Human evaluative conditioning: Order of stimulus presentation

In an experiment designed to demonstrate evaluative conditioning, subjects were shown 48 pictures of sculptures that they rated on a scale with 21 categories (?10 to +10). Then, the two most liked pictures (L) were paired with pictures from the categories ?1, 0, or +1 (N). In contrast to prior experiments, subjects were given either forward conditioning (N-L) or backward conditioning (L-N) trials but not both. Four other neutral stimuli were paired with each other (N-N) and acted as control stimulus pairs. After conditioning, the stimuli were rated a second time. There was a statistically significant difference in evaluative ratings showing a change of the evaluative tone of the previously neutral stimuli in a positive direction only after forward conditioning. This finding is inconsistent with results of prior experiments and challenges the assumption of Martin and Levey (1987) that evaluative conditioning is different from human classical conditioning.     

Is evaluative conditioning really resistant to extinction? Evidence for changes in evaluative judgements without changes in evaluative representations

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is defined as the change in the evaluation of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a positive or negative unconditioned stimulus (US). Although several individual studies suggest that EC is unaffected by unreinforced presentations of the CS without the US, a recent meta-analysis indicates that EC effects are less pronounced for post-extinction measurements than post-acquisition measurements. The disparity in research findings suggests that extinction of EC may depend on yet unidentified conditions. In an attempt to uncover these conditions, three experiments (N = 784) investigated the influence of unreinforced post-acquisition CS presentations on EC effects resulting from simultaneous versus sequential pairings and pairings with single versus multiple USs. For all four types of CS–US pairings, EC effects on self-reported evaluations were reduced by unreinforced CS presentations, but only when the CSs had been rated after the initial presentation of CS–US pairings. EC effects on an evaluative priming measure remained unaffected by unreinforced CS presentations regardless of whether the CSs had been rated after acquisition. The results suggest that reduced EC effects resulting from unreinforced CS presentations are due to judgement-related processes during the verbal expression of CS evaluations rather than genuine changes in the underlying evaluative representations.     

Mere ownership: Affective self-bias or evaluative conditioning?

Experimental evidence is presented supporting Nuttin's (1985, 1987) conclusion that the name letter effect (i.e. a preference for letters occurring in the own name above not-own name letters) is an affective consequence of mere ownership. We argue that ‘evaluative conditioning’ (e.g. Martin & Levey, 1987) was not fully eradicated by Hoorens (1990) as an alternative explanation for the name letter effect. In the present experiment, we tried to separate evaluative conditioning from ownership induction. An essential requirement for ‘mere’ ownership postulated by Nuttin (1987) is that the preferences for owned versus noi-owned objects are measured or obtained in absence of subjects' awareness of their belongingness to self. This criterion was perhaps not fully satisfied. However, our results are more in agreement with the mere ownership view than with an account solely based on evaluative conditioning. The mere ownership effect (i.e. a preference for any object belonging to the self above any similar object belonging to another) is described as disclosing a purely affective self-bias.     

Dissociating the effects of attention and contingency awareness on evaluative conditioning effects in the visual paradigm

Two experiments are described that investigate the effects of attention in moderating evaluative conditioning (EC) effects in a picture-picture paradigm in which previously discovered experimental artifacts (e.g., Field & Davey, 1999 ) were overcome by counterbalancing conditioned stimuli (CSs) and unconditioned stimuli (USs) across participants. Conditioned responses for individuals who had attention enhanced were compared against a control group and groups for whom attention was impeded using a distracter task. In a second experiment the effects of attention were dissociated from those of contingency awareness by using backward-masked US presentations. The results of these experiments indicate that although associative EC effects may not be disrupted by a lack of contingency awareness, attention is an important factor in establishing conditioning. These results shed some light onto the possible boundary conditions that could explain past inconsistencies in obtaining EC effects in the visual paradigm.     

Evaluative conditioning in the picture-picture paradigm with random assignment of conditioned stimuli to unconditioned stimuli

Human participants were allocated to 1 of 3 groups. In the conditioning group, each conditioned stimulus (CS)-unconditioned stimulus (US) pair was presented 7 times during the acquisition phase. Participants who were assigned to the extinction group saw 5 additional presentations of each CS in isolation after the 7 presentations of each CS-US pair. In the latent inhibition group, the CS-only trials were presented before the CS-US trials. Overall, a significant evaluative conditioning effect was observed. This effect cannot be dismissed on the basis of the arguments developed by A. P. Field and G. C. L. Davey (1997, 1998, 1999), and the results thus provide strong evidence for the associative nature of evaluative conditioning. The results are also in line with other findings, which showed that evaluative conditioning is resistant to extinction.     

Both trace and delay conditioning of evaluative responses depend on contingency awareness

Whereas previous evaluative conditioning (EC) studies produced inconsistent results concerning the role of contingency knowledge, there are classical eye-blink conditioning studies suggesting that declarative processes are involved in trace conditioning but not in delay conditioning. In two EC experiments pairing neutral sounds (conditioned stimuli; CSs) with affective pictures (unconditioned stimuli; USs), we tested whether the type of conditioning procedure affects the relationship between awareness and EC. Auditory CSs and visual USs were either overlapping and co-terminating (Delay Conditioning Group), or they were separated by a short temporal gap (Trace Conditioning Group). In both groups, contingency awareness was manipulated by varying the duration at which the US was presented during conditioning. Furthermore, in addition to a post-conditioning measure of awareness, US detectability was measured concurrently during the learning phase in Experiment 2. US exposure duration affected both measures of awareness. The data of both experiments demonstrate that EC does not occur if the USs are presented at very brief durations, but reliable EC effects can be observed at longer US exposure durations. As there were no differences between trace and delay conditioning, the data suggest that contingency awareness plays a crucial role in trace and in delay conditioning of evaluative responses. These results challenge automatic association-formation accounts of EC, but they are in line with ‘single-process’ accounts assuming EC to be dependent on conscious declarative knowledge about CS–US contingencies.     

Analyzing the random control procedure: Effects of paired and unpaired CSs and USs on autoshaping the chick's key peck with heat reinforcement

A series of five experiments using a total of 264 subjects investigated the effects of paired and unpaired key light (CS) and heat (US) stimuli on autoshaping the chick's key peck. Experiment 1 established that paired presentations of CS and US promoted a more rapid rise in key pecking than did randomly presented CSs and USs and that the specific sequence of stimuli under the random control procedure affected key pecking performance. Experiment 2 used a trace conditioning procedure to determine the role of the CS-US interval on autoshaping and to define empirically unpaired CSs and USs. Key pecking declined as the trace delay interval was increased from 0 to 25 sec; at 25 sec, no conditioning of key pecking occurred. Experiments 3–5 assessed the effects on autoshaped key pecking of (a) number of daily CS-US pairings, (b) added unpaired CS presentations, and (c) added unpaired US presentations, since paired and random control schedules differed in all of these respects. Reduction in the number of CS-US pairings slowed the acquisition of key pecking as did the concurrent addition of nonreinforced CSs and unsignaled USs. These results support theories of association formation that stress the effects of both paired and unpaired CSs and USs.     

Evaluative conditioning effects are modulated by the nature of contextual pairings

Across two studies participants completed a learning phase comprised of two types of trials: context pairing trials in which two (valenced or non-valenced) words were identical or opposite to one another and evaluative conditioning (EC) trials in which a CS was paired with a US. Based on the idea that EC occurs because CS-US pairings function as a symbolic cue about the relation between the CS and the US, we hypothesised that the nature of context pairings (identical or opposite) might moderate EC effects. Results indicate that identity-based context pairs led to typical assimilative explicit and implicit effects whereas opposition-based pairs led to attenuated effects. Implications and different accounts of our findings 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.     

I like it because I said that I like it: evaluative conditioning effects can be based on stimulus-response learning

Evaluative conditioning (EC) effects are often assumed to be based on a learned mental link between the CS (conditioned stimulus) and the US (unconditioned stimulus). We demonstrate that this link is not the only one that can underlie EC effects, but that if evaluative responses are actually given during the learning phase also a direct link between the CS and an evaluative response-a CS-ER link-can be learned and lead to EC effects. In Experiment 1, CSs were paired with USs and participants were asked to evaluate the pairs during the conditioning phase. Resulting EC effects were unaffected by a later revaluation of the USs, suggesting that these EC effects can be attributed to CS-ER learning rather than to CS-US learning. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1 with the difference that no evaluative responses were given during the learning phase. EC effects in this study were influenced by US revaluation, suggesting that these EC effects are mainly based on CS-US learning. In Experiment 3, it was shown that EC effects can be found even if the USs are entirely removed from the procedure and the CSs are only paired with enforced evaluative responses. Together the experiments show that the valence of a stimulus can change because of a contingency with an evaluative response. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved).     

Shaking That Icky Feeling: Effects of Extinction and Counterconditioning on Disgust-Related Evaluative Learning

Learned disgust appears to play an important role in certain anxiety disorders, and can be explained by the process of evaluative conditioning, in which an affective evaluative reaction evoked by an unconditional stimulus (US) is transferred to a conditional stimulus (CS). Much remains unknown about how disgust-related evaluative learning can be effectively eliminated. Study 1 of the present investigation examined the effects of extinction on reducing the negative evaluation of a CS that was acquired during disgust conditioning. Participants completed acquisition trials, with a disgusting picture as US and two neutral pictures as CS (CS + was paired with the US; CS- was unpaired), followed by extinction trials ("CS only"; experimental condition) or a filler task (control condition). Extinction trials reduced acquired US expectancy to the CS +, but did not extinguish negative evaluations of the CS +. Study 2 examined the effects of counterconditioning on evaluative learned disgust. After disgust acquisition trials, counterconditioning trials followed in which the CS + was paired with a pleasant US (experimental condition) or a filler task (control condition). Counterconditioning trials reduced acquired US expectancy to the CS + and reduced evaluative conditioned disgust. Implications of the potential differential effects of extinction and counterconditioning on evaluative learning for exposure-based treatment of specific anxiety disorders are discussed.     

The decrement in conditioned fear with increased trials of simultaneous conditioning is not specific to the simultaneous procedure

Three experiments using a conditioned punishment paradigm with rat subjects examined the possibility that the nonmonotonic acquisition function previously found to characterize simultaneous conditioning was due to the noninformative nature of the conditioned stimulus (CS). In Experiment 1 the suppressive effects of a CS previously presented with an unconditioned stimulus (US) in a simultaneous and forward (informative) manner were compared following 20 and an additional 60 conditioning trials. Excitatory conditioning similarly diminished with increased trials for both the simultaneous and forward procedures. Experiment 2 employed a between-groups design. Simultaneous, forward, and trace conditioning procedures were compared following 20 or 100 trials. Each of the three 100-trial groups showed less resistance to extinction than their 20-trial counterparts. Experiment 3 determined that the decrement in excitatory conditioning for the 100-trial groups was not due to the greater number of US presentations, per se, but rather to the number of CS-US pairings. The nonmonotonic acquisition function observed with all three conditioning procedures indicated that informational factors were not responsible for the decrement observed in simultaneous conditioning. The pattern of results suggested that subjects receiving extended conditioning trials were better able to discriminate between training and testing.     

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.     

Revisiting the relation between contingency awareness and attention: Evaluative conditioning relies on a contingency focus

Although evaluative conditioning has occasionally been demonstrated in the absence of contingency awareness, many recent studies imply that its acquisition depends on the availability of attentional resources during conditioning. In previous experiments attention has typically been manipulated in a general way rather than looking at the particular focus of attention. The present study investigated the role of a focus on the CS–US contingency. Two separate distraction tasks were designed that either diverted attention from the stimuli or directed it to the stimuli while drawing attention away from the contingency between the stimuli. Both types of distraction were shown to eliminate evaluative conditioning. Significant evaluative conditioning was observed in a third group of participants who were required to attend the contingencies. A mediation analysis showed that the observed discrepancy in evaluative conditioning effects between groups was mediated by contingency awareness. The results imply that attention in terms of a stimulus focus is not sufficient for evaluative conditioning to occur. Rather, attention to the contingencies between stimuli appears to be crucial in evaluative conditioning, because it is supposed to foster the acquisition of contingency awareness.     

Contextual conditioning in infants, but not older animals, is facilitated by CS conditioning

Context conditioning in infant Sprague-Dawley rats (postnatal days [PD] 15, 17, and 19), juveniles (PD 25), adolescents (PD 35), and adults (PD 71-89) was compared when CS conditioning did or did not occur in the context. Degree of CS conditioning within that context was equated across age, and separate groups at each age were given unpaired presentations of the CS and US within that context. Infants conditioned more effectively to context when CS-US pairings occurred in that context than when they did not, juveniles conditioned to context about equally with and without CS-US pairings in the context, and adolescents and adults conditioned less effectively to context when CS and US were paired than when unpaired. Adolescents had significant context conditioning despite CS-US pairings in the context but adults did not, and overall, context conditioning was strongest for adolescents. Supplementary experiments indicated that with more extensive conditioning experience, the infants' pattern of context conditioning became more similar to that of older animals, and with less conditioning experience the pattern of context conditioning by adults became more similar to that of younger animals, but infants never attained the adult pattern of context conditioning nor did adults attain the infant pattern. The potentiation of context conditioning by CS conditioning observed in infants is consistent with previous evidence derived from compound conditioning. Alternative explanations place common emphasis on infant-specific amodal processing. One views potentiation as a result of the greater perceived intensity of the stimulus compound (CS and context, in this case) during conditioning and the lesser generalization decrement in infants than adults when tested with a single element after conditioning with a compound. The other explanation emphasizes consequences of the redundancy inherent in intersensory compounds, within the theory of Bahrick and Lickliter.     

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.     

Latent Inhibition of Contextual Stimuli Reduces the US Preexposure Effect in Rats

Two experiments are reported which utilized latent inhibition of contextual stimuli prior to administering unsignaled presentations of the Us in an attempt to further assess the role of contextual stimuli in the US preexposure effect. Specifically in Experiment 1, rats received either 0-, 5-, 10-, or 15-minute exposure to the context in which the unsignaled Uss were to occur (latent inhibition). Following preexposure to the US, animals were trained in a CER paradigm with a tone CS. Measures of suppression to the tone indicated that the greatest US preexposure effect occurred in the 0 group and that no US preexposure effect was evident in the 15 group. Experiment 2 includec two important control groups which were omitted in Experiment 1 (no US preexposures) and an additional dependent variable (time to initiate licking) to measure fear to contextual stimuli. These results are discussed in terms of the role context conditioning may play in US preexposure.

     

Cholinergic modulation of trace conditioning trained in serial compound: A developmental analysis

In four experiments the effects of serial compound conditioning on responding to a trace-conditioned CS were evaluated using a fear conditioning paradigm. The subjects were 18- and 25-day-old Sprague-Dawley rats, previously shown to exhibit little or no trace fear conditioning. Here, animals as young as 18 days of age were shown to be capable of trace conditioning between a visual CS1 and a shock US, provided the trace interval was filled with a non-target CS2 during serial conditioning trials (CS1-->CS2-->US). To explore cholinergic mechanisms involved in trace and serial conditioning, additional experiments assessed conditioned responding following pre-training administration of the muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine. Scopolamine produced a dose-dependent reduction in responding to the trace CS1, regardless of whether subjects were trained with standard trace (CS1-->trace interval-->US) or serial (CS1-->CS2-->US) trials. Responding to CS2 was unaffected by scopolamine. These data suggest that central cholinergic systems are functional in the young animals, but are not normally sufficiently activated by standard trace conditioning procedures. The results suggest that serial compound conditioning can promote trace conditioning in young rats, as it does in adults, perhaps by enhancing cholinergic activity during training. Implications for the late ontogenetic emergence of trace conditioning as it relates to maturation of neural pathways and their role in the potentiating effects of a gap filler are discussed.     

Formation of tone-US associations does not interfere with the formation of context-US associations in pigeons

In four experiments we investigated whether signaled and unsignaled US presentations resulted in differential context conditioning. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that the presence of a tone during grain presentation facilitated the formation of tone-food associations in pigeons. Experiment 2 also showed that the acquisition of associative value by the tone did not diminish associations between context and the unconditioned stimulus (US). Experiment 3 showed that signaled USs did not interfere with the acquisition of context-US associations, and Experiment 4 showed that even when the signal was extensively pretrained, context-US associations could not be blocked. The results of these experiments are inconsistent with conditioning models that require competition between cues and contexts for associative value.     

Pavlovian second-order conditioned analgesia

Three experiments with rat subjects assessed conditioned analgesia in a Pavlovian second-order conditioning procedure by using inhibition of responding to thermal stimulation as an index of pain sensitivity. In Experiment 1, rats receiving second-order conditioning showed longer response latencies during a test of pain sensitivity in the presence of the second-order conditioned stimulus (CS) than rats receiving appropriate control procedures. Experiment 2 found that extinction of the first-order CS had no effect on established second-order conditioned analgesia. Experiment 3 evaluated the effects of post second-order conditioning pairings of morphine and the shock unconditioned stimulus (US). Rats receiving paired morphine-shock presentations showed significantly shorter response latencies during a hot-plate test of pain sensitivity in the presence of the second-order CS than did groups of rats receiving various control procedures; second-order analgesia was attenuated. These data extend the associative account of conditioned analgesia to second-order conditioning situations and are discussed in terms of the mediation of both first- and second-order analgesia by an association between the CS and a representation or expectancy of the US, which may directly activate endogenous pain inhibition systems.