Occasional reinforced responses during extinction can slow the rate of reacquisition of an operant response

Three experiments with rats examined reacquisition of an operant response after either extinction or a response-elimination procedure that included occasional reinforced responses during extinction. In each experiment, reacquisition was slower when response elimination had included occasional reinforced responses, although the effect was especially evident when responding was examined immediately following each response-reinforcer pairing during reacquisition (Experiments 2 and 3). An extinction procedure with added noncontingent reinforcers also slowed reacquisition (Experiment 3). The results are consistent with research in classical conditioning (Bouton, M. E., Woods, A. M., & Pineño, O. (2004). Occasional reinforced trials during extinction can slow the rate of rapid reacquisition. Learning & Motivation, 35, 371-390) and suggest that rapid reacquisition after extinction is analogous to a renewal effect that occurs when reinforced responses signal a return to the conditioning context. Clinical implications are also discussed.     

On the costs and benefits of directing attention towards or away from threat-related stimuli: A classical conditioning experiment

In attentional bias modification programs, individuals are trained to attend away from threat in order to reduce emotional reactivity to stressful situations. However, attending towards threat is considered to be a prerequisite for fear reduction in other models of anxiety. We compared both views by manipulating attention towards or away from an acquired signal of threat. The strength of extinction and reacquisition was assessed with threat and US-expectancy ratings. We found more extinction in the attend towards threat group, compared to both the attend away from threat group and a control group in which attention was not manipulated. The results are in line with the Emotional Processing Theory and cognitive accounts of classical conditioning.     

Memories of reward and nonreward regulate the extinction and reacquisition of both excitatory and inhibitory associations

The memories of the unconditioned stimulus (US) and its absence (No US), symbolized as S^R and S^N, respectively, may be retrieved on US or No US trials giving rise to four types of associations, S^R → US, S^R → No US, S^N → US, and S^N → No US. Here, following acquisition under partial reward (PRF), rats were shifted either to different schedules of PRF (Experiment 1) or extinction (Experiments 1 and 2). Inhibitory S^R → No US associations formed in acquisition survived extinction and shifts to one, but not another type of PRF schedule (Experiments 1 and 2). Excitatory S^R → US associations also survived extinction (Experiment 2). These findings, as well as the acquisition findings of Experiment 2, are consistent with the sequential model but not with the only other two theories said to be able to explain PRF findings, the frustration hypothesis of Amsel and the attention hypothesis of Mackintosh [see Haselgrove, M., Aydin, A., & Pearce, J. M. (2004). A partial reinforcement extinction effect despite equal rates of reinforcement during Pavlovian conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 30, 240–250]. Also, the reacquisition findings obtained here are inconsistent with two views applied to several learning phenomena, the rule-learning view and the position-item view.