The extinction of within-compound flavor associations

Three experiments studied extinction of the associations which are formed between two flavors presented in a simultaneous compound. In Experiment 1 those associations were identified by a sensory preconditioning procedure in which the poisoning of one element of the compound led to the rejection of the other element. Separate presentation of either element between their joint occurence and the poisoning of one element sharply attenuated the rejection of the other element. That attenuation was interpreted in terms of the extinction of within-compound associations. Experiment 2 obtained similar results with an alternative extinction procedure in which the elements of the original compound were presented in other compounds. Experiment 3 obtained similar results when the existence of the within-compound associations was determined by an alternative assessment procedure in which one element of the compound was made more attractive by the induction of a specific hunger. These experiments suggest that within-compound associations can be extinguished when the elements are separately presented outside of the compound. Experiments 2 and 3 make less plausible an alternative interpretation of the effects of separate element presentation in terms of reduction of the novelty of the element. The findings may be taken as implying that the elements of a simultaneously presented compound are joined by a single symmetrical association which acts at various points during a sensory preconditioning experiment.     

The partial-reinforcement extinction effect and the contingent-sampling hypothesis

The partial-reinforcement extinction effect (PREE) implies that learning under partial reinforcements is more robust than learning under full reinforcements. While the advantages of partial reinforcements have been well-documented in laboratory studies, field research has failed to support this prediction. In the present study, we aimed to clarify this pattern. Experiment 1 showed that partial reinforcements increase the tendency to select the promoted option during extinction; however, this effect is much smaller than the negative effect of partial reinforcements on the tendency to select the promoted option during the training phase. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the overall effect of partial reinforcements varies inversely with the attractiveness of the alternative to the promoted behavior: The overall effect is negative when the alternative is relatively attractive, and positive when the alternative is relatively unattractive. These results can be captured with a contingent-sampling model assuming that people select options that provided the best payoff in similar past experiences. The best fit was obtained under the assumption that similarity is defined by the sequence of the last four outcomes.     

The situation

A formulation for the explanation of behavior is needed to guide the work of the applied psychologist whose first task is to explain behavior. It can also serve as a coordinating framework for the basic research that centers around each of psychology's many constructs. This paper puts forward the notion that the appropriate framework reflects the intersection of numerous person and environment systems; in other words, that it is found in the structure of a situation. Continuity within the science of psychology is promoted if an appropriate structure is found in the classic situations of the experimental laboratory. A prototypical situation that is based on the major paradigms of instrumental learning is described. It has already shown considerable utility in organizing the investigation of behavioral determinants in a real-world setting, and its ability to clarify interrelationships among psychology's constructs also looks promising.Thanks are due to C. Cofer, J. Keenan, E. Mannucci, and M. Nadien for their helpful comments on a draft of this paper.     

The effects of single-component extinction of a three-component serial CS on resistance to extinction of the conditioned avoidance response

Central to a fear interpretation of how avoidance responses are maintained in the absence of further CS-UCS pairings is the underlying assumption of an existing gradient of fear across the CS-UCS interval. Extrapolations based on this gradient lead to a number of differential predictions concerning the topography of avoidance responding during extinction. The present research was concerned with the differential effects of extinguishing separate components of the CS complex upon responding to the complete CS complex during extinction. In Phase 1 of the study, rats were classically conditioned to a three-component serial CS (S₁/S₂/S₃) followed by shock. Each subject was then given avoidance training in a one-way apparatus to a criterion of one successful avoidance. In Phase 2, subjects were divided into four groups, with three of the groups receiving nonreinforced exposure for 25 trials to one of the components of the serial CS (S₁, S₂, or S₃). The fourth group (S₀) was exposed for the same period of time to the apparatus cues. In Phase 3, the total stimulus complex was reintroduced in its original order, and animals were tested until extinction of the instrumental response was reached. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that a fear gradient exists in extinction and decreases in magnitude as the distance from the point of UCS onset increases.     

Resistance to extinction versus extinction as discrimination

The hypothesis that response strength might be measured by persistence of responding in the face of extinction was discredited in the 1960s because experiments showed that responding persists longer following intermittent reinforcers than following continuous reinforcers. Instead, researchers proposed that the longer persistence following intermittent reinforcers arises because intermittent reinforcement more closely resembles extinction—a discrimination theory. Attention to resistance to extinction revived because one observation seemed to support the persistence hypothesis: Following training on a multiple schedule with unequal components, responding usually persisted longer in the formerly richer component than in the formerly lean component. This observation represents an anomaly, however, because results with single schedules and concurrent schedules contradict it. We suggest that the difference in results arises because the multiple-schedule procedure, while including extensive training on stimulus discrimination, includes no training on discrimination between food available and food unavailable, whereas comparable single- and concurrent-schedule procedures include such training with repeated extinction. In Experiment 1, we replicated the original result, and in Experiment 2 showed that when the multiple-schedule procedure includes training on food/no-food discrimination, extinction following multiple schedules contradicts behavioral momentum theory and agrees with the discrimination theory and research with single and concurrent schedules.     

The control of switching into blackout during extinction

During the extinction component of a multiple variable-interval extinction schedule, four pigeons learned to peck a second key that switched off the keylights. Two experiments attempted to isolate the events that control this behavior. In the first experiment, switching into blackout was equally maintained when switches were restricted to the first minute as when they were restricted to the last minute of the extinction component. When switches could be emitted in the first and last minutes, they occurred more frequently in the first. Restricting switching to the first minute of each component and eliminating the blackout between components had no effect on switching. In the second experiment, when the stimulus correlated with extinction was omitted, switching decreased slightly. Omission of both multiple schedule stimuli decreased the switching rate, but switching was still maintained. Food reinforcement was then omitted and switching by two birds increased. Switching ceased when blackout was no longer the consequence of pecking the switching key. It was concluded that switching was not controlled by the similarity of the blackouts produced by the switching key and those that occurred between components; nor was it maintained by the temporal proximity of switching responses to the onset of the reinforced component. Finally, switching did not appear to be controlled by the main-key stimuli correlated with the components of the multiple schedule.