A transfer of control test for contextual associations

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

McCue

Lázaro‐Muñoz

et al. 2013

Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) is an effect whereby a classically conditioned stimulus (CS) enhances ongoing instrumental responding. PIT has been extensively studied with appetitive conditioning but barely at all with aversive conditioning. Although it's been argued that conditioned suppression is a form of aversive PIT, this effect is fundamentally different from appetitive PIT because the CS suppresses, instead of facilitates, responding. Five experiments investigated the importance of a variety of factors on aversive PIT in a rodent Sidman avoidance paradigm in which ongoing shuttling behavior (unsignaled active avoidance or USAA) was facilitated by an aversive CS. Experiment 1 demonstrated a basic PIT effect. Experiment 2 found that a moderate amount of USAA extinction produces the strongest PIT with shuttling rates best at around 2 responses per minute prior to the CS. Experiment 3 tested a protocol in which the USAA behavior was required to reach the 2-response per minute mark in order to trigger the CS presentation and found that this produced robust and reliable PIT. Experiment 4 found that the Pavlovian conditioning US intensity was not a major determinant of PIT strength. Experiment 5 demonstrated that if the CS and US were not explicitly paired during Pavlovian conditioning, PIT did not occur, showing that CS-US learning is required. Together, these studies demonstrate a robust, reliable and stable aversive PIT effect that is amenable to analysis of neural circuitry.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Development of an aversive Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer task in rat

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

McCue

Lázaro‐Muñoz

et al. 2013

“…However, an aversive CS is also capable of controlling the performance of goal-directed behaviors. This is illustrated by aversive Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT: Bolles and Popp, 1964 ; Rescorla and Lolordo, 1965 ; Rescorla, 1968 ; Weisman and Litner, 1969 ; Overmier and Payne, 1971 ; Overmier and Brackbill, 1977 ; Patterson and Overmier, 1981 ) and other related aversive instrumental learning phenomena (see LeDoux et al, 2016 ). In PIT, a previously trained aversive CS enhances the rate at which subjects perform avoidance behaviors (e.g., two-way shuttling) that terminate threats and prevent harm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pavlovian Extinction and Recovery Effects in Aversive Pavlovian to Instrumental Transfer

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

Kim

Rojas

et al. 2017

Three studies explored the sensitivity of aversive Pavlovian to instrumental transfer (PIT) to Pavlovian extinction in rodents. Rats underwent Pavlovian conditioning prior to avoidance training. The PIT test then involved assessment of the effects of the Pavlovian conditioned stimulus (CS) on the performance of the avoidance response (AR). Conducting extinction prior to avoidance training and transfer testing, allowed spontaneous recovery and shock reinstatement of extinguished motivation, whereas conducting extinction following avoidance training and just prior to PIT testing successfully reduced transfer effects. This was also the case in a design that compared responding to an extinguished CS against a non-extinguished CS rather than comparing extinguished and non-extinguished groups to one another. While extinction treatments in many appetitive PIT studies do not successfully reduce transfer, and can sometimes enhance the effect, the current findings show that an extinction treatment temporally close to transfer testing can reduce the motivational impact of the aversive Pavlovian CS on instrumental avoidance responding.

“…In addition to eliciting simple CRs, Pavlovian cues can also motivate or enhance other actions that are associated with the US through prior experience. For example, in Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) a previously shock-paired CS, rather than generating passive freezing CRs, increases the rate of ongoing active footshock avoidance behavior (e.g., two-way shuttling; Campese et al, 2013; also see Rescorla and Lolordo, 1965; Weisman and Litner, 1969; Overmier and Payne, 1971; Overmier and Brackbill, 1977; Patterson and Overmier, 1981). In recent work, we have begun to explore the neural basis of aversive PIT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noradrenergic Regulation of Central Amygdala in Aversive Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer

Soroeta

Vazey³

et al. 2017

eNeuro

The neural mechanisms through which a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus (CS) elicits innate defense responses are well understood. But a Pavlovian CS can also invigorate ongoing instrumental responding, as shown by studies of aversive Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT). While the neural circuitry of appetitive PIT has been studied extensively, little is known about the brain mechanisms of aversive PIT. We recently showed the central amygdala (CeA) is essential for aversive PIT. In the current studies, using pharmacology and designer receptors in rodents, we demonstrate that noradrenergic (NE) activity negatively regulates PIT via brainstem locus coeruleus (LC) activity and LC projections to CeA. Our results provide evidence for a novel pathway through which response modulation occurs between brainstem neuromodulatory systems and CeA to invigorate adaptive behavior in the face of threat.