| Abstract: | Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 118(3) of Behavioral Neuroscience (see record 2007-16851-001). The article contained several errors. On page 396, second paragraph, the sentence beginning on line 6 should read as follows: "Having a stable baseline is critical for studies of reflex facilitation because the experimental designs invariably entail repetitive CR testing, if only to achieve reasonable statistical power (see Choi et al., 2001b; Lindquist & Brown, 2004)." On page 400, the first heading should read as follows: "Comparison of New and Old Reflex Facilitation Procedures". On page 400, the first sentence under the abovementioned heading should read as follows: "We decided not to use the original measure of reflex facilitation, developed by J. S. Brown et al. (1951), because it suffers from severe interpretational limitations, elaborated in detail elsewhere (Choi et al., 2001b; Leaton & Cranney, 1990; Lindquist & Brown, 2004)."] Temporal encoding in Pavlovian fear conditioning was examined through conditional facilitation of the short-latency (Rl) component of the rat eyeblink reflex. Rats were fear-conditioned to a tone conditional stimulus (CS) with either a 3- or 9-s interstimulus interval (ISI) between CS onset and the onset of the grid-shock unconditional stimulus (US). Rl facilitation was tested over 2 days, in counterbalanced order, at a latency of 3 s and 9 s from CS onset. CS-produced Rl facilitation, the conditional response (CR), was 3-4 times larger when the test latency equaled the conditioning ISI. These results, coupled with the known neurophysiology of Rl facilitation, suggest that this CR could disclose differences in the time course of CS-generated output from the amygdala when driven by cortical versus subcortical CS-CR pathways. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
