Classic conditioning in aged rabbits: Delay, trace, and long-delay conditioning.

Solomon, Paul R.; Groccia-Ellison, MaryEllen

doi:10.1037/0735-7044.110.3.427

Cited by 58 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Solomon and Groccia-Ellison (1996) found that the trace procedure is more difficult to learn than the long-delay procedure, with CS-US onset interval the same in both. L. found that aged rabbits were much more impaired on trace than comparable long-delay conditioning.…”

Section: Trace Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 96%

Neural Substrates of Eyeblink Conditioning: Acquisition and Retention

Christian¹,

Thompson²

2003

Learn. Mem.

565

473

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classical conditioning of the eyeblink reflex to a neutral stimulus that predicts an aversive stimulus is a basic form of associative learning. Acquisition and retention of this learned response require the cerebellum and associated sensory and motor pathways and engage several other brain regions including the hippocampus, neocortex, neostriatum, septum, and amygdala. The cerebellum and its associated circuitry form the essential neural system for delay eyeblink conditioning. Trace eyeblink conditioning, a learning paradigm in which the conditioned and unconditioned stimuli are noncontiguous, requires both the cerebellum and the hippocampus and exhibits striking parallels to declarative memory formation in humans. Identification of the neural structures critical to the development and maintenance of the conditioned eyeblink response is an essential precursor to the investigation of the mechanisms responsible for the formation of these associative memories. In this review, we describe the evidence used to identify the neural substrates of classical eyeblink conditioning and potential mechanisms of memory formation in critical regions of the hippocampus and cerebellum. Addressing a central goal of behavioral neuroscience, exploitation of this simple yet robust model of learning and memory has yielded one of the most comprehensive descriptions to date of the physical basis of a learned behavior in mammals.

show abstract

Section: Trace Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 96%

Neural Substrates of Eyeblink Conditioning: Acquisition and Retention

Christian¹,

Thompson²

2003

Learn. Mem.

565

473

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SCRs were slightly larger on unperceived trace CS than on unperceived trace CS trials, and perhaps significant differences would have been observed had it not been for other factors that can influence conditioning. For example, trace procedures appear to be more difficult than delay conditioning, and increasing task difficulty often interferes with CR acquisition (Carter et al, 2003;Solomon & Groccia-Ellison, 1996;Thompson, Moyer, & Disterhoft, 1996). In addition, the duration of the trace CS was shortened to maintain the same interstimulus interval between CS onset and UCS presentation for the delay and trace procedures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of awareness in delay and trace fear conditioning in humans

Knight

Nguyen

Bandettini

2006

Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expression of conditional fear without awareness has been previously demonstrated during delay conditioning, a procedure in which the conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (UCS) overlap. However, less is known about the role of awareness in trace fear conditioning, where an interval of time separates the CS and UCS. The present study assessed skin conductance response (SCR) and UCS expectancy during delay and trace conditioning. UCS predictability was varied on a trial-bytrial basis by presenting perithreshold auditory CSs. Differential UCS expectancies were demonstrated only on perceived delay and trace trials. Learning-related SCRs were observed during both perceived and unperceived delay CSs. In contrast, differential SCRs were demonstrated only for perceived trace CSs. These data suggest that awareness is necessary for conditional responding during trace, but not delay, fear conditioning.

show abstract

“…To equate the interstimulus interval (ISI) (750 ms) between the CS and US in the delay versus trace paradigms, an 850 ms CS that overlapped and coterminated with a 100 ms US was used during delay conditioning. Thus, this version of delay conditioning differs from the standard delay procedure, which typically incorporates a shorter CS and ISI (Solomon and Groccia-Ellison, 1996;Gould et al, 1999;Ivkovich and Stanton, 2001). During very long delay conditioning, the ISI was extended to 1400 ms such that a CS of 1500 ms overlapped and coterminated with a 100 ms US.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal Discontiguity Is neither Necessary nor Sufficient for Learning-Induced Effects on Adult Neurogenesis

Leuner¹,

Waddell²,

Gould³

et al. 2006

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some, but not all, types of learning and memory can influence neurogenesis in the adult hippocampus. Trace eyeblink conditioning has been shown to enhance the survival of new neurons, whereas delay eyeblink conditioning has no such effect. The key difference between the two training procedures is that the conditioning stimuli are separated in time during trace but not delay conditioning. These findings raise the question of whether temporal discontiguity is necessary for enhancing the survival of new neurons. Here we used two approaches to test this hypothesis. First, we examined the influence of a delay conditioning task in which the duration of the conditioned stimulus (CS) was increased nearly twofold, a procedure that critically engages the hippocampus. Although the CS and unconditioned stimulus are contiguous, this very long delay conditioning procedure increased the number of new neurons that survived. Second, we examined the influence of learning the trace conditioned response (CR) after having acquired the CR during delay conditioning, a procedure that renders trace conditioning hippocampal-independent. In this case, trace conditioning did not enhance the survival of new neurons. Together, these results demonstrate that associative learning increases the survival of new neurons in the adult hippocampus, regardless of temporal contiguity.

show abstract

Classic conditioning in aged rabbits: Delay, trace, and long-delay conditioning.

Cited by 58 publications

References 21 publications

Neural Substrates of Eyeblink Conditioning: Acquisition and Retention

Neural Substrates of Eyeblink Conditioning: Acquisition and Retention

The role of awareness in delay and trace fear conditioning in humans

Temporal Discontiguity Is neither Necessary nor Sufficient for Learning-Induced Effects on Adult Neurogenesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About