The resistance of renewal to instructions that devalue the role of contextual cues in a conditioned suppression task with humans

The renewal of extinguished conditioned behaviour appears to reflect context-dependent learning. The present research used a conditioned suppression task with humans to examine whether instructions concerning the context could influence renewal. Pairings of a conditional stimulus (CS) and unconditional stimulus (US) were made in one context, followed by extinction trials of CS alone in a second context, and test trials of CS alone upon return to the original learning context. Four experiments tested whether the renewal of conditioned suppression observed during test would be attenuated if participants were instructed that the context changes were irrelevant to the predictive relationship between the CS and US. Using a differential conditioning design, no attenuation was found when the instructions were given prior to conditioning (Experiment 1) or immediately prior to the test trials (Experiment 2). The latter result was replicated with a single-cue conditioning design and further controls for exposure to the extinction contexts (Experiment 3). The collection of on-line ratings about the relationship between the contextual changes and the predictive nature of the CS indicated that participants did attend to and believe the instructions (Experiment 4). The results point to the resistance of renewal to explicit instructions that attempt to devalue the role of the contextual cues.     

The effects of physical context changes and multiple extinction contexts on two forms of renewal in a conditioned suppression task with humans

Three experiments examined the effects of physical context changes and multiple extinction contexts on the renewal of conditioned suppression in humans. A conditioned suppression task used an undesirable event as the unconditional stimulus (US). One conditional stimulus (CS+) predicted the occurrence of the US and another (CS−) predicted US absence. In Experiment 1 (N = 32), conditioned suppression was acquired to the CS+ in one context and extinguished in a different context. An increase in suppression was found for the CS+ and not for the CS− when subsequent test trials were conducted in the acquisition context (ABA renewal). Experiment 2 (N = 32) tested for ABC Renewal and showed increased suppression to both the CS+ and CS− when test was conducted in a novel context. Experiment 3 (N = 80) showed that these two effects were abolished when extinction was conducted in multiple contexts. The experiments extend the ABA renewal of conditioned suppression found with non-human animal subjects and the reduction of renewal by extinction in multiple contexts. Context changes may also facilitate cue competition effects after training with elementary stimuli, as shown by the effects of US omission in the ABA and ABC renewal groups.     

Role of conditioned contextual stimuli in reinstatement of extinguished fear

If the unconditioned stimulus (US) is presented independently of the conditioned stimulus (CS) following extinction, the conditioned response may be reinstated to the CS. Three experiments are reported that suggest that reinstatement is mediated by conditioning to contextual stimuli that are present during both US presentation and testing. Shocks presented to rats following the extinction of conditioned suppression reliably reinstated suppression to the CS, but only when they were presented in the context in which testing was later to occur. Reinstatement was also reversed by extinguishing fear to the context through nonreinforced exposure to the context between shock presentation and testing. Reinstatement was obtained in these experiments in spite of procedures that have been used in the past to minimize the influence of context conditioning. Moreover, fear of the context was never detected directly by depressed bar-press rates in the absence of the CS. The results do not support the hypothesis that reinstatement results from an increment in the strength of a memory of the US that has been weakened during extinction. Problems inherent in controlling and detecting levels of context conditioning that may influence behavior toward nominal CSs are discussed.     

Contextual Control of Latent Inhibition by the Reinforcer

Three experiments examined the contextual control of latent inhibition (LI) by the unconditioned stimulus (US) using a within-subjects conditioned suppression procedure with rats. The effect of reducing the context change produced by the introduction of the shock US was investigated by presenting this US during preexposure to the conditioned stimulus (CS). Although limited CS preexposure in the absence of the US had no impact on subsequent conditioning, preexposure in the presence of the shock retarded both excitatory and inhibitory conditioning. We conclude that the introduction of the US during the conditioning phase of a normal LI experiment can produce a contextual change that reduces the observed magnitude of LI.     

Conditioned taste aversion is enhanced when the unconditioned stimulus is presented in a different context

Using a conditioned taste aversion procedure with rats as the subjects, two experiments examined the effect of presenting a conditioned stimulus (CS saccharin solution) in one context followed by an unconditioned stimulus (US LiCl) in a different context. Experiment 1 showed that animals which received the above-mentioned procedure (Group D) showed a more marked conditioned aversion to the CS than animals which were given both the CS and the US in the same context (Group S). Experiment 2 found that in both Group D and Group S, aversion to the CS increased when the subjects were exposed to the conditioned context after the conditioning. These findings supported the argument that the strength of the CS-US association acquired during conditioning is compared with that of the context-US to determine the magnitude of aversion revealed to the CS.     

The effects of context changes on the reinstatement of extinguished conditioned behavior in a conditioned suppression task with humans

Reinstatement refers to the return of previously extinguished conditioned responses to test trials of a conditional stimulus (CS) when presentations of the unconditional stimulus (US) alone are given following extinction. Four experiments were conducted to determine whether reinstatement could be found in a conditioned suppression task with humans and whether contextual changes can abolish it. Experiment 1 demonstrated the reinstatement of conditioned suppression when acquisition, extinction, US alone, and test trials were all given in the same context. Experiments 2 and 3 suggested that the reinstatement effect was still present when the US alone presentations were given in a different context to the subsequent test trials. Experiment 4 replicated this effect using additional controls over the amount of exposure to the various contexts. The results suggest that reinstatement can be robust across changing contexts. Aspects of the conditioned suppression task that promote the transfer of learning across contexts or the establishment of configural context-CS stimuli may underlie the apparent lack of contextual control over reinstatement.     

The comparator hypothesis of conditioned response generation: manifest conditioned excitation and inhibition as a function of relative excitatory strengths of CS and conditioning context at the time of testing

In the present research water-deprived rats were used in a conditioned lick suppression paradigm to test and further develop Rescorla's (1968) contingency theory, which posits that excitatory associations are formed when a conditioned stimulus (CS) signals an increase in unconditioned stimulus (US) likelihood and that inhibitory associations develop when the CS signals a decrease in US likelihood. In Experiment 1 we found that responding to a CS varied inversely with the associative status of the context in which the CS was trained and that this response was unaltered when testing occurred in a distinctively dissimilar context with a different conditioning history, provided associative summation with the test context was minimized. These results suggest that manifest excitatory and inhibitory conditioned responding is modulated by the associative value of the training context rather than that of the test context. In Experiment 2 it was demonstrated that postconditioning decreases in the associative value of the CS training context reduced the effective inhibitory value of the CS even when testing occurred outside of the training context. Moreover, this contextual deflation effect was specific to the CS training context as opposed to any other excitatory context. Collectively, these studies support the comparator hypothesis, which states that conditioned responding is determined by a comparison of the associative strengths of the CS and its training context that occurs at the time of testing rather than at the time of conditioning. This implies that all associations are excitatory and that responding indicative of conditioned inhibition reflects a CS-US association that is below (or near) the associative strength of its comparator stimulus. It is suggested that response rules which go beyond a monotonic relation between associative value and response strength can partially relieve learning theories of their explanatory burdens, thereby allowing for simpler models of acquisition.     

One-trial conditioned suppression: effects of instructions on extinction

Two experimental groups of undergraduate volunteers received a single Pavlovian conditioning trial consisting of a paired presentation of a tone conditioned stimulus (CS) and a shock unconditioned stimulus (UCS). Control groups received either the CS alone or the UCS alone. Subjects from one experimental group were subsequently instructed that they would not receive further shocks, while the other experimental group received no such instructions. The CS alone was then presented once to all four groups while subjects were engaged in a button-pressing task maintained by slide reinforcement. During the latter phase, rate of button-pressing was measured. Classically conditioned suppression of button-pressing was obtained in the noninstructed experimental group but not in the instructed group. The results demonstrate that suppression can be a sensitive index of Pavlovian conditioning in humans but question the use of conditioned suppression as an adequate experimental analog of clinically observed anxiety-motivated behavior.     

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.     

Differential acquisition,extinction, and reinstatement of conditioned suppression in mice

In animals, the reappearance of conditioned fear responses after extinction has been primarily investigated using single-cue conditioning paradigms. However, a differential paradigm can overcome several of the disadvantages associated with a single-cue procedure. In the present study, the reinstatement phenomenon was assessed in mice using a differential conditioned suppression paradigm. In a first phase, one conditioned stimulus (CS + ) was consistently paired with an unconditioned stimulus (US; footshock) while another CS (CS–) was not, resulting in selective suppression of previously trained instrumental behaviour during the CS + . After the extinction phase, half of the animals (reinstatement group) were presented with unsignalled USs, while the other half were not (control group). A differential return of conditioned responding was observed in the reinstatement group, but not in the control group. The implications of these findings for future conditioning research are discussed.     

What you see is what will change: Evaluative conditioning effects depend on a focus on valence

This study investigated whether evaluative conditioning (EC) effects depend on an evaluative focus during the learning phase. An EC effect is a valence change of an originally neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus or CS) that is due to the former pairing with a positive or negative stimulus (unconditioned stimulus or US). In three experiments, the task focus during the conditioning phase was manipulated. Participants judged CS–US pairings either with respect to their valence or with respect to another stimulus dimension. EC effects on explicit and implicit measures were found when valence was task relevant but not when the non-valent stimulus dimension was task relevant. Two accounts for the valence focus effect are proposed: (1) An additional direct learning of the relation of CS and evaluative responses in the valence focus condition, or (2) a stronger activation of US valence in the valence focus condition compared to the non-valent focus condition.     

Differential acquisition, extinction, and reinstatement of conditioned suppression in mice

In animals, the reappearance of conditioned fear responses after extinction has been primarily investigated using single-cue conditioning paradigms. However, a differential paradigm can overcome several of the disadvantages associated with a single-cue procedure. In the present study, the reinstatement phenomenon was assessed in mice using a differential conditioned suppression paradigm. In a first phase, one conditioned stimulus (CS + ) was consistently paired with an unconditioned stimulus (US; footshock) while another CS (CS-) was not, resulting in selective suppression of previously trained instrumental behaviour during the CS + . After the extinction phase, half of the animals (reinstatement group) were presented with unsignalled USs, while the other half were not (control group). A differential return of conditioned responding was observed in the reinstatement group, but not in the control group. The implications of these findings for future conditioning research are discussed.     

Mechanisms underlying retarded emergence of conditioned responding following inhibitory training: evidence for the comparator hypothesis

The comparator hypothesis posits that conditioned responding is determined by a comparison at the time of testing between the associative strengths of the conditioned stimulus (CS) and stimuli proximal to the CS at the time of conditioning. The hypothesis treats all associations as being excitatory and treats conditioned inhibition as the behavioral consequence of a CS that is less excitatory than its comparator stimuli. Conditioned lick suppression by rats was used to differentiate four possible sources of retarded responding to an inhibitory CS. These include habituation to the unconditioned stimulus (US), latent inhibition to the CS, blocking of the CS-US association by the conditioning context, and enhanced excitatory associations to the comparator stimuli. Prior research has demonstrated the first three phenomena. Therefore, we employed parameters expected to highlight the fourth one--the comparator process. In Experiment 1, our negative contingency training was shown to produce a conditioned inhibitor that passed inhibitory summation and retardation tests. In Experiment 2 we found transfer of retardation from an inhibitory CS to a novel stimulus when the location where retardation-test training occurred was excitatory, which is indicative of contextual blocking and/or comparator effects. In Experiment 3, extinction of the conditioning context was found to attenuate retardation regardless of whether extinction occurred before or after the CS-US pairings of the retardation test. This indicates that much of the present retardation was due to the comparator process rather than to contextual blocking. Experiment 4 demonstrated that habituation to the US did not contribute to retardation in the present case. Collectively, these studies suggest that retardation following inhibitory training can be explained without recourse to any of the traditional mechanisms of conditioned inhibition.     

Contextual control of inhibition with reinforcement: adaptation and timing mechanisms

Four experiments with rats studied the effects of switching the context after Pavlovian conditioning. In three conditioned suppression experiments, a large number of conditioning trials created "inhibition with reinforcement" (IWR), in which fear of the conditional stimulus (CS) reached a maximum and then declined despite continued CS-unconditional stimulus pairings. When IWR occurred, a context switch augmented fear of the CS; IWR and augmentation were highly correlated. Neither IWR nor augmentation resulted from inhibition of delay (IOD): In conditioned suppression, IWR and augmentation occurred without IOD (Experiment 3), and in appetitive conditioning (Experiment 4), IOD occurred without IWR or augmentation. IWR may occur in conditioned suppression because the animal adapts to fear of the CS in a context-specific manner. The authors discuss several implications.     

Effects of Paired and Unpaired Eye-Blink Conditioning on Purkinje Cell Morphology

This experiment addressed (1) the importance of conjunctive stimulus presentation for morphological plasticity of cerebellar Purkinje cells and inhibitory interneurons and (2) whether plasticity is restricted to the spiny branches of Purkinje cells, which receive parallel fiber input. These issues were investigated in naive rabbits and in rabbits that received paired or unpaired presentations of the conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (US). To direct CS input to the cerebellar cortex, pontine stimulation served as the CS. Air puffs to the cornea served as the US. Paired condition rabbits received pontine stimulation for 350 msec paired with a coterminating 100-msec air puff. Unpaired condition rabbits received the same stimuli in a pseudorandom order at 1- to 32-sec intervals. Rabbits were trained for a mean of 12 days. Naive rabbits received no treatment. In Golgi-stained Purkinje neurons in lobule HVI, total dendritic length, main branch length, total spiny branch length, and number of spiny branch arbors were all greater in the naive group than in the paired and unpaired groups, which did not differ. No differences were found between the hemispheres ipsilateral and contralateral to the trained eye. The dendritic length and number of branches for inhibitory interneurons did not differ across groups. The Purkinje cell morphological changes detected with these methods do not appear to be uniquely related to the conjunctive activation of the CS and US in the paired condition.     

Simultaneous conditioning in honeybees (Apis mellifera).

Honeybees (Apis mellifera) were classically conditioned with odor as conditioned stimulus (CS), sucrose as unconditioned stimulus (US), and proboscis extension as response. The purpose of Experiment 1 (Ns = 26 and 27) was to look for facilitation of forward conditioning by CS-US overlap, but rapid conditioning without overlap left little room for improvement. In 2 further experiments, CS and US were simultaneous, and response to odor alone was measured in subsequent tests. In Experiment 2, a Simultaneous group (N = 25) responded more to the training odor than did an Unpaired control group (N = 25). In Experiment 3, a differentially conditioned Simultaneous group (N = 29) responded more to an odor paired with sucrose in training (S+) than to an odor presented alone (S-). The implications of the results for the problem of the role of amount of reward in honeybee learning are considered.     

What you see is what will change: evaluative conditioning effects depend on a focus on valence

This study investigated whether evaluative conditioning (EC) effects depend on an evaluative focus during the learning phase. An EC effect is a valence change of an originally neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus or CS) that is due to the former pairing with a positive or negative stimulus (unconditioned stimulus or US). In three experiments, the task focus during the conditioning phase was manipulated. Participants judged CS-US pairings either with respect to their valence or with respect to another stimulus dimension. EC effects on explicit and implicit measures were found when valence was task relevant but not when the non-valent stimulus dimension was task relevant. Two accounts for the valence focus effect are proposed: (1) An additional direct learning of the relation of CS and evaluative responses in the valence focus condition, or (2) a stronger activation of US valence in the valence focus condition compared to the non-valent focus condition.     

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.     

The potentiation effect during serial conditioning

The development of suppression in rats to a target conditioned stimulus (CS) was compared in trace and serial conditioning procedures. The interval between the end of the target CS and the shock unconditioned stimulus (US) was filled by a second CS in the serial, but not the trace, procedure. In five experiments the serial procedure produced superior conditioning. This potentiation effect, however, depended critically upon the level of conditioning to the stimulus interpolated between the target CS and the US. When conditioning to the interpolated CS was either reduced by giving independent nonreinforced trials with this CS alone or enhanced by independent reinforced trials, the potentiation effect was abolished. In addition, the insertion of a trace interval between the target and interpolated CSs reduced the effect. However, the magnitude of conditioning to the target CS was unaffected by post-conditioning changes in the conditioned strength of the interpolated CS. These findings are discussed in terms of the contribution of both the association between the CSs themselves, which is inherent in the serial procedure, and that between the target CS and the US.     

Rapid reaquisition in conditioning of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response.

Reacquisition after extinction often appears faster than original acquisition. However, data from conditioned suppression studies indicate that this effect may arise from spontaneous recovery and reinstatement of unextinguished contextual stimuli related to the unconditioned stimulus (US). In the present experiments using the rabbit nictitating membrane preparation, spontaneous recovery was eradicated before reaquisition training. US contextual stimuli were controlled by retaining the US during extinction through explicit unpairings of the conditioned stimulus (CS) and US. Attempts were also made to drive the associative strength of the CS into the inhibitory region by differential conditioning and conditioned inhibition procedures. In all cases, reacquisition was very rapid in comparison with a rest control. The results are discussed with respect to their implications for CS and US processing models of conditioning.