Context specificity of conditioning and latent inhibition: Evidence for a dissociation of latent inhibition and associative interference

Conditioning may generalize from one context to another when latent inhibition (the effect on subsequent conditioning of prior unreinforced exposure to the stimulus) does not. Experiment 1 studied conditioned approach and licking by rats to a stimulus paired with the delivery of water and confirmed that latent inhibition could be abolished by a change of context, while prior aversive conditioning to the stimulus, produced by pairing it with mild shock, interfered with the acquisition of conditioned approach and licking regardless of this change of context. Thus even when conditioning and latent inhibition were measured in the same way, the former generalized across contexts, and the latter did not. Experiment 2 showed that the effects not only of unreinforced exposure to a stimulus but also of presentation of the stimulus uncorrelated with the delivery of water were confined to the context in which they occurred. Thus the generalization of conditioning from one context to another and the failure of latent inhibition to generalize cannot be attributed to the occurrence of rein-forcers during conditioning and their absence in latent inhibition. This conclusion was confirmed in Experiment 3, where animals received both aversive conditioning trials and unreinforced presentations of other stimuli in the treatment phase of the experiment, but were then conditioned to one of these stimuli paired with water. Once again, the effects of aversive conditioning transferred perfectly from one context to another, while those of unreinforced presentations did not. Latent inhibition, these results suggest, is not easily explained by supposing that animals associate an unreinforced stimulus with zero consequences and have to unlearn this association when the stimulus is then paired with a reinforcer.