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: Parametric manipulation of landmark stability offers an intriguing way of influencing the process of spatial representation and thus understanding better the processes through which egocentric representations of perceived space are transformed into allocentric representation of the real world.
Abstract: To investigate whether spatial learning complies with associative learning theories or with theories of cognitive mapping, rats were trained in three experiments exploring the effect of variations in spatial predictive relationships. In experiment 1, it was found that making one of two landmarks the sole spatial predictor of reward, by varying the spatial relationship between reward and other cues, reduced the control over search exerted by that landmark compared with that observed when the landmark and context cues were both reliable predictors of reward location. This requirement for landmark stability rather than predictive power appears to contradict results obtained in conventional conditioning paradigms. Discrimination learning was unaffected, suggesting a dissociation between discrimination and spatial learning with respect to the influence of geometric stability. Further experiments used arrays of both single and multiple landmarks. Experiment 2 revealed that the stability of a single landmark improved accuracy of search, but also showed that local stability between a pair of landmarks that moved around the arena together was sufficient to support spatial learning. Experiment 3 examined landmark stability using fixed directional cues in the absence of vestibular disorientation. This also revealed a relative advantage of stable landmarks, but animals presented with a landmark that moved from trial to trial did show some evidence of learning. Parametric manipulation of landmark stability offers an intriguing way of influencing the process of spatial representation and thus understanding better the processes through which egocentric representations of perceived space are transformed into allocentric representations of the real world.
87 citations
Cites background from "Probability of shock in the presenc..."
...Rescorla (1968) found that the associative strength of a conditioned stimulus depends on how well it predicts the unconditioned stimulus....
[...]
86 citations
TL;DR: A modification of Toates's (1981) incentive model of ingestive behavior was suggested to incorporate relativity effects based on both associative and nonassociative factors in the consumption of both nutritive and nonnutritive substances.
Abstract: Contrast effects were obtained in rats in the consumption of saccharin solutions in three different paradigms. Degree of negative contrast varied as a function of concentration disparity, but not equally in the three procedures. Successive negative contrast occurred following shifts from 0.15% to either 0.075% or 0.05% saccharin but did not occur following shifts to 0.10% or 0.125% saccharin. Some degree of simultaneous contrast was obtained with all four concentration disparities. Anticipatory contrast, where the intake of the first substance is suppressed by a more preferred second substance, occurred only in the case of the 0.05%-0.15% difference in concentrations. It was suggested that the several contrast paradigms engage somewhat different psychological processes differentially involving emotional, sensory, and associative mechanisms, but all lead to behavior based on relative value. A modification of Toates's (1981) incentive model of ingestive behavior was suggested to incorporate relativity effects based on both associative and nonassociative factors in the consumption of both nutritive and nonnutritive substances.
84 citations
TL;DR: This chapter presents data that bears directly on the existence of cognitive deficit and proposes that the deficit stems either from perceptual or from expectational bias toward non-contingency, and examines evidence bearing on the judgment of contingency in animals and humans as it bears on helplessness theory.
Abstract: Publisher Summary This chapter presents data that bears directly on the existence of cognitive deficit and proposes that the deficit stems either from perceptual or from expectational bias toward non-contingency The learned helplessness theory successfully integrates the animal and human data within a single theoretical framework The present state of animal research strongly indicates that helpless animals have trouble learning later contingencies but has not yet isolated whether the deficit is perceptual or expectational The present state of human research tends less strongly to indicate that depressed and helpless humans have trouble learning later contingencies Learned helplessness argues that organisms actively form a subjective representation of the degree to which an outcome is dependent upon responses This representation has been variously called a perception, belief, or expectation of control The learned helplessness theory is cognitive It is one of the few learning theories which postulates subjective representations of contingencies as a mediator between objective contingencies and behavioral effects The chapter examines evidence bearing on the judgment of contingency in animals and humans as it bears on helplessness theory The chapter also critically examines the findings offered in support of cognitive deficit in helpless animals and humans, with particular reference to the separation of this deficit from hypothesized motivation and activity
82 citations
TL;DR: These findings provide the most direct evidence yet available that the mechanisms of LTP are recruited in the experimental animals during behavioral training and that such mechanisms might be utilized for memory storage.
Abstract: Fear conditioning, during which emotional significance is attached to an initially biologically insignificant conditioned stimulus, when such neutral stimulus is paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus, provides an experimental paradigm that is most commonly used to study fear learning The amygdala, a sub-cortical nuclear group, is a brain structure critically important for fear conditioning Recent studies indicate that both fear conditioning-induced neuronal plasticity and LTP at the amygdala synapses share common mechanisms of induction and expression These findings provide the most direct evidence yet available that the mechanisms of LTP are recruited in the experimental animals during behavioral training and that such mechanisms might be utilized for memory storage
82 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)....
[...]