Failure to Block Control by a Relevant Stimulus

LoLordo, Vincent M.; Jacobs, W. J.; Foree, Donald D.

doi:10.1037/e666602011-388

Cited by 16 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Miller's interpretation was that an association (i.e., between the noise CS and the illness US, or between the saccharin CS and the footshock US) had not been established during Phase 1. Similarly, LoLordo, Jacobs, and Foree (1982) observed that selective associations were not blocked in pigeons. In one study, pigeons responded for food reinforcement with a noise CS in Phase I, followed by a compound light-noise stimulus in Phase 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmentation, not blocking, in an A+/AX+ flavor-conditioning procedure

Batson

Batsell

2000

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An A+/AX+ Pavlovian conditioning design typically produces weakened or blocked conditioning to stimulus X. Two experiments were conducted in which rats first received an odor (A+) paired with an emetic US, and then received odor and taste (AX+) paired with the US. In both experiments, the preconditioned odor facilitated conditioning to the taste. In Experiment 1, a group that received two odor-illness pairings in A+ conditioning had a stronger taste aversion than a group that only had a single odor-illness pairing. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the strengthened taste aversion in the A+/AX+ condition was not due to stimulus generalization. The results represent a unique outcome in the flavor-aversion literature that is similar to potentiation. Wepropose that this facilitated conditioning to X in the A+/AX+ design be termed augmentation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmentation, not blocking, in an A+/AX+ flavor-conditioning procedure

Batson

Batsell

2000

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most previous studies of CS effects have not identified such a large constellation of phenomena related to the nature of the CS. The strongest precedent for our f indings comes from studies of nonsexual appetitive and aversive conditioning, showing that the use of a biologically significant CS can attenuate blocking and other stimulus competition effects (Feldman, 1975;LoLordo et al, 1982;Miller & Matute, 1996;Oberling et al, 2000).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Miller and Matute (1996) demonstrated that blocking is less likely if the to-beblocked stimulus is of greater "biological significance," as measured by the vigor of baseline responding to that stimulus (see also Oberling, Bristol, Matute, & Miller, 2000). In other research, LoLordo et al (1982) found that a CS that is more relevant to the US is resistant to the blocking effect in appetitive and aversive conditioning with pigeons.…”

Section: Resistance Of a Naturalistic Cs To Blockingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning with arbitrary versus ecological conditioned stimuli: Evidence from sexual conditioning

Domjan

Cusato

Krause

2004

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratory investigations of Pavlovian conditioning typically involve the association of an arbitrary conditioned stimulus (CS) with an unconditioned stimulus (US) that has no inherent relation to the CS. However, arbitrary CSs are unlikely to become conditioned outside the laboratory, because they do not occur often enough with the US to result in an association. Learning under natural circumstances is likely only if the CS has a preexisting relation to the US. Recent studies of sexual conditioning have shown that in contrast to an arbitrary CS, an ecologically relevant CS is resistant to blocking, extinction, and increases in the CS-US interval and results in sensitized responding and stronger secondorder conditioning. Although the mechanisms of these effects are not fully understood, these findings have shown that signature learning phenomena are significantly altered when the kinds of stimuli that are likely to become conditioned under natural circumstances are used. The implications of these findings for an ecological approach to the study of learning are discussed.

show abstract

“…Evidence of the role of stimulus relevance in the blocking effect was obtained by LoLordo, Jacobs, and Foree (1982). In earlier research, Foree and LoLordo (1973) found that, in pigeons, auditory cues are more effective than visual cues in avoidance conditioning, whereas visual cues are more effectivethan auditory cues in conditioning reinforced with food.…”

mentioning

confidence: 88%

Blocking of the sexual conditioning of differentially effective conditioned stimulus objects

Köksal

Domjan

Weisman

1994

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The blocking phenomenon was investigated in the sexual response system of male Japanese quail. Access to a live female quail served as the unconditioned stimulus (US). The same audiovisual cue served as the pretrained stimulus in all ofthe experiments. Following asymptotic conditioning ofthe audiovisual cue, a second conditioned stimulus (CS2) was added. In Experiment 1, CS2 was a rectangular wood block that had little or no resemblance to a female quail and could not support copulatory behavior. In Experiment 2, CS2 was a terrycloth object that had no quail parts but could support copulatory behavior, and, in Experiment 3, CS2 was a terrycloth object that had a taxidermically prepared head of a female quail added. The terrycloth-only object supported more rapid conditioning than did the wood block, but the blocking effect was obtained with both kinds of stimuli. Approach responding to the terrycloth + head object required pairing it with copulatory opportunity, and the terrycloth + head object supported at least as rapid conditioning as did the terrycloth-only object. However, responding to the terrycloth + head object was not blocked by the pretrained audiovisual cue. These results indicate that the blocking effect occurs in sexual conditioning even with stimulus objects that can support copulation. However, the addition of species-typical head cues to an object makes that object such a powerful stimulus that conditioned approach responding to it cannot be blocked by a previously conditioned arbitrary audiovisual cue.One of the cornerstones of contemporary investigations and interpretations of Pavlovian conditioning is the blocking effect, which was originally demonstrated by Kamin (1969) in a standard fear conditioning preparation with rat subjects. In the first phase of the blocking experiment, the rats received a noise conditioned stimulus (CS) paired with a shock unconditioned stimulus (US).

show abstract

Failure to Block Control by a Relevant Stimulus

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Augmentation, not blocking, in an A+/AX+ flavor-conditioning procedure

Augmentation, not blocking, in an A+/AX+ flavor-conditioning procedure

Learning with arbitrary versus ecological conditioned stimuli: Evidence from sexual conditioning

Blocking of the sexual conditioning of differentially effective conditioned stimulus objects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About