Reminder-induced recovery from blocking as a function of the number of compound trials

Conditioned lick suppression in rats was employed to examine changes in the associative status of a blocked stimulus as a function of the number of compound stimulus conditioning trials. In each of two experiments, prior tone-footshock pairings produced similar blocking of conditioned responding to the light element of a tone-light compound when either two or six compound trials were used. In experiment 1, two exposures to the light alone in a dissimilar context during the retention interval, i.e., a reminder treatment, resulted in a restoration of responding to the light which was complete and similar for animals receiving two or six compound trials. This indicated that latent acquisition with respect to the blocked stimulus was largely complete after two compound trials. Because of a potential ceiling effect for reminder-induced recovery from blocking, Experiment 2 employed an attenuated reminder (one light exposure). This reminder reversed the blocking when six, but not when two, compound trials were used. These results suggest that, after latent acquisition to the blocked stimulus is complete, the blocked stimulus continues to be processed during additional compound stimulus conditioning trials, with a consequent latent facilitation of retrieval of associations to the blocked stimulus.     

Blocking as a retrieval failure: Reactivation of associations to a blocked stimulus

Conditioned lick suppression in rats was used to examine the effectiveness of three different “reminder” treatments in reactivating associations to a blocked stimulus in a Kamin blocking paradigm. Experiment I indicated that with our parameters prior tone-footshock pairings could block manifestation of a light-footshock association that would otherwise be evident following pairings of a light-tone compound stimulus with footshock. In Experiment II, exposure to either the US, the blocked stimulus (light), or the apparatus cues between the compound conditioning trials and testing decreased blocking. Experiments III(a) and III(b) replicated the unblocking effects seen in Experiment II and included control groups that received the identical training and reminder treatments except for the omission of the light from the compound stimulus. These latter animals failed to display behaviour comparable to the blocked and reminded subjects, thereby establishing the associative basis of suppression to the light in the animals reminded following treatment known to produce blocking. Experiment IV also replicated the results of Experiment II and included control groups that received identical light-tone compound trials and reminder treatments without prior conditioning to the tone alone. In these control groups, reminder treatments tended to disrupt rather than increase evidence of conditioning to the light. The results suggest that associations are formed to the added element of a compound despite prior conditioning to the initial element, and that failure on the test trial to retrieve these associations to the blocked CS, rather than a failure to attend to or learn about the added element, is at least in part responsible the Kamin blocking effect.     

A re-examination of one-trial blocking in conditioned suppression

Three experiments on the conditioned suppression of licking in rats examined the amount of conditioning produced by a single conditioning trial to a clicker-light compound and the effect of prior conditioning to the light on the level of conditioning to the clicker. In Experiment I, prior conditioning to the light, far from blocking conditioning to the clicker, actually enhanced it, whether the clicker was presented in a simultaneous compound with the light or in a serial compound preceding the light. Experiment II, however, showed that this potentiation effect could be abolished if a trace interval was inserted between the clicker and light in the serial compound arrangement. Moreover, Experiment III demonstrated a significant blocking effect when a trace interval separated the clicker and light on the single compound trial. These results establish that one-trial blocking of conditioned suppression is possible, and suggest that in some earlier studies blocking may have been masked by higher-order conditioning to the target stimulus.     

Locus of the effect of a surprising reinforcer in the attenuation of blocking

Previous experiments on conditioned suppression in rats have shown that prior conditioning to one element of a compound conditioned stimulus paired with shock may block or prevent conditioning to the other element. Reliable conditioning may, however, occur to the added element (blocking may be attenuated), if a surprising second shock is added shortly after each compound trial. Experiment I confirmed this finding, and further showed that blocking was attenuated only when the second shock occurred 10 s after the compound trial, not when it occurred 100 s later. Experiment II showed that the surprising omission of an expected second shock 10 s after each compound trial would also attenuate blocking, thus implying that the surprising event does not itself act to reinforce conditioning to the added element, but rather permits the unconditioned stimulus (the first shock) to play its normal role as an effective reinforcer. This conclusion was confirmed by Experiment III, which showed that a surprising second shock does not produce any increase in conditioning to the added element on the trial on which it occurs; rather it serves to ensure adequate conditioning to that element on a subsequent compound trial. The implication is that the surprising event acts proactively to prevent subjects learning to ignore an otherwise redundant stimulus.     

Stimulus and temporal cues in classical conditioning

In 2 experiments, separate groups of rats were given stimulus conditioning, temporal conditioning, untreated control and (in Experiment 2) learned irrelevance control procedures, followed by a compound with both stimulus and temporal cues. Stimulus conditioning consisted of a random 15-s duration conditioned stimulus (CS) followed by food; temporal conditioning consisted of food-food intervals of fixed 90 s (Experiment 1) or fixed 75 + random 15 s (Experiment 2). The stimulus group abruptly increased responding after CS onset, and the temporal group gradually increased responding over the food-food interval. When the food-food interval was fixed 90 s, the temporal cue exerted stronger control in the compound, whereas when the food-food interval was fixed 75 + random 15 s, the stimulus cue exerted stronger control. The strength of conditioning, temporal gradients of responding, and cue competition effects appear to reflect simultaneous timing of multiple intervals.     

Blocking and unblocking of conditioned analgesia

Two experiments with rat subjects assessed the blocking phenomenon using inhibition of responding to painful thermal stimulation as an index of conditioned analgesia established through conditioned stimulus (CS)-shock pairings. In Experiment 1, a group of rats receiving the standard blocking procedure ($\text{A+}\text{AB+}$) showed shorter response latencies during a hot plate test of pain sensitivity in the presence of the added CS than groups of rats receiving various blocking control procedures. Experiment 2 replicated the blocking outcome of Experiment 1 and also demonstrated that the addition of a second shock unconditioned stimulus (US) during the compound conditioning phase attenuated the blocking effect; i.e., unblocking was observed. However, the deletion of a second shock US during compound conditioning in a group that had received two shocks on each trial in the first phase of the experiment failed to result in unblocking. These data extend the associative account of conditioned analgesia to situations involving stimulus selection and the implications for the analysis of aversive learning are discussed.     

Spontaneous recovery from forward and backward blocking

This article demonstrates and analyzes spontaneous recovery of stimulus control following both forward and backward blocking in a conditioned suppression preparation with rats. Experiment 1 found, in first-order conditioning, robust forward blocking and an attenuation of it following a retention interval. Experiment 2 showed, in sensory preconditioning, recovery of responding following both forward and backward blocking. Also, the results of this experiment indicated that response recovery to the blocked stimulus cannot be explained by an impaired status of the blocking stimulus after a retention interval. Experiment 3, also in sensory preconditioning, suggested that spontaneous recovery following both forward and backward blocking in Experiment 2 was due to impaired associative activation of the blocking stimulus' representation during testing with the blocked stimulus. Although no contemporary model of associative learning can explain these results, a modification of R. R. Miller and L. D. Matzel's (1988) comparator hypothesis is proposed to do so.     

Overshadowing of subsequent events and recovery thereafter

Four experiments using a conditioned lick suppression preparation with rats were conducted to examine whether overshadowing of subsequent events could be obtained in Pavlovian backward conditioning (i.e. unconditioned stimulus [US] before conditioned stimulus [CS]), and to determine whether such overshadowing could be reversed without further training with the overshadowed CS, as has been reported in overshadowing of antecedent events. In Experiment 1, a backward-conditioned CS overshadowed a second backward-conditioned CS. Two posttraining manipulations, extinction of the overshadowing CS (Experiment 2) and shifting of the temporal relationship of the overshadowing CS to the US (Experiment 3), increased responding to the overshadowed CS. These results constitute the first unambiguous demonstration of stimulus competition between subsequent events using first-order conditioning, and they show that, like overshadowing with forward conditioning, such overshadowing is due, at least in part if not completely, to a failure to express information that had been acquired.     

Overshadowing and stimulus duration

In 3 experiments, the authors investigated the effect of stimulus duration on overshadowing. Experiments 1 and 2 examined responding to a target conditioned stimulus (CS1) when it was conditioned in compound with a coterminating overshadowing stimulus (CS2) that was longer, shorter, or of the same duration (the long, short, and matched groups, respectively). Equal overshadowing of conditioning to CS1 was obtained in all 3 conditions relative to a control group conditioned to the light alone. There were, however, differences in responding to CS2 as a function of its absolute duration. Experiment 3 examined the contribution of the food-food interval/CS onset-food interval ratio to these findings. In Experiments 1 and 2, the ratio differed for the overshadowing CS but not for the target CS. In Experiment 3, this arrangement was reversed, but the pattern of results remained the same. The implications of these findings for trial-based and real-time models of conditioning are discussed.     

Malleability of conditioned associations: path dependence

Using conditioned suppression of barpressing to investigate the stability of a conditioned stimulus-unconditioned stimulus (CS-US) association, we gave water-deprived rats either a few pairings of the CS with a strong footshock US or many pairings with a weak footshock US so that barpress suppression in response to the CS was equated. Experiment 1 established training parameters that yielded this equivalence. Specifically, rapid acquisition to a preasymptotic level of responding with strong shock produced suppression comparable to the asymptotic level reached more slowly with weak shock. Experiment 2 showed that although equivalent performance was obtained from extensive conditioning with a weak shock or limited conditioning with strong shock, only extensive conditioning with weak shock resulted in retarded acquisition of an association between that same CS and a footshock level perceived as midway between the two initial training shock intensities as implied by asymptotic performance in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 demonstrated that the observed retardation in animals given many conditioning trials with weak shock was CS specific. Collectively, these findings indicate that the malleability of learned behavior is not simply a function of initial associative strength but is dependent on path during initial acquisition.     

Role of the hippocampus in blocking and conditioned inhibition of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response.

Bilateral aspiration of the dorsal hippocampus produced a disrupttion of blocking of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response in Kamin's two-stage paradigm (Experiment 1) but had no effect on the formation of a Pavlovian conditioned inhibitor (Experiment 2). The results of Experiment 1 indicated that normal animals and those with cortical lesions given conditioning to a light-plus-tone conditioned stimulus (CS) gave conditioned responses (CRs) to both the light and the tone during nonreinforced presentations of each (test phase). If, however, compound conditioning was preceded by tone acquisition, only the tone elicited a CR during testing; that is, blocking was observed. In rabbits with hippocampal lesions, however, CRs were given to both the light and the tone during testing whether or not compound conditioning was preceded by tone acquisition. The data from Experiment 2 showed that rabbits with hippocampal lesions could discriminate as well as normal rabbits and those with cortical lesions between a light (CS+) and light plus tone (CS-). In addition, when the inhibitory tone was subsequently paired with the unconditioned stimulus in retardation testing, animals in all three lesion conditions acquired the CR at the same rate. Thus, it appears that hippocampal lesions do not disrupt conditioned inhibition. The results of these experiments were taken as support for the view that the hippocampus is responsible for "tuning out" stimuli that have no adaptive value to the organism.     

The strength of the orienting response during blocking

In two experiments rats initially received appetitive Pavlovian conditioning with an auditory conditioned stimulus (CS). Subsequently this stimulus was presented in compound with a novel light and paired with the same appetitive reinforcer. In keeping with the outcome of many such experiments on blocking, there was very little evidence of appetitive conditioning during subsequent independent presentations of the light. Of main concern in the present experiments, however, was the influence of this training on the strength of the orienting response directed towards the light. When the light was first presented it elicited a strong orienting response. The strength of this response declined rapidly when the light was presented in compound with the previously trained auditory CS but more slowly when it was paired with the reinforcer either by itself or in conjunction with an initially neutral auditory stimulus. It is suggested that the extent to which the events following the light are accurately predicted determines the strength of orientation towards this stimulus.     

A role for stimulus generalization in conditional discrimination learning

In each of three experiments on discrimination learning by rats, whether or not a 10-sec target stimulus was followed by food was determined by the nature of a 2-min background stimulus that accompanied it. A conditional discrimination was employed in Experiment 1 such that background A indicated food would follow one target but not the other, whereas this relationship between the targets and food was reversed in the presence of background B. Experiment 2 employed two feature-positive discriminations. Subsequent test trials revealed that the background for one discrimination was able to enhance responding during the target for the other discrimination. Experiment 3 employed a feature-positive and a feature-negative discrimination prior to test trials in which each target was presented separately during a compound of both background stimuli. The compound enhanced responding to the target from the feature-positive discrimination and reduced it to the target from the feature-negative discrimination. We suggest that to accommodate all these findings, the best explanation is provided by a configural model of Pavlovian conditioning.     

Recovery of an overshadowed association achieved by extinction of the overshadowing stimulus

Three experiments are reported in which conditioned lick suppression by water-deprived rats was used as an index of associative strength. In Experiment 1, overshadowing of a light by a tone was observed when the light-tone compound stimulus was paired with foot shock. After initial compound pairings, the tone-shock association was extinguished in one group of subjects. Subsequently, these animals demonstrated significantly higher levels of suppression to the light relative to a control group in which the tone had not been extinguished. Experiment 2 replicated this effect while failing to find evidence to support the possibilities that extinction presentations of the overshadowing tone act as retrieval cues for the light-shock association, or that, via second-order conditioning, the light-shock association is actually formed during extinction of the tone. Experiment 3 determined that the recovery from overshadowing observed in Experiments 1 and 2 was specific to the extinction of the overshadowing stimulus rather than the extinction of any excitatory cue. Collectively, these results suggest that the debilitated response to an overshadowed stimulus does not represent an acquisition failure, but rather the failure of an acquired association to be manifest in behavior.     

Insensitivity to stimulus validity in human pavlovian conditioning

Four experiments investigated the role of information value, or stimulus validity, in human electrodermal conditioning. Conditioned stimuli (CSs) were long, variable duration (10-50-sec) slides or sounds, the unconditioned stimulus (US) was shock, and the primary measures were change in tonic skin conductance level and self-report expectancy of shock. In Experiment 1 electrodermal responding to a target stimulus was marginally lower in a blocking group than in a superconditioning group. This difference failed to occur in Experiment 2, despite increased sensitivity of the electrodermal measure. Explicit instructions to pay attention to the relationship between each stimulus and shock improved learning, but did not lead to group differences (Experiment 3). In Experiment 4 expectancy ratings in a blocking group were lower than in an overshadowing group, but no electrodermal differences occurred. The results were interpreted in terms of non-additive learning processes such as occasion-setting, in addition to a general lack of transfer of learning about a stimulus from one context to another (element to compound or vice versa). It was suggested that sensitivity to stimulus validity might be observed if conditioning were embedded in a causally familiar task, as in contingency judgement research.     

Blocking with serial compound stimuli: The role of local context and second-order associations

Blocking was studied with rats in two serial conditioning experiments in which CS1 was followed by CS2 and then shock. Experiment 1 demonstrated that pretraining with CS1 was able to block conditioning to CS2 when the pretraining consisted of trace conditioning. But when serial conditioning was used for pretraining, with a third stimulus as the second element of the compound, then blocking was not detected during the subsequent phase. In Experiment 2 the effect of pretraining with CS2 on blocking with CS1 was examined. Blocking was effective, but only when steps were taken to minimize the growth of second-order associations resulting from the pairing of CS1 with CS2. These results are consistent with a principle stating that the ability of a pretrained stimulus to block the added stimulus in a compound depends on the relative contiguity of each stimulus to the US.     

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.     

Inhibitory conditioning resulting from a reduction in the magnitude of reinforcement

Five experiments, all employing conditioned suppression in rats, studied inhibitory conditioning to a stimulus signalling a reduction in shock intensity. Experimental subjects were conditioned to a tone signalling a 1·0 mA shock and to a tone-light compound signalling a 0·4 mA shock. On a summation test in which it alleviated the suppression maintained by a third stimulus also associated with the 1·0 mA shock, the light was established as a conditioned inhibitor. Retardation tests gave ambiguous results: the light was relatively slow to condition when paired, either alone or in conjunction with another stimulus, with the 0·4 mA shock, but the difference from a novel stimulus control group was not significant. Two final experiments found no evidence at all of inhibition on a summation test in which the light was presented in conjunction with a stimulus that had itself been associated with the 0·4 mA shock. The results of these experiments have implications for the question of what animals learn during the course of inhibitory conditioning.     

Blocking between occasion setters and contextual stimuli

Two appetitive conditioning experiments with rats used a blocking procedure to compare the mechanisms through which contexts and positive occasion setters control responding to conditioned stimuli (CSs) in discrimination learning. In Experiment 1, a light (L) initially set the occasion for food reinforcement of a tone CS (T). Then a compound of L and a novel context signaled reinforcement of T. Previous learning about L blocked contextual control of responding to T. Blocking was not due to simple excitation conditioned to L during discrimination training; comparable excitation to L in a control group did not result in blocking. Conversely, in Experiment 2, initial learning about the context blocked the acquisition of occasion setting to L. Excitation conditioned to the context could not account for the blocking. In general, the results suggest that contexts and occasion setters may control responding to CSs through similar mechanisms.     

Contextually Based Conditional Discrimination of the Rabbit Eyeblink Response

Rabbits received conditional discrimination training using contextual stimuli to set the occasion for stimulus pairings during eyelid conditioning. Specifically, animals were exposed to either the presence or the absence of an oscillating chamber light throughout the intertrial interval (50 ± 10 s). For half the animals, this light signaled paired presentations of a discrete tone conditioned stimulus (CS) and air puff unconditioned stimulus (US) while darkness signaled presentations of only the tone CS. The remaining animals experienced the opposite contextual relationship to the conditioning stimuli. These trial types occurred pseudo-randomly across a session, with all transitions between contextual settings (i.e., light or dark) taking place immediately at the CS–US offset. Under these conditions, animals successfully utilized the contextual stimuli as conditional cues for differential responding to the shared CS. Moreover, both light and dark were equally effective as discriminative stimuli. A subset of animals received further training in which the contextual contingency was removed by restricting all conditioning to the CS-alone context. Without the contingency in place, subsequent CS presentations (paired and CS-alone) evoked equivalent conditioned responding across three sessions of training. Following the reinstatement of the contextual contingencies, discriminatory responding was immediately observed and returned to previous levels within three sessions. Finally, animals appeared to use the static representation of the conditional cue, rather than the phasic transition between cues, for discriminatory responding. These findings are discussed in terms of current neurobiological models of eyelid conditioning.