Posttraining shifts in the overshadowing stimulus–unconditioned stimulus interval alleviates the overshadowing deficit.

Two conditioned lick suppression experiments explored the effects on overshadowing of a posttraining change in the temporal relationship between the overshadowing conditioned stimulus (CS) and the unconditioned stimulus (US). Rats received either trace (Experiment 1) or delay (Experiment 2) overshadowing training. Then pairings of the overshadowing CS and US were given with either a trace or delay temporal relationship. Overshadowing was alleviated by shifting the overshadowing CS–US temporal relationship so that it no longer matched the overshadowed CS–US temporal relationship. These outcomes are explicable in terms of an integration of the comparator hypothesis, which states that cue competition effects (e.g., overshadowing) will be maximal when the information potentially conveyed by competing CSs is equivalent, and the temporal coding hypothesis, which states that CS–US intervals are part of the information encoded during conditioning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Temporal Learning in Random Control Procedures.

Experiments 1 and 2 delivered conditioned stimuli (CSs) at random times and unconditioned stimuli (USs) at either fixed (Experiment 1) or random (Experiment 2) intervals. In Experiment 3, CS duration was manipulated, and US deliveries occurred at random during the background. In all 3 experiments, the mean rate of responding (head entries into the food cup) in the background was determined by the mean US-US interval, and the mean rate during the CS was a linear combination of responding controlled by the mean US-US and mean CS onset-US intervals; the pattern of responding in time was determined by the interval distribution form (fixed or random). An event-based timing account, Packet theory, provided an explanation of the results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Duration of signals for intertrial reinforcement and nonreinforcement in random control procedures.

In the random control procedure, responding to a conditioned stimulus (target CS) is prevented when the probability of unsignaled, unconditioned stimuli (UCS) in the intertrial interval (ITI) is equal to the probability of the UCS in the presence of the target CS. Three experiments used an autoshaping procedure with White Carneaux pigeons to examine the effects of the temporal duration of signals for the ITI UCS (cover CSs) and for concomitant periods of nonreinforcement. In Experiment 1, a short duration cover, but not a long duration cover, resulted in responding to the target CS. In Experiment 2, an explicit CS– cue during periods of nonreinforcement did not affect target acquisition. In Experiment 3, a long CS–, but not a short cover CS, was a sufficient condition for the acquisition of responding to the target CS. These results imply that the acquisition of responding to a target CS requires a discriminable period of nonreinforcement that is long relative to the target CS duration. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Response rates track the history of reinforcement times.

When conditioning involves a consistent temporal relationship between the conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (US), the expression of conditioned responses within a trial peaks at the usual time of the US relative to the CS. Here we examine the temporal profile of responses during conditioning with variable CS–US intervals. We conditioned stimuli with either uniformly distributed or exponentially distributed random CS–US intervals. In the former case, the frequency of each CS–US interval within a specified range is uniform but the momentary probability of the US (the hazard function) increases as time elapses during the trial; with the latter distribution, short CS–US intervals are more frequent than longer intervals, but the momentary probability of the US is constant across time within the trial. We report that, in a magazine approach paradigm, rats' response rates remained stable as time elapses during the CS when the CS–US intervals were uniformly distributed, whereas their response rates declined when the CS–US intervals were exponentially distributed. In other words, the profile of responding during the CS matched the frequency distribution of the US times, not the momentary probability of the US during the CS. These results are inconsistent with real-time associative models, which predict that associative strength tracks the momentary probability of the US, but may provide support for timing models of conditioning in which conditioned responding is tied to remembered times of reinforcement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stimulus competition between a discrete cue and a training context: Cue competition does not result from the division of a limited resource.

Several associative learning theories explain cue competition as resulting from the division of a limited resource among competing cues. This leads to an assumption that behavioral control by 2 cues competing with each other should always reflect a tradeoff, resulting in apparent conservation of total reinforcer value across all competing cues. This assumption was tested in 3 conditioned lick suppression experiments with rats, investigating the effects of changing the conditioned stimulus (CS) duration (Experiment 1), administering pretraining exposures to the CS (Experiment 2), and presenting nonreinforced CSs during the intertrial interval (Experiment 3) on Pavlovian conditioned responding to both the CS and the conditioning context. Fear conditioned to the context and to the CS decreased when the CS was of longer duration, massively preexposed before being paired with the reinforcer, or presented alone during the intertrial interval. These observations are problematic for the theories that explain cue competition as the division of a limited resource and suggest that the total reinforcer value across competing cues is not always fixed for a given reinforcer. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Role of stimulus ambiguity in conditional learning.

Three experiments using rats and the conditioned emotional response procedure examined the notion that when a conditioned stimulus (CS) is paired with a reinforcer (US), that CS must be ambiguous if the CS–US association is to become the target of conditional control. CS ambiguity was manipulated by varying whether the CS had been preexposed prior to conditioning. In Experiments 1 and 2, it was demonstrated that a cue that accompanied pairings of a CS and shock acquired conditional control over the CS–shock association when that CS had been preexposed, but not when it was novel. The measure of conditional control in Experiments 1 and 2 was the ability of the (conditional) cue to enhance responding to the target CS. Experiment 3 used a blocking procedure to show that this enhancement reflected an amplification of the target CS's effective associative strength. These findings extend existing knowledge of the conditions required for conditional cue formation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Overshadowing and summation in compound stimulus conditioning of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response.

Examined acquisition of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response to a light?+?tone simultaneous compound stimulus and its components as a function of the intensity of the tone. In Exp I, the tone intensity was varied across the values of 85, 89, and 93 db, and the CS–UCS interval was 400 msec. In Exp II, the tone intensities were 73, 85, and 93 db, and the CS–UCS interval was 800 msec. Exps III and IV further examined the effects of the 73-db CS–UCS tone at CS–UCS intervals of 400 and 800 msec. All experiments included control groups, which were trained with either a light or a tone CS. Overall results show repeated instances of overshadowing: the impairment of CR acquisition to one or both of the components of a compound. Two types of summation were obtained: within-Ss summation, in which Ss trained with a compound showed a higher level of responding to the compound than to either of its component CSs; and between-groups summation, in which a group trained with a compound showed faster CR acquisition than either of its corresponding control groups trained with a single CS. Results are discussed in terms of perceptual and distributive processing models of compound stimulus conditioning. (37 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intertrial unconditioned stimuli preferentially interfere with delay conditioning.

One way to minimize excitation acquired by the conditioned stimulus (CS) is to introduce intertrial presentations of the unconditioned stimulus (US). However, even in the presence of frequent intertrial USs, Experiments 1a and 1b found that rats anticipated the customary arrival time of a food pellet US when it occurred before (embedded)—versus coincident with (delay)—the termination of a white noise CS. Delay conditioning emerged in Experiment 2 in the absence of intertrial USs; hence, the detrimental effects of intertrial USs depended on the CS-US relationship, delay versus embedded, and not the duration of CS-US interval. Experiments 3a, 3b, and 4 found that random USs located in the early portion of the intertrial interval increased the control acquired by contextual stimuli at the expense of temporal stimuli occasioned near CS termination. Our results suggest that delay relationships leave the CS especially vulnerable to the deleterious effects of intertrial USs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Conditioning across the duration of a backward conditioned stimulus.

Five conditioned suppression experiments examined the extent to which an appetitively motivated lever-press response can be punished by different components of a backward conditioned stimulus (CS). Using a 0-s unconditioned stimulus UCS–CS interval, Experiments 1 and 2 showed that the initial 3 s of a normally 30-s backward CS served as a more effective punisher than the CS as a whole, Experiment 3 found no such effect if the UCS–CS interval were 3 s rather than 0 s. Experiments 4A and 4B found that if the UCS–CS interval were 0 s, the initial part of the backward CS acquired excitatory properties although the CS as a whole passed a summation test for conditioned inhibition. By contrast, the 3-s UCS–CS interval supported inhibitory conditioning across the whole duration of the backward CS. Taken together, these findings support a modified version of Wagner's sometimes opponent process model, which suggests that different components of a backward CS become either excitatory or inhibitory depending on the components' temporal proximity to the UCS. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Relationships among age, conditioned stimulus–unconditioned stimulus interval, and neuropsychological test performance.

To evaluate the effect of age at various conditioned stimulus (CS)–unconditioned stimulus (US) intervals, 144 young, middle-aged, and older adults were tested on eyeblink classical conditioning at CS–US intervals of 500, 1,000, or 1,500 ms. Reaction time, response timing, motor learning, declarative memory, and attention were assessed to identify correlates of conditioning at various CS–US intervals. Previously reported middle-aged and older adults were impaired at a 400-ms CS–US interval, but the addition of 100 ms to the CS–US interval in this study enabled equal conditioning in middle-aged and young adults. At a 1,000-ms CS–US interval, older adults remained significantly impaired. It was only at the 1,500-ms CS–US interval that conditioning was equal for the 3 age groups. Measures of reaction time, timing, and motor learning were not correlated systematically with conditioning. Whereas the results of age differences at various CS–US intervals were clear and striking, patterns of relationships among neuropsychological and conditioning variables were not consistent in indicating sources of age differences. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Temporal specificity of fear conditioning: Effects of different conditioned stimulus--unconditioned stimulus intervals on the fear-potentiated startle effect.

Separate groups of rats were given 30 pairings of a light (conditioned stimulus, CS) and a 500-ms shock (unconditioned stimulus, US) at CS–US intervals of 0, 25, 50, 100, 200, 800, 3,200, 12,800, or 51,200 ms. Other groups had lights and shocks inconsistently paired. The startle reflex was elicited 2–4 days later with a noise burst alone or 25–51,200 ms after light onset. After CS–US pairings over a range of intervals (25–51,200 ms), startle was potentiated in testing, as rapidly as 50 ms after light onset. Magnitude of potentiation and resistance to extinction were generally greater with longer CS–US intervals. In several groups, potentiation was maximal at a test interval that matched the CS–US interval used in training. This temporal specificity sharpened with increasing numbers of training trials but even occurred with a single training trial in which a 51,200-ms CS–US interval was used. Data indicate that even during simple fear conditioning (FC), animals rapidly learn a temporal CS–US relationship. This has implications for understanding the neural mechanisms of FC. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comparative electrophysiologic findings between responders and nonresponders to class III antiarrhythmic drugs among patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmia

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.     

Blocking of a CS–US association by a US–US association.

Pigeons were autoshaped with a keylight as the conditioned stimulus (CS) and food as the unconditioned stimulus (US). Preexposure to repeated US presentations was followed by training sessions in which a single US preceded a single CS–US pairing. Preexposure blocked conditioning to the CS only when the interval between the prior US and the US in the US–CS pairing (critical interval) was equal to the US–US interval in preexposure. Blocking was examined as a function of the length of the critical interval and the amount of preexposure. The hypothesis that blocking occurs because prior US predicts the time of arrival of the US in the CS–US pairing was supported by a reduction in blocking when USs separated by intervals longer than the critical interval were added to preexposure sessions. Certain other interpretations of these results were tested and rejected. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Degraded contingency revisited: Posttraining extinction of a cover stimulus attenuates a target cue's behavioral control.

In a Pavlovian conditioning situation, unsignaled outcome presentations interspersed among cue-outcome pairings attenuate conditioned responding to the cue (i.e., the degraded contingency effect). However, if a nontarget cue signals these added outcomes, responding to the target cue is partially restored (i.e., the cover stimulus effect). In 2 conditioned suppression experiments using rats, the effect of posttraining extinction of the cover stimulus was examined. Experiment 1 found that this treatment yielded reduced responding to the target cue. Experiment 2 replicated this finding, while demonstrating that this basic effect was not due to acquired equivalence between the target cue and the cover stimulus. These results are consistent with the extended comparator hypothesis interpretation of the degraded contingency and cover stimulus effects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Learned irrelevance exceeds the sum of CS-preexposure and US-preexposure deficits.

Barpress suppression by water-deprived rats was used to examine the retarded emergence of excitatory responding when a tone conditioned stimulus (CS) and a shock unconditioned stimulus (US) were paired following uncorrelated exposure to the CS and US. Experiment 1{a} established parameters whereby the retardation resulting from preconditioning CS-alone presentations (latent inhibition) was eliminated by presenting unpredictable, nontarget neutral stimuli (clicks) after each CS during the preconditioning phase, a treatment thought to maintain attention to the CS. Experiment 1{b} established parameters whereby the retardation resulting from preconditioning US-alone presentations was eliminated by preceding each US with a 2nd nontarget cue (a light) during the preconditioning phase, which presumably reduced acquisition of context–US associations. In Experiment 1{c}, the techniques to attenuate CS-preexposure and US-preexposure effects were imposed on a random schedule of CS and US presentations. Although this procedure reduced subsequent retardation, an appreciable response deficit remained. In Experiment 2 a context shift between CS-alone or US-alone presentations and subsequent CS–US pairings eliminated retardation, but retardation arising from uncorrelated exposures to the CS and US, albeit significantly reduced, transferred between contexts. These results suggest that the deficit resulting from preconditioning, uncorrelated exposures to the CS and US is composed of a CS preexposure effect, a US preexposure effect, and learned irrelevance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Conditioned inhibition produced by extinction-mediated recovery from the relative stimulus validity effect: A test of acquisition and performance models of empirical retrospective revaluation.

Empirical retrospective revaluation is a phenomenon of Pavlovian conditioning and human causal judgment in which posttraining changes in the conditioned response (Pavlovian task) or causal rating (causal judgment task) of a cue occurs in the absence of further training with that cue. Two experiments tested the contrasting predictions made by 2 families of models concerning retrospective revaluation effects. In a conditioned lick-suppression task, rats were given relative stimulus validity training, consisting of reinforcing a compound of conditioned stimuli (CSs) A and X and nonreinforcement of a compound of CSs B and X, which resulted in low conditioned responding to CS X. Massive posttraining extinction of CS A not only enhanced excitatory responding to CS X, but caused CS B to pass both summation (Experiment 1) and retardation (Experiment 2) tests for conditioned inhibition. The inhibitory status of CS B is predicted by the performance-focused extended comparator hypothesis (J. C. Denniston, H. I. Savastano, & R. R. Miller, 2001), but not by acquisition-focused models of empirical retrospective revaluation (e.g., A. Dickinson & J. Burke, 1996; L. J. Van Hamme & E. A. Wasserman, 1994). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stimulus Processing and Associative Learning in Wistar and WKHA Rats.

This study assessed basic learning and attention abilities in Wistar-Kyoto hyperactive (WKHA) rats using appetitive conditioning preparations. Two measures of conditioned responding to a visual stimulus, orienting behavior (rearing on the hind legs), and food cup behavior (placing the head inside the recessed food cup) were measured. In Experiment 1, simple conditioning, but not extinction, was impaired in WKHA rats compared with Wistar rats. In Experiment 2, nonreinforced presentations of the visual cue preceded the conditioning sessions. WKHA rats displayed less orienting behavior than Wistar rats but comparable levels of food cup behavior. These data suggest that WKHA rats exhibit specific abnormalities in attentional processing as well as in learning stimulus-reward relationships. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The temporal dynamics of a visual discrimination: The role of stimulus comparison and opponent processes.

The influence of trial spacing on simple conditioning is well established: When successive reinforced conditioned stimulus, CS+, trials are separated by a short interval (massed training), conditioned responding emerges less rapidly than when such trials are separated by longer intervals (spaced training). This study examined the influence of trial spacing on the acquisition of an appetitive visual discrimination in rats. Experiments 1 and 2 established that massed training facilitates the acquisition of such discriminations. The results of subsequent experiments demonstrated that this trial-spacing effect reflects the proximity of nonreinforced, CS-, trials to preceding (Experiment 3) and signaled (Experiment 4) presentations of the reinforcer. Experiment 5 showed that the facilitation of discrimination learning with massed training reflected an effect on learning rather than performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)