in humans. We suggest that these contrasting results could depend on the contrasting influences of either: (1) occasion-setting contextual associations vs. direct context-CS associations formed as a consequence of the retrieval trial or (2) discrimination vs. generalization between the circumstances of conditioning and extinction.     

Measurement of fear of the conditioned stimulus and of situational cues at several stages of two-way avoidance learning

In Experiment 1, subjects were trained in a signaled two-way avoidance task to a criterion of either 2, 10, or 20 consecutive avoidance responses. Subsequently, they were allowed to escape, in the absence of shock, from one compartment of the avoidance apparatus to an adjacent safe box. For one group at each criterion level, the conditioned stimulus (CS) was presented during these trials; for another group, it was not (NCS). The rate and level of learning of the escape response were taken to reflect the amount of fear of the CS and situational cues present at the end of avoidance training for the CS groups and the amount of fear of the situational cues alone for the NCS groups. Under the CS condition, all groups learned equally well; under the NCS condition, learning occurred only in the two-criterion group. This pattern of results suggests that, as avoidance training continued, differential reinforcement led to the formation of a discrimination so that a substantial amount of fear was elicited by the CS plus situational cues but only a minimal amount by the situational cues alone. Such a loss of fear of situational cues would, according to effective reinforcement theory, serve to maintain or even increase reinforcement as avoidance training progressed. The results of Experiment 2, by ruling out some alternative explanations, supported the interpretation that the learning of the instrumental escape response in the first experiment was based on prior fear conditioning.     

Temporal specificity of fear conditioning: effects of different conditioned stimulus-unconditioned stimulus intervals on the fear-potentiated startle effect

Separate groups of rats were given 30 pairings of a light (conditioned stimulus, CS) and 500-ms shock (unconditioned stimulus, US) at CS-US intervals of 0, 25, 50, 100, 200, 800, 3,200, 12,800, or 51,200 ms. Other groups had lights and shocks inconsistently paired. The startle reflex was elicited 2-4 days later with a noise burst alone or 25-51,200 ms after light onset. After CS-US pairings over a wide range of intervals (25-51,200 ms), startle was potentiated in testing, sometimes as rapidly as 50 ms after light onset. Magnitude of potentiation and resistance to extinction were generally greater with longer CS-US intervals. In several groups, potentiation was maximal at a test interval that matched the CS-US interval used in training. This temporal specificity sharpened with increasing numbers of training trials but even occurred with a single training trial in which a 51,200-ms CS-US interval was used. The data indicate that even during simple fear conditioning, animals rapidly learn a temporal CS-US relationship. This has important implications for understanding the neural mechanisms of fear conditioning.     

Effects of stimulus probability and visual similarity on stimulus encoding

Visual similarity, stimulus probability, and stimulus contrast were manipulated in two memory-scanning experiments to determine how stimulus probability affects encoding. Two hypotheses were tested: The first, a featural facilitation hypothesis, localizes the effect of stimulus probability on feature extraction; the second claims that stimulus probability has its effect on stimulus recognition. In both experiments, visual similarity was found to slow encoding, particularly under low-contrast conditions. This effect was larger for low probability stimuli than for high probability stimuli and increased as the difference in probability between two visually similar stimuli increased. These results are inconsistent with the featural facilitation hypothesis, but can be explained in terms of differential priming of internal recognition responses for members of the stimulus set, such that more probable members are more easily recognized.     

The effect of two schedules of primary and conditioned reinforcement

Of 23 pigeons, 11 received continuous reinforcement for key pecking, and 12 received an FR 10 schedule of reinforcement. The birds were then tested without food, but with potential conditioned reinforcers presented either on the same schedule as in training, on the other schedule, or not at all. Each bird in the subgroup trained on CRF and tested with S^r's at FR 10 not only gave more responses in testing than did each bird in both subgroups receiving no S^r's, but also gave more responses than did each bird in the S^r subgroup receiving CRF training and S^r's at CRF. Cumulative records are presented to show the effects of different schedules of conditioned reinforcers.     

Effects of visual and tactual stimulus presentation on learning two-choice patterned and semirandom sequences.

Three experiments compared the effects of visual and tactual stimulus presentation in two-choice sequential learning situations requiring a predictive response. In Experiments 1 and 2, subjects received a five- or six-unit repeating pattern; in Experiment 3, they received a semirandom sequence. Tactual as compared to visual stimulus presentation resulted in less trials to criterion in predicting a repearing pattern and in earlier frequency matching in predicting a semirandom sequence. These results suggest an unusual tactual adeptness in binary serial learning. Additionally, a new method of analyzing conditional responding in th brobability learning paradigm is described and applied to the data in Experiment 3.     

Effects of contextual conditioning and unconditional stimulus presentation on performance in appetitive conditioning

Four experiments with rat subjects examined the effects of contextual conditioning on conditioned appetitive performance. Experiment 1 compared the effects of contextual conditioning on performance to conditioned stimuli (CSs) with different conditioning histories. Contextual conditioning enhanced performance to the CS if the CS had first been conditioned and then extinguished, but had no effect on performance when the CS had been merely paired or unpaired with food. Experiments 2 and 3 then asked whether the effect on the extinguished CS was due to contextual conditioning acting as a cue for conditioning. In Experiment 2, extinction procedures in which extra unconditioned stimuli (USs) were presented during the intertrial intervals were found to reduce the CS's sensitivity to enhancement by contextual conditioning, but had no effect on spontaneous recovery. In Experiment 3, USs added to conditioning or extinction acquired the ability to cue the corresponding performance. Under some conditions, USs added to conditioning could suppress performance (Experiment 4). The results suggest that contextual conditioning has complex effects that can be better understood by recognizing that contextual conditioning, as well as the USs that create it,Mayacquire discriminative control over conditioned responding.     

The influence of visual ability on learning and memory performance in 13 strains of mice

We calculated visual ability in 13 strains of mice (129SI/Sv1mJ, A/J, AKR/J, BALB/cByJ, C3H/HeJ, C57BL/6J, CAST/EiJ, DBA/2J, FVB/NJ, MOLF/EiJ, SJL/J, SM/J, and SPRET/EiJ) on visual detection, pattern discrimination, and visual acuity and tested these and other mice of the same strains in a behavioral test battery that evaluated visuo-spatial learning and memory, conditioned odor preference, and motor learning. Strain differences in visual acuity accounted for a significant proportion of the variance between strains in measures of learning and memory in the Morris water maze. Strain differences in motor learning performance were not influenced by visual ability. Conditioned odor preference was enhanced in mice with visual defects. These results indicate that visual ability must be accounted for when testing for strain differences in learning and memory in mice because differences in performance in many tasks may be due to visual deficits rather than differences in higher order cognitive functions. These results have significant implications for the search for the neural and genetic basis of learning and memory in mice.     

Expectancy-learning and evaluative learning in human classical conditioning: affective priming as an indirect and unobtrusive measure of conditioned stimulus valence

It has been argued that in classical conditioning two processes might be operative. First, one may learn that the conditioned stimulus (CS+) is a valid predictor for the occurrence of the biologically negative or positive event (US; expectancy-learning). Second, one may learn to perceive the conditioned stimulus itself as a negative or positive stimulus, depending on the valence of the event it has been associated with (evaluative learning). Until the present, however, both forms of learning have been investigated using rather different conditioning procedures. Using a differential aversive conditioning preparation with pictures of human faces as CSs and an electrocutaneous stimulus as US, we were able to demonstrate that both forms of learning can co-occur. Moreover, the extent of evaluative learning in this aversive conditioning procedure did not significantly differ from the amount of evaluative learning in an evaluative conditioning procedure with positive and negative adjectives as USs, which was administered to the same participants. In the present study evaluative learning was not only indexed by direct evaluative ratings, but we introduced affective priming as an indirect and unobtrusive, reaction time based measure of stimulus valence. Finally, imagery instructions during acquisition did not facilitate expectancy-learning nor evaluative learning.