Preference and response suppression under different correlations between shock and a positive reinforcer in rats

A lever-press response by rats was reinforced by food in two successively presented types of trial signalled by different discriminative stimuli. When responding was punished by a shock in one type of trial, a groups for which the shock always preceded the reinforcer by .5 sec (positive correlation) showed less suppression in those trials than a group which received the shock and food separated in time (negative correlation). When, in a second experiment, rats were given a choice between food alone in one end of a shuttle box and either positively or negatively correlated shock and food in the other on a concurrent schedule, the group receiving the negatively correlated shock showed a greater preference for the food alone end. On the basis of a third experiment in which a tone was substituted for the shock in the choice situation, it was argued that the effect of correlation was not simply due to the stimulus properties of the shock. A final experiment demonstrated that when shock punishment is administered during extinction of the lever-press response, the rate of extinction is slower if the shock has been previously paired with the food reinforcer. Pairing a shock with food seems to attenuate the intrinsic aversiveness of the shock through Pavlovian counterconditioning.     

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.     

Reevaluation of things past

The ability of rats to reevaluate previously presented information in light of subsequently provided information was evaluated using a CER (conditioned emotional response) procedure. In Experiment 1, rats suppressed responding to a compound light + tone stimulus that was repeatedly paired with shock. Groups of rats were then presented with only one element of the compound (the tone), either presented alone or paired with shock, for 15 days. During this 15-day period, two control groups received trials with the shock alone or neither stimulus nor shock. All of the rats were then tested with the other element of the compound (the light). Rats that had received the tone paired with shock during the intervening training continued to suppress to the light, whereas rats that had received the tone alone showed rapid extinction of the CER to light. The control groups showed that this effect was not due to the number of shock presentations received. A subsequent experiment also demonstrated that these results were not due to nonspecific stimulus effects. Apparently, a subsequent change in the associative strength of one element results in a similar change to the other element of a previously established compound stimulus.     

Pavlovian counterconditioning is unchanged by chlordiazepoxide or by septal lesions

Two experiments were performed to test whether the minor tranquillizer chlordiaz-epoxide or septal lesions could interfere with Pavlovian counterconditioning. Rats were first trained to bar-press for food on a random interval schedule on which was superimposed the presentation of a light which predicted delivery of a shock. This training continued until all animals were showing stable suppression of responding to the light. Separate groups were then presented, while the manipulandum was retracted from the box, with either a shock paired with the delivery of food or shock and food delivery in a random relationship with one another. This type of intrusion period alternated with the presentation of the light and shock. Pavlovian counterconditioning developed, as shown by progressively less response suppression in the paired groups compared to the random groups. This Pavlovian counterconditioning was in no way reduced by either chlordiazepoxide (5 mg/kg) or by medial or lateral septal lesions. It is argued that these results rule out Pavlovian counterconditioning as a process which is affected by minor tranquillizers or by septal lesions when they interfere with the behavioural tolerance observed after partial punishment or partial reward schedules.     

Differential effects of forward or simultaneous conditioned stimulus-unconditioned stimulus intervals on the defensive behavior system of the Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus)

To test several predictions derived from a behavior-systems approach, the authors assessed Pavlovian fear conditioning in rats after 30 trials of forward, simultaneous, or unpaired training. Direct evidence of conditioned fear was collected through observation of flight and freezing reactions during presentations of the conditioned stimulus (CS) alone. The authors also tested the CS's potential to reinforce an instrumental escape response in an escape-from-fear paradigm. On the one hand, rats that received forward training showed conditioned freezing, but no conditioned flight was observed. On the other hand, rats that received simultaneous training showed conditioned flight, but no conditioned freezing was observed. Rats that received either forward or simultaneous pairings showed instrumental learning of the escape-from-fear response. Implications for several theories of Pavlovian conditioning are discussed.     

Counterconditioning of appetitive and defensive CRs in rabbits

Two experiments examined interactions between conditioned appetitive and defensive responses in the rabbit. In Experiment I, a conditioned jaw-movement response was established by following presentations of a clicker CS with intra-oral sucrose delivery on 50% of trials. The jaw-movement response was then maintained on this partial reinforcement schedule during a counterconditioning phase. A group which received para-orbital shock paired with the CS on non-sucrose trials showed acquisition of eyeblink responding and suppression of jaw-movement responding to the CS, in comparison to control groups which received either no shock or unpaired presentations of the CS and shock. Experiment II was identical in design to Experiment I except that the roles of the sucrose and shock reinforcers were reversed. The paired group acquired a conditioned jaw-movement response when sucrose was added in the counterconditioning phase, but in contrast to Experiment I showed a slight enhancement of the previously established eyeblink response. The asymmetry of appetitive and defensive counterconditioning was discussed in relation to opponent-process theories of motivation and reinforcement.     

Post-training amphetamine administration enhances memory consolidation in appetitive Pavlovian conditioning: Implications for drug addiction

It has been suggested that some of the addictive potential of psychostimulant drugs of abuse such as amphetamine may result from their ability to enhance memory for drug-related experiences through actions on memory consolidation. This experiment examined whether amphetamine can specifically enhance consolidation of memory for a Pavlovian association between a neutral conditioned stimulus (CS-a light) and a rewarding unconditioned stimulus (US-food), as Pavlovian conditioning of this sort plays a major role in drug addiction. Male Long-Evans rats were given six training sessions consisting of 8 CS presentations followed by delivery of the food into a recessed food cup. After the 1st, 3rd, and 5th session, rats received subcutaneous injections of amphetamine (1.0 or 2.0 mg/kg) or saline vehicle immediately following training. Conditioned responding was assessed using the percentage of time rats spent in the food cup during the CS relative to a pre-CS baseline period. Both amphetamine-treated groups showed significantly more selective conditioned responding than saline controls. In a control experiment, there were no differences among groups given saline, 1.0 or 2.0 mg/kg amphetamine 2 h post-training, suggesting that immediate post-training amphetamine enhanced performance specifically through actions on memory consolidation rather than through non-mnemonic processes. This procedure modeled Pavlovian learning involved in drug addiction, in which the emotional valence of a drug reward is transferred to neutral drug-predictive stimuli such as drug paraphernalia. These data suggest that amphetamine may contribute to its addictive potential through actions specifically on memory consolidation.     

Appetitive-aversive interactions: Superconditioning of fear by an appetitive cs

Four groups of rats received conditioned suppression training in which a tone and light compound was reinforced with shock. If the light had been previously paired with free food, enhanced fear conditioning accrued to the tone during compound training relative to control groups pre-exposed to the light alone, the light semi-randomly associated with food, or the light unpaired with food. The second experiment replicated the difference in aversive conditioning for the groups receiving the light either paired or unpaired with food. The results are discussed in terms of the functional similarity of a conditioned excitor for food and a conditioned inhibitor for shock.     

A modified counterconditioning procedure prevents the renewal of conditioned fear in rats

Two studies using an ABA design examined the Extinction and renewal of conditioned barpress suppression. Following lights-off and foot shock pairings in Context A, rats were placed in Context B and were given either a standard counterconditioning procedure where the lights-off CS was paired with a novel food US delivered freely or a modified counterconditioning procedure where CS-US pairings only occurred if the rat earned the US by performing a required behavior during the CS. Results indicated that the modified counterconditioning procedure thwarted ABA renewal but the conventional counterconditioning procedure did not reduce ABA renewal any more than nonreinforced exposure to the CS alone. Furthermore, the response required during the modified counterconditioning procedure could be one used as a baseline response during Acquisition of fear or it could be a novel response. Implications of the results for theories of Extinction and renewal of fear are discussed.     

Avoidance extinction in goldfish

Independent groups of goldfish trained to avoid shock in a shuttlebox situation were presented with several extinction procedures in which the relationships between the conditioned stimulus and shock were altered and/or response contingencies removed. Random shock presentations, equivalent to the number of shocks received during avoidance acquisition, resulted in response decrements similar to those obtained when the conditioned stimulus was presented alone. Pairing the conditioned stimulus with shock on every trial, however, served to maintain response levels. When response-contingent punishment was superimposed upon these Pavlovian pairings, performance was facilitated slightly although punishment alone resulted in somewhat faster response reduction than that produced by exposure only to the conditioned stimulus. Extinction of avoidance responding produced by exposure to the conditioned stimulus alone was dependent on the total duration of exposure and independent of both number of stimulus onsets and response prevention. These experiments demonstrated that, in general, the procedures used to reduce avoidance responding in rats were equally effective for goldfish, with one exception: the introduction of a Pavlovian contingency following avoidance acquisition, making the previously avoidable shock unavoidable, maintained response probabilities near previously established levels.     

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.     

Acquisition and transfer of occasion setting in operant feature positive and feature negative discriminations

The acquisition and transfer of stimulus control in discrete-trial operant feature positive and feature negative discriminations was examined in two experiments with rats. When the feature and target cues were presented simultaneously on compound training trials, the feature appeared to acquire simple excitatory or inhibitory control, which readily transferred to other target cues and which was substantially reduced by post-training counterconditioning. Conversely, when the feature preceded the target during training, the feature's control was relatively more specific to responding in the presence of its original target and less influenced counterconditioning. These results are comparable to outcomes of analogous experiments (previously reported) that used Pavlovian conditioning procedures.     

Pavlovian processes in the motivational control of instrumental performance

Hungry rats were rewarded for pressing a lever on a multiple schedule. During one component the reward was a sucrose solution, whereas food pellets acted as the reward during another component. Lever pressing was never rewarded during the third component. When the drive state was switched from hunger to thirst and the animals tested in extinction, they pressed more in the presence of the component stimulus that had been associated with the sucrose reward during training. A similar effect was observed during the extinction test of a second study in which the component stimuli had signalled non-contingent presentations of either the sucrose or pellet rewards in the absence of the lever. This suggests that the instrumental irrelevant incentive effect observed in the first experiment was due, at least in part, to the Pavlovian relationship between the component stimuli and the reinforcers during training. In fact, when the size of the effects controlled by purely Pavlovian and supposedly instrumental contingencies was compared directly in the final study, no difference could be detected.     

Sign-tracking behavior in aversive conditioning: Its acquisition via a Pavlovian mechanism and its suppression by operant contingencies

When rats are presented with Pavlovian backward pairings in which shock is the unconditioned stimulus (US) and an elevated platform the conditioned stimulus (CS), they show a strong tendency to approach the platform. Attempts were made at evaluating the nature of the associative mechanisms responsible for the acwuisition and maintenance of the approach behavior. In Experiment 1, following a baseline period when platform presentations were given in the absence of shocks, first (training I), approach to the platform was prevented and subjects were exposed to either backward, forward, or random presentations of shock and platform: this procedure attempted to minimize the effects of response learning on the acquisition of approach behavior. Then (training II), all subjects received backward shock-platform pairings and had access to the platform. Approach to the platform was stronger in animals previously exposed to backward pairings than in the animals of the other two groups. Also, animals preexposed to forward platform-shock pairings showed suppression of approach behavior on the first trial of training II relative to their performance on the last trial of baseline. These data suggest that a stimulus-reinforcer learning mechanism alone is sufficent for the acquisition of approach. Experiments 2a and 2b evaluated the effects of “punishing” operant contingencies on Pavlovian-produced approach behavior. The results showed that approach can be eliminated, but only after repeated exposure to an operant contingency which consisted of the immediate closure of the platform upon approach responding. These data suggest that approach behavior produced by Pavlovian contingencies can be modified by operant contingencies. Taken together, these data provide additional support for a sign-tracking notion in aversive conditioning.     

Conditioned suppression of an avoidance response by a stimulus paired with food

Three food-deprived Long-Evans rats were exposed to a non-discriminated shock avoidance procedure. Superimposed upon this operant avoidance baseline were periodic presentations of a conditioned stimulus that was paired with food, the unconditioned stimulus. These pairings resulted in increases in the rate of shock over that recorded when the conditioned stimulus was not present. A traditional suppression ratio failed to reveal any differential effect of the conditioned stimulus on the overall rate of avoidance responding, although all subjects showed a consistent pattern of pausing and postshock response bursts during presentations of the conditioned stimulus. When food was withheld during a final extinction phase, the conditioned stimulus ceased to occasion increases in shock rates and disruptive postshock response bursts were eliminated. An analysis of conditioned suppression procedures is proposed that stresses not only operant-Pavlovian or appetitive-aversive incompatibility, but also the manner in which the baseline schedule of reinforcement affects operant behavior changes that are elicited by the superimposed Pavlovian procedure.     

Incentive learning and the motivational control of instrumental performance

Hungry rats were trained to press a lever and pull a chain concurrently, with one action being reinforced with a sucrose solution and the other with food pellets. In addition, in the first two experiments all animals experienced non-contingent presentations of the two incentives in the absence of the operant manipulanda while either thirsty or hungry and either before (Experiment 1A) or after (Experiment 1B) the instrumental training. When lever pressing was assessed subsequently in extinction under thirst, the animals pressed at a relatively high rate only if (1) this action had been reinforced with the sucrose solution rather than the food pellets during training and (2) they had received the non-contingent presentations of the sucrose solution and food pellets on days on which they were thirsty rather than hungry. A third experiment demonstrated that non-contingent exposure to the sucrose solution alone, but not to water under thirst was sufficient to bring about this type of motivational control of instrumental performance.     

Hippocampal associative cellular responses: dissociation with behavioral responses revealed by a transfer-of-control technique

Multiunit activity was recorded in the CA3 field of the dorsal hippocampus in freely moving rats during classical conditioning and subsequent presentation of the CS on operant baselines for food reward as well as shock avoidance. Rats were first trained in a nonsignaled bar-pressing-dependent shock omission task and in a food-motivated lever-pressing task (60-s VI). Five sessions with presentations of a previously habituated tone as a CS paired with footshock as a US were then given. Testing was carried out by presenting the CS alone while behavioral responses were maintained by reinforcement in both instrumental tasks on alternate sessions. As expected, the CS induced a marked suppression of lever pressing for food reward and a marked enhancement of bar-pressing for shock avoidance. The analysis of the frequency of multiunit discharges to the CS revealed that the hippocampal cellular responses established during classical conditioning were maintained while two different behavioral responses were exhibited to the CS. The results showed that the associative response of hippocampal neurons may be dissociated from the Pavlovian conditioned responses the CS elicits. They support the hypothesis that hippocampal cellular responses represent a neural index of the acquired CS-US associative representation.     

Reinforcement and the organization of behavior in golden hamsters: Pavlovian conditioning with food and shock unconditioned stimuli

The effects of Pavlovian conditioned stimuli (CSs) for food or shock on a variety of behaviors of golden hamsters were observed in three experiments. The aim was to see whether previously reported differences among the behaviors produced by food reinforcement and punishment procedures could be accounted for by differential effects of Pavlovian conditioning on the behaviors. There was some correspondence between the behaviors observed to the CSs and the previously reported effects of instrumental training. However, the Pavlovian conditioned responses (CRs) alone would not have predicted the effects of instrumental training. Moreover, CRs depended to some extent on the context in which training and testing occurred. These findings, together with others in the literature, suggest that the results of Pavlovian conditioning procedures may not unambiguously predict what system of behaviors will be most readily modified by instrumental training with a given reinforcer.     

Predictive learning in nutrient-based flavor conditioning

This paper presents two experiments on nutrient-based flavor conditioning with rats as subjects and sucrose as the unconditioned stimulus (US). Experiment 1 was aimed at establishing an optimal control for conditioning, comparing simultaneous and serial presentations of a flavor and the US. The results showed that simultaneous, but not serial training, produced conditioning. Experiment 2 was designed to obtain evidence of summation as an index of both conditioned inhibition and predictive learning. Group Simultaneous received Pavlovian conditioned inhibition training during which flavor A was simultaneously paired with sucrose on excitatory trials (A+), and forming an unreinforced compound with flavor B on inhibitory trials (AB-). An independent excitor for the summation test was also trained by simultaneous pairings with sucrose (C+). In the control group (Blocked), the AB- trials were presented forming a block at the beginning of training to avoid a negative contingency-relationship with sucrose, and flavor A received serial rather than simultaneous pairing with sucrose (A --> +). On the summation test, only in group Simultaneous was consumption of the CB compound lower than that of flavor C alone, suggesting that, during training, flavor A activated an expectancy of the US occurrence.     

Counterconditioning of an overshadowed cue attenuates overshadowing

In 3 Pavlovian conditioned lick-suppression experiments, rats received overshadowing treatment with a footshock unconditioned stimulus such that Conditioned Stimulus (CS) A overshadowed CS X. Subjects that subsequently received CS X paired with an established signal for saccharin (CS B) exhibited less overshadowing of the X-footshock association than subjects that did not receive the X-B pairings (Experiment 1). Experiment 2 replicated this effect and controlled for some additional alternative accounts of the phenomenon. In Experiment 3, this recovery from overshadowing produced by counterconditioning CS X was attenuated if CS B was massively extinguished prior to counterconditioning. These results are more compatible with models of cue competition that emphasize differences in the expression of associations than those that emphasize differences in associative acquisition.