Modulation of unconditioned defensive reflexes by a putative emotive Pavlovian conditioned stimulus.

Brandon, Susan E.; Bombace, Joan C.; Falls, William A.; Wagner, Allan R.

doi:10.1037/0097-7403.17.3.312

Cited by 32 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Experiment 2 replicated the observed adequacy of hindleg shock for modulation training, under 2 different conditions of eyeblink conditioning. The data, along with the findings that the same 30-s stimuli similarly facilitate the unconditioned eyeblink and the airpuff-elicited startle response (Brandon, Bombace, Falls, & Wagner, 1991), were viewed as supporting the notion that the CRmodulation is dependent upon a conditioned fear response elicited by the 30-s cues (Wagner & Brandon, 1989). demonstrated what they referred to as the differential modulation of a conditioned eyeblink response (CR) by contextlike Pavlovian stimuli.…”

mentioning

confidence: 86%

Modulation of a conditioned eyeblink response by a putative emotive stimulus conditioned with hindleg shock.

Bombace

Brandon²,

Wagner³

1991

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments with rabbits showed that the differential modulation of a conditioned eyeblink response (CR) by 30-s auditory stimuli previously paired with shock was independent of the locus of shock application. In Experiment 1, the modulation occurred when the CR was trained with paraorbital shock and the 30-s stimuli were trained with either hindleg or paraorbital shock. Experiment 2 replicated the observed adequacy of hindleg shock for modulation training, under 2 different conditions of eyeblink conditioning. The data, along with the findings that the same 30-s stimuli similarly facilitate the unconditioned eyeblink and the airpuff-elicited startle response (Brandon, Bombace, Falls, & Wagner, 1991), were viewed as supporting the notion that the CRmodulation is dependent upon a conditioned fear response elicited by the 30-s cues (Wagner & Brandon, 1989). demonstrated what they referred to as the differential modulation of a conditioned eyeblink response (CR) by contextlike Pavlovian stimuli. The contextual stimuli were two 30-s auditory stimuli (designated A and B) that were trained under the arrangement that a single, 4-mA, 50-ms, paraorbital shock consistently occurred between 8 and 28 s after the onset of A, but never occurred in the presence of B. When a 1,050-ms target conditioned stimulus (CS) that had been separately pretrained to elicit an and Wagner (1991) studies that eyeblink tendencies were conditioned to the contextual stimuli and that although these were below some response threshold, so as not to be evidenced in responding to the contextual stimuli in isolation, they may nonetheless have been adequate to increase the amplitude of an eyeblink CR otherwise elicited.There are two related predictions concerning the generality of the CR modulation effect reported by Brandon and Wagner (1991) that follow from the view that the results represent the action of a conditioned emotional response. One is that contextual cues, as trained with paraorbital shock by , should modulate a range of other defensive behaviors besides the eyeblink CR. This prediction was supported by Brandon, Bombace, Falls, and Wagner (1991), who showed that the same contextual cues that modulated the eyeblink CR similarly modulated the eyeblink unconditioned response (UR) and the airpuff-elicited startle response. The second prediction, which is the focus of the present study, is that these stimuli should become effective in modulating the eyeblink CR by being paired with any of a range of aversive USs that should be equally capable of supporting the acquisition of a conditioned emotional response. That is, the eyeblink modulation otherwise observed by Brandon and Wagner and by should not be unique to contextual stimuli trained with paraorbital shock.This prediction was tested in the two experiments reported here. Both assessed the possibility that hindleg shock would be adequate to condition contextual stimuli that could subsequently modulate the amplitude of the eyeblink CR to a CS independently paired with a paraorbital US. E...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 86%

Modulation of a conditioned eyeblink response by a putative emotive stimulus conditioned with hindleg shock.

Bombace

Brandon²,

Wagner³

1991

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The outer eyelid and the nictitating membrane are known to covary in conditioning (see, e.g., McCormick, Lavond, & Thompson, 1982). The potentiated startle response to an airpuff stimulus in the rabbit has been shown in our laboratory (e.g., Brandon, Bombace, Falls, & Wagner, 1991) to behave as a measure of the putative fear-eliciting properties of a CS in a manner akin to that observed via potentiated acoustic startle in the rat (Brown, Kalish, & Farber, 1951;Davis, 1984Davis, , 1986.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

Divergence of conditioned eyeblink and conditioned fear in backward Pavlovian training

McNish

Betts

Brandon

et al. 1997

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments of Pavlovian conditioning with rabbits evaluated the effects of initiating or continuing a conditioned stimulus (CS) after a paraorbital unconditioned stimulus (US). In Experiment 1, backward pairings, in which a CS carne on after the US, produced a CS that appeared inhibitory on a measure of eyeblink conditioning but excitatory on a potentiated-startle measure of conditioned fear. In Experiment 2, extending the duration of a CS that carne on prior to the US,so that it continued after the US, decreased eyeblink conditioned responses, whereas it increased conditioned fear. The data from the two experiments confirm and extend those of Tait and Saladin (1986), supporting the suppositions of AESOP (Wagner & Brandon, 1989) that conditioned eyeblink and conditioned fear can be dissociated under various temporal relationships between the CS and US. Tait and Saladin (1986) reported that "backward" training, where an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US) was followed, rather than preceded, by a conditioned stimulus (CS), produced a CS that appeared concurrently excitatory and inhibitory, depending on the measure of associative learning employed. After 65 conditioning trials, where a 1,000-msec tone CS was administered 500 msec after a 1OO-msec paraorbital shock US, the tone appeared excitatory as indicated by its acquired ability to suppress drinking behavior, whereas it appeared inhibitory as evidenced by its retardation in subsequent acquisition ofeyeblink conditioned responses (CRs). Wagner and Brandon (1989) pointed to these data as providing especially clear evidence that CS-US pairings can produce an association between the CS and the emotive qualities of the US (as presumably reflected in common measures of conditioned fear) that is separable from the association between the CS and the remaining sensory-perceptual attributes ofthe US (as presumably seen in discrete CRs, such as the eyeblink). The separability is such that, under the conditioning parameters employed by Tait and Saladin, one association may be excitatory while the other is inhibitory.The data reported by Tait and Saladin (1986) might have been anticipated on the basis of the separate literatures on fear conditioning and on eyeblink conditioning concerned with the effects of backward US-CS pairings. Studies offear conditioning that have employed relatively short US-CS intervals have repeatedly reported an excitatory associative consequence

show abstract

“…These results suggest that a long-duration excitatory stimulus can modulate responding to another excitatory CS, when the two stimuli do not otherwise evoke similar CRs. Elaborating on a theory ofassociative acquisition proposed by Konorski (1967), Brandon and Wagner (see also Bombace, Brandon, Bombace, Falls, & Wagner, 1991;Wagner & Brandon, 1989) suggested that the long-and short-duration stimuli became associated with different aspects of the US. One feature of the excitation acquired by the long-duration stimulus was its ability to elicit preparatory CRs, whereas the shortduration CS elicited consummatory CRs.…”

Section: Modulation By Excitorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulatory mechanisms in Pavlovian conditioning

Swartzentruber

1995

Animal Learning & Behavior

159

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modulation of unconditioned defensive reflexes by a putative emotive Pavlovian conditioned stimulus.

Cited by 32 publications

References 31 publications

Modulation of a conditioned eyeblink response by a putative emotive stimulus conditioned with hindleg shock.

Modulation of a conditioned eyeblink response by a putative emotive stimulus conditioned with hindleg shock.

Divergence of conditioned eyeblink and conditioned fear in backward Pavlovian training

Modulatory mechanisms in Pavlovian conditioning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About