Contextual control of the extinction of conditioned fear

Rats received 15 pairings of a CS and shock in one context, and then a series of CS-alone trials in a second context. Even though this extinction procedure produced a complete loss of conditioned suppression, when the animals were returned to the site of original conditioning, suppression was renewed to a level comparable to that of animals that had not undergone extinction. Controls indicated that the renewed suppression was not due solely to pseudoconditioning, suggesting that the CS-US association had survived extinction. Renewed suppression was also demonstrated in a third context that was never associated with shock. Loss of suppression did not necessarily depend upon inhibitory conditioning of the extinction context. The data suggest that extinction of conditioned fear is specific to the context in which it occurs. They also suggest the possibility that animals might discriminate episodes in which a CS is reinforced and nonreinforced independently of the excitatory or inhibitory status of cues, like contextual stimuli, that are coincidentally present during those episodes.     

Acquisition and extinction of signaled avoidance as a function of intermittent reinforcement

Signaled, shuttle-box avoidance responding in female rats of the Fischer₃₄₄ strain was examined as a function of four separate contingencies of intermittent reinforcement. In Experiment 1, when avoidance responses during acquisition were reinforced 25% of the time with prompt CS termination, animals responded equally often during acquisition and significantly more often during extinction than animals who received such reinforcement on a 100% schedule. Similar results were found under a trace procedure in Experiment 2 when avoidance responses were reinforced 25% of the time with informational feedback stimuli. In contrast, during Experiment 3, when animals were shocked on only 25% of the trials on which they failed to respond, the level of avoidance responding during both acquisition and extinction was significantly less than it was when animals were shocked on a 100% schedule. Comparable results were found in Experiment 4 when avoidance responses during acquisition averted shock on only 25% of the trials. Thus, intermittent reinforcement contingencies involving response-contingent feedback stimuli and shock have differential effects on avoidance responding during both acquisition and extinction trials under the signaled avoidance procedure.     

The US preexposure phenomenon in the conditioned suppression paradigm: A role for conditioned situational stimuli

Four experiments evaluated possible associative and nonassociative accounts of the retardation in the acquisition of conditioned suppression produced by repeated prior exposure to an electric shock US. Associative interference resulting from conditioning of situational stimuli during preexposure to shock was suggested by the findings that signaling the occurrence of high-intensity shock with a discrete nontarget CS during the preexposure phase reduced the magnitude of the retardation effect compared to an unsignaled shock preexposure treatment (Experiments 1 and 4), nonreinforced presentations of putatively conditioned situational stimuli prior to conditioned suppression training reduced the magnitude of the retardation effect (Experiment 2), and the magnitude of the retardation effect was directly related to the intensity of preexposure shock (Experiment 3). Nonassociative interference was suggested by the finding that signaling the occurrence of low-intensity shock with a discrete nontarget CS during the preexposure phase did not reduce the magnitude of the retardation effect compared to an unsignaled shock preexposure treatment (Experiment 4). It was suggested that associative and nonassociative mechanisms govern the US preexposure phenomenon obtained in the conditioned suppression paradigm, and their relative contribution depends upon the intensity of shock.     

Compounds of conditioned fear stimuli

A differential conditioning procedure was used with rats to establish different levels of suppression to two different stimuli. One stimulus was paired with shock every time it was presented, while the other stimulus cued shock on only 25% of its presentations. When these two component stimuli were subsequently tested as a simultaneous compound, two different types of component-compound relationships were observed. Some subjects showed greater suppression to the compound than they did to either component stimulus, while other subjects showed an intermediate level of suppression to the compound. The difference in type of component-compound relationship appeared to be related to the degree of stability (over trials) of each subject's reaction to the probabilistic (25%) cue.When a similar discrimination was established based on the intensity of the shock, rather than its probability of occurrence, all subjects showed more suppression to the compound than to its individual component stimuli. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for choice of model for characterizing the interaction of conditioned states.     

Positive and negative conditioned suppression in the pigeon: Effects of the locus and modality of the CS

In Experiment I, four pigeons were exposed to trials in which a 12-sec key light illumination was followed by free food. These trials were superimposed upon a baseline of key pecking for food reinforcement on a variable-interval schedule. When the signal for food was on the operant key, response rate was substantially higher during the signal than during the baseline procedure. When the signal was on a second, signal key, operant responding was suppressed during the signal and substantial pecking of the signal key occurred. The sum of signal key and operant key pecks far exceeded the operant baseline rate of responding. An explanation of opposite results obtained with rats and pigeons as subjects in experiments of this type was suggested in terms of the spatial relation between the signal for free food and the operant target which usually characterizes these experiments. Experiment II assessed the importance of signal location when shock rather than food was the US. Suppression of operant key pecking was unaffected by signal location. Experiment III assessed the relative effectiveness of visual and auditory stimuli (clicks) as signals for food and shock, and found that all combinations of signal and US were equally effective in suppressing operant key responding. The three experiments together suggested that the identification of important effects of species—typical behavior in one experimental situation does not imply that there will be like effects in similar situations.     

Backward conditioning as an extinction procedure

In two conditioned suppression experiments, rats received Pavlovian forward defense conditioning in which tonal conditioned stimuli (CSs) terminated with the onset of scrambled grid shock unconditioned stimuli (USs). After this experience, the rats then received a Pavlovian backward conditioning procedure in which the same USs now terminated with the onset of the same CSs. Although the two experiments differed greatly in terms of CS and US parameters, number of forward and backward pairings, and in terms of the general techniques used to establish and measure the Pavlovian conditioned response (CR), the results of both experiments agreed in showing that backward conditioning can indeed weaken a CR based on forward pairings. The results also show that, under some conditions, the backward procedure can be at least as effective in weakening an established CR as the traditional CS-alone extinction procedure; but, under other conditions, the backward procedure is less effective and leads to more spontaneous recovery than the CS-alone procedure.     

Mechanisms of blocking by contextual stimuli

The influence of contextual stimuli on the conditioning and performance of responding to a discrete stimulus was examined in the US preexposure paradigm using both context shift manipulations and a measure of context conditioning. Four groups of rats received both repeated exposure to an electric shock US in one context (Context 1), and repeated nonshocked exposure to a second context (Context 2). Two additional groups of rats received exposure to these contexts, but never received shock presentations. Rats exposed to shock learned to escape from the stimuli of Context 1, but did not escape from the stimuli provided by Context 2. Rats not exposed to shock failed to escape from either context. All rats then received a single CER conditioning session in which four pairings of a 3-min noise CS and shock US were presented. Half the rats received those CS-US pairings in the excitatory Context 1, while the remaining rats received those pairings in the neutral Context 2. Finally, half the rats in each of the CER conditioning treatments received extinction test trials of the noise CS in Context 1, while the remaining rats received those test trials in Context 2. Thus, this design factorially manipulated the presence of excitatory or neutral contextual stimuli during both conditioning and testing of a discrete CS. In comparison with the two groups of rats never preexposed to shock alone, attenuation in acquisition of conditioned suppression observed during test trials occurred only when CER conditioning had been administered in the excitatory Context 1, and this effect was manifested when testing occurred in either the excitatory Context 1 or the neutral Context 2. These results support the model of R. A. Rescorla and A. R. Wagner (1972) (in A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.) Classical Conditioning II, pp. 64–99, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts) which asserts that contextual stimuli and sicrete CSs compete for limited associative strength supportable by a given US.     

Transfer of conditioned appetitive stimuli to conditioned aversive excitatory and inhibitory stimuli

The transfer of Pavlovian appetitive stimuli to Pavlovian aversive stimuli was examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1, rats received appetitive (Ap) conditioning designed to establish a flashing-light stimulus as either a CS+, CSo, or CS? for food, or to maintain it as a novel stimulus for US-alone subjects. Then, the stimulus was employed as a signal for weak shock in conditioned-emotional-response (CER) training. Both acquisition and extinction results showed that the ApCS+ facilitated and the ApCS? retarded aversive excitatory conditioning relative to the ApCSo and US-alone controls. Experiment 2 replicated the findings of Experiment 1 with both a moderate and a severe shock in CER training. In Experiment 3, different groups received the same appetitive conditioning as before, but to a flashing-light stimulus which was then employed as a signal for no shock in CER training. The ApCS? facilitated and the ApCS+ retarded aversive inhibitory conditioning relative to ApCSo and US-alone controls. Collectively, these findings establish that, in Pavlovian conditioning, transfer of an appetitive CS to an aversive excitor or inhibitor is facilitated by maintaining the initial conditioning contingency.     

Stimulus control and response bias in an analogue prey-detection procedure

The present study compared the performance of 6 pigeons trained to detect luminance differences in two different signal-detection procedures. Exposed to a three-key array, the pigeons were trained to peck the left key when the brighter of two light intensities had been presented on the center key and to peck the right key when the dimmer of two light intensities had been presented on the center key. Procedure A was a standard signal-detection procedure in which left/bright and right/dim responses produced food reinforcement and left/dim and right/bright responses produced periods of timeout. Procedure B was designed to simulate some of the contingencies operating in a prey-detection situation. Left-key responses produced reinforcement following the brighter center-key stimulus and a period of timeout following the dimmer center-key stimulus. Right-key responses always produced a short period of timeout irrespective of the stimulus. Within each procedure, the duration of timeout arranged for false alarms (left/dim responses) was varied between 3 s and 120 s. Measures of accuracy and response bias were compared between the two procedures. The timeout manipulation produced systematic, but relatively small, changes in these measures when right/dim responses (i.e., correct rejections) produced reinforcement (Procedure A). Arranging timeout for right/dim responses in Procedure B produced greater variability in accuracy and response bias than did arranging reinforcement, but this variability was not related to timeout duration. Overall, discrimination accuracy was considerably higher when right/dim responses produced timeout than when they resulted in reinforcement, and accuracy was accompanied by a large bias toward the response associated with reinforcement. These results are consistent with a recently proposed model of signal detection.     

Preference for shock signals as a function of the temporal accuracy of the signals

Three groups of rats were exposed to pairs of three different contingencies on two sides of a shuttlebox. One signaled contingency provided 10-min danger and safety cues plus an additional 10-sec cue immediately preceeding shock (P-S), another signaled contingency provided 10-min danger and safety cues but random 10-sec cues with respect to shock (R-S), and an unsignaled contingency provided no safety period, but only a 20-min danger period during which shock could occur (NS). Signaled P-S and R-S contingencies were preferred in a choice test to the unsignaled NS contingency, and P-S was preferred to R-S. Independent tests of the fear-eliciting properties of the cues made in an off-baseline test of suppression of ongoing exploration indicated more freezing (fear) to the 10-sec cue in rats experiencing the P-S contingency. The results were interpreted as indicating a preference for cues providing more precise information about the temporal location of shock even when those cues were fear-eliciting.     

Stimulus specificity in avoidance learning

The present experiments address the issue of stimulus specificity in fear and avoidance learning. First, it was established that light stimuli are effective warning signals (WS) in shuttle avoidance. Then light stimuli were shown to produce conditioned suppression in the conditioned emotional response situation comparable to that produced by noise conditioned stimuli. Finally, the effectiveness of noise onset and noise offset as feedback signals was tested. This was assessed under conditions of immediate and delayed termination of a light WS. Delayed termination of a light WS interfered with avoidance learning and the introduction of noise offset as a feedback signal enhanced it. The only demonstration of stimulus specificity was the failure of noise onset to function as a feedback signal.     

Temporal properties of responding during stimuli that precede response-independent food

Pigeons' keypecks were reinforced with grain on the average of once per minute by schedules that maintained low response rates and by schedules that maintained high response rates. During these schedules, a fixed-duration conditioned stimulus (CS) ranging from 7.5 to 120 sec in duration across conditions terminated with response-independent food. Response rates during the CS were inversely related to CS duration. The rates and the temporal patterns of responding during the shortest CS were similar whether the ongoing schedule maintained high response rates or low response rates. As CS duration increased, the rate and pattern of responding during the CS converged on the rate and pattern of responding maintained by the baseline schedule. These data indicate that changes in responding during stimuli that signal response-independent reinforcement are not homogeneous throughout the CS; that response measures, such as “suppression ratios”, which presume homogeneity may mislead us; and that conditioned suppression and conditioned enhancement may be better talked about in terms of species-specific approach and avoidance than in terms of emotional states.     

Pavlovian processes and response competition as determinants of avoidance response-prevention effects

Two experiments investigated the facilitation of avoidance extinction by exposure to lengthy (5-sec) shock during avoidance response prevention. In Experiment 1, animals exposed to light only or to light-shock pairings during response prevention showed equal facilitation of extinction relative to shock-only animals or to animals receiving no response prevention. Preshock rearing, directly antagonistic to the avoidance response, developed for shocked animals during response prevention and persisted during extinction for light-shock animals. Immediately before extinction, half of each group was permitted a single escape from a light-shock compound by means of the response previously required for avoidance. The only effect was upon the extinction performance of light-shock animals. Rearing was eliminated and extinction responding increased to a level far above that for any of the other animals. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the shock-only treatment affected the extinction performance and rearing of nonescape and escape animals in a manner entirely equivalent to the effects of the light-shock treatment of Experiment 1, provided stimulus conditions (light absent) were the same for all experimental phases. Thus, lengthy shock during avoidance response prevention simultaneously leads to the acquisition of competing behavior and enhances control by a warning signal or contextual stimuli over the avoidance response. Implications for the CS-only response-prevention treatment and the transfer of aversive control are discussed.     

Variations in explicitly unpaired training are differentially effective in producing conditioned inhibition

To evaluate a contingency interpretation of conditioned inhibition (CI), rats were given “explicity unpaired” training in which the locus and duration of a CS within the inter-US (shock) interval were systematically manipulated for different groups. Summation and retardation tests in Experiment 1 indicated that stronger CI resulted from both a backward and a trace CS than from a midlocus CS of equal or greater duration. Complementing these findings, the same tests in Experiment 2 showed that, by comparison with novel-stimulus controls, CI developed to a trace CS but not to a mid-locus CS, nor to a trace CS that was accompanied by an immediate signal for the US. These findings argue against a contingency interpretation of CI and favor a contiguity interpretation stressing the short-term rehearsal of stimulus events. Such rehearsal of the US allows a backward CS, but not a mid-locus CS with an extended US-CS interval, to be discriminated as a signal for nonreinforcement, and thus to develop as a conditioned inhibitor. Similarly, excitatory conditioning to the memory trace of a CS allows the nominal trace CS to develop as a signal for nonreinforcement, and thus as a conditioned inhibitor, but not when its memory trace is overshadowed by another CS that immediately precedes the US. In short, the development of CI is facilitated when excitation is mediated by the memorial processing of either the US or a discrete CS for the US rather than by contextual cues.     

The influence of positive and negative reinforcement on selective attention in the rat

In Experiments 1 and 2 rats were trained under two multiple schedules of reinforcement. In one, bar pressing during a tone-light compound stimulus was reinforced under a variable-interval food reinforcement schedule. In the other multiple schedule, bar pressing avoided grid shock on a free-operant schedule. In both multiple schedules, a discrimination was maintained by an extinction schedule that was operative during the absence of the tone-light compound. In Experiments 1 and 2 the intensity of the tone-light compound was manipulated over three levels. Subsequent extinction tests revealed that light was attended to, almost exclusively of the tone, when food reinforcement had maintained bar pressing. On the other hand, the tone gained considerable attentional control under the shock avoidance schedule. This stimulus-reinforcer interaction was maintained for all three levels of the compound intensity. In Experiment 3 it was investigated whether this interaction was associative by presenting shock during the absence of the tone-light compound when food reinforcement maintained responding, and food during the absence of the compound when shock avoidance maintained responding. Since both food and shock were presented during a single session for both schedules, nonassociative effects of the reinforcing stimuli were equivalent across the schedules. Nevertheless, the stimulus-reinforcer interaction was maintained, indicating that the interaction was an associative effect.     

Chronometric analysis of apparent spotlight failure in endogenous visual orienting

Subjects made speeded responses to peripheral luminance increments or decrements preceded by informative central precues. In 4 experiments one of these stimuli was much more likely to occur than the other. In a simple detection task, the likely and unlikely stimuli showed equivalent cuing effects. In a discrimination task (bright/dim), the likely stimuli showed cuing but the unlikely one did not (spotlight failure), and there was a tendency to make the likely response when the unlikely stimulus occurred at the cued location. In Experiment 5, the 2 stimuli were equally likely, and a choice was required. Large cuing effects were observed for both stimuli with no evidence of a speed-accuracy trade-off. A logogen-activation framework is described within which criterion and sensitivity adjustments are needed to accommodate the full pattern of results. Endogenous orienting appears to enhance processing of all stimuli at attended (relative to unattended) locations, an effect that may be masked by specific stimulus or response expectancies.     

A neural activity interpretation of luminance effects on infant pattern preferences

Visual pattern preferences were established for 9- and 13-week-old infants (N = 96) using stimuli varying in contour density presented either at a low, moderate, or high luminance level. Age differences in the maximally preferred patterns across stimuli and luminance levels indicated that luminance interacts with contour density in determining stimulus preference functions for a given age. A neural activation model based on synchronous neural activity was advanced to describe these results.     

The effectiveness of visual and gustatory conditioned stimuli in human classical aversive conditioning with electric shock

Thirty-six undergraduate volunteers, divided into three equal groups, were given electric shock while sipping a colored, unflavored solution (Group I): a flavored, colorless solution (Group 2); or a colored, flavored solution (Group 3), in order to determine whether human Ss respond differentially to visual and gustatory cues when the UCS is aversive electric shock. Using a standard classical discrimination procedure, the CS + was blue water for Group 1, citric acid solution for Group 2, and blue citric acid solution for Group 3. For all groups the CS- was plain water, which was never paired with electric shock. The dependent variables were derived from Staats' A-R-D theory: attitudinal change (A) and a performance measure of sip-size taken during conditioning trials (D) both confirmed the hypothesis that taste can be an effective CS when the UCS is shock, in contrast to results typically obtained with rats where visual but not taste cues are effective with a shock UCS.     

Sign-tracking in aversive conditioning

Two experiments were conducted to determine if rats tend to avoid contact with a stimulus that signals the occurrence of shock and contact a stimulus that signals the nonoccurrence of shock. The conditioned stimulus was a 60-sec platform presentation, and the unconditioned stimulus was a 2-sec inescapable shock. In each experiment, the emphasis was on two types of Pavlovian pairings: forward pairing in which each platform presentation was followed by shock, and backward pairing in which each platform presentation was preceded by shock and followed by a lengthy shock-free interval. Experiment 1 showed that in comparison with Random and CS-only procedures, the backward procedure produced a significant increase in approach and contact with the platform, but the forward procedure failed to produce a significant decrease in contact with the platform. Experiment 2, in which all groups were roughly equated for baseline levels of platform preference, demonstrated strong effects of both forward and backward conditioning. The experiments provide evidence for an aversive sign-tracking system in which animals' tendencies to withdraw from or approach and contact a platform CS are determined by the Pavlovian contingencies which render it a reliable signal for the occurrence or nonoccurrence of shock.     

Transfer of the signaling properties of aversive CSs to an instrumental appetitive discrimination

Rats received Pavlovian conditioning in which, based on a shock US, white noise was established for different groups as an aversive CS+, CSo, or CS?. Then, half of each group received the CS contingent upon either the food-reinforced or nonreinforced response in an easy, choice discrimination. Correct responses, i.e., number of reinforcements, to criterion showed that a CS+ for the reinforced response facilitated learning, whereas a CS? retarded learning; conversely, a CS+ for the nonreinforced response retarded learning, whereas a CS? facilitated learning. The same contingency difference occurred with errors to criterion for CS? subjects but was obscured for CS+ subjects apparently by an avoidance-producing effect of the CS+. In support of the generality of the transfer effect, Z-score transforms of the correct-response data showed that the magnitude of transfer was comparable to that obtained in more difficult discriminations. Collectively, the findings indicate that an aversive CS can function as a transformed signal for the presence (CS+) or absence (CS?) of an appetitive reinforcer and that the signal's control of behavior is via a within-chain mediational process.