Probability of shock in the presence and absence of CS in fear conditioning.
01 Aug 1968-Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology (J Comp Physiol Psychol)-Vol. 66, Iss: 1, pp 1-5
TL;DR: 2 experiments indicate that CS-US contingency is an important determinant of fear conditioning and that presentation of US in the absence of CS interferes with fear conditioning.
Abstract: 2 experiments indicate that CS-US contingency is an important determinant of fear conditioning and that presentation of US in the absence of CS interferes with fear conditioning. In Experiment 1, equal probability of a shock US in the presence and absence of a tone CS produced no CER suppression to CS; the same probability of US given only during CS produced substantial conditioning. In Experiment 2, which explored 4 different probabilities of US in the presence and absence of CS, amount of conditioning was higher the greater the probability of US during CS and was lower the greater the probability of US in the absence of CS; when the 2 probabilities were equal, no conditioning resulted. Two conceptions of Pavlovian conditioning have been distinguished by Rescorla (1967). The first, and more traditional, notion emphasizes the role of the number of pairings of CS and US in the formation of a CR. The second notion suggests that it is the contingency between CS and US which is important. The notion of contingency differs from that of pairing in that it includes not only what events are paired but also what events are not paired. As used here, contingency refers to the relative probability of occurrence of US in the presence of CS as contrasted with its probability in the absence of CS. The contingency notion suggests that, in fact, conditioning only occurs when these probabilities differ; when the probability of US is higher during CS than at other times, excitatory conditioning occurs; when the probability is lower, inhibitory conditioning results. Notice that the probability of a US can be the same in the absence and presence of CS and yet there can be a fair number of CS-US pairings. It is this that makes it possible to assess the relative importance of pairing and contingency in the development of a CR. Several experiments have pointed to the usefulness of the contingency notion. Rescorla (1966) reported a Pavlovian 1This research was supported by Grants MH13415-01 from the National Institute of Mental Health and GB-6493 from the National Science Foundation, as well as by funds from Yale University.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This paper illustrates how the Widrow-Hoff rule offers unexpected opportunities for the computational simulation of a range of language phenomena that make it possible to approach old problems from a novel perspective.
Abstract: In this paper we present the Widrow-Hoff rule and its applications to language data. After contextualizing the rule historically and placing it in the chain of neurally inspired artificial learning models, we explain its rationale and implementational considerations. Using a number of case studies we illustrate how the Widrow-Hoff rule offers unexpected opportunities for the computational simulation of a range of language phenomena that make it possible to approach old problems from a novel perspective.
11 citations
Cites background or methods from "Probability of shock in the presenc..."
...This was made possible through the implementation of the Rescorla-Wagner rule as the Naive Discrimination Learner (NDL) by Baayen, Milin, Đurđević, Hendrix, and Marelli (2011). NDL...
[...]
...First, the background rate of informative (associated or correlated) and non-informative examples crucially affects the learning performance (cf., Rescorla, 1968)....
[...]
01 Sep 2016
TL;DR: Investigating whether human-robot interaction can be improved by a robot's nonverbal warning signals found that participants who learned the relation between gestures and performance improved collaboration with the robot through prevention behavior immediately after a predictive gesture.
Abstract: The present research was aimed at investigating whether human-robot interaction (HRI) can be improved by a robot's nonverbal warning signals. Ideally, when a robot signals that it cannot guarantee good performance, people could take preventive actions to ensure the successful completion of the robot's task. In two experiments, participants learned either that a robot's gestures predicted subsequent poor performance, or they did not. Participants evaluated a robot that uses predictive gestures as more trustworthy, understandable, and reliable compared to a robot that uses gestures that are not predictive of their performance. Finally, participants who learned the relation between gestures and performance improved collaboration with the robot through prevention behavior immediately after a predictive gesture. This limits the negative consequences of the robot's mistakes, thus improving the interaction.
11 citations
Additional excerpts
...Contingency learning works regardless deviations from a strict contiguity of the CS with the US (i.e., whether the CS occurs at the same time as the US), as shown by Rescorla (1968)....
[...]
TL;DR: A situation conducive to a pervasive mutual interference effect is described, and further analyses lend support to one of the key tenets of the model, namely that the pattern of interference depends on the relative strength of the two competing pathways.
Abstract: The asymmetry of interference in a Stroop task usually refers to the well-documented result that incongruent colour words slow colour naming (Stroop effect) but incongruent colours do not slow colo...
11 citations
Cites background from "Probability of shock in the presenc..."
...Since Rescorla (1968), the associative learning tradition, extended by recent studies on statistical learning (see Perruchet & PoulinCharronnat, 2012, for linking the two domains together), emphasizes the pervasive role of the contingency between events in the strengthening of associative relations....
[...]
11 citations
TL;DR: The results imply that propositional knowledge about the CS-US relationship, as reflected in contingency judgments, moderates evaluative learning.
Abstract: An experiment is reported studying the impact of objective contingency and contingency judgments on cross-modal evaluative conditioning (EC). Both contingency judgments and evaluative responses were measured after a contingency learning task in which previously neutral sounds served as either weak or strong predictors of affective pictures. Experimental manipulations of contingency and US density were shown to affect contingency judgments. Stronger contingencies were perceived with high contingency and with low US density. The contingency learning task also produced a reliable EC effect. The magnitude of this effect was influenced by an interaction of statistical contingency and US density. Furthermore, the magnitude of EC was correlated with the subjective contingency judgments. Taken together, the results imply that propositional knowledge about the CS-US relationship, as reflected in contingency judgments, moderates evaluative learning. The data are discussed with respect to different accounts of EC.
11 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: This "truly random" control procedure leads to a new conception of Pavlovian conditioning postulating that the contingency between CS and US, rather than the pairing of CS andUS, is the important event in conditioning.
Abstract: The traditional control procedures for Pavlovian conditioning are examined and each is found wanting. Some procedures introduce nonassociative factors not present in the experimental procedure while others transform the excitatory, experimental CS-US contingency into an inhibitory contingency. An alternative control procedure is suggested in which there is no contingency whatsoever between CS and US. This \"truly random\" control procedure leads to a new conception of Pavlovian conditioning postulating that the contingency between CS and US, rather than the pairing of CS and US, is the important event in conditioning. The fruitfulness of this new conception of Pavlovian conditioning is illustrated by 2 experimental results.
1,328 citations
301 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, three groups of dogs were trained with different kinds of Pavlovian fear conditioning for three different types of dogs: randomly and independently; for a second group, CSs predicted the occurrence of USs; and for a third group, S predicted the absence of the USs.
Abstract: Three groups of dogs were Sidman avoidance trained They then received different kinds of Pavlovian fear conditioning For one group CSs and USs occurred randomly and independently; for a second group, CSs predicted the occurrence of USs; for a third group, CSs predicted the absence of the USs The CSs were subsequently presented while S performed the avoidance response CSs which had predicted the occurrence or the absence of USs produced, respectively, increases and decreases in avoidance rate For the group with random CSs and USs in conditioning, the CS had no effect upon avoidance
160 citations
64 citations
TL;DR: Rats in an experimental group were given 30 trials of differential CER and then the CS+ and CS− were combined during CER extinction, resulting in less suppression for the experimental group than shown by a control group, interpreted as a demonstration of the active inhibitory properties of CS−.
Abstract: Rats in an experimental group were given 30 trials of differential CER and then the CS+ and CS− were combined during CER extinction. The combination resulted in less suppression for the experimental group than shown by a control group which had a CS+ and a formerly random stimulus combined during extinction. This was interpreted as a demonstration of the active inhibitory properties of CS−.
44 citations
"Probability of shock in the presenc..." refers background in this paper
...Although such an account is plausible for the present data, it fails to explain the active inhibition of fear found by Rescorla and LoLordo (1965), Rescorla (1966), and Hammond (1967)....
[...]