Motivational factors underlying aversive Pavlovian-instrumental transfer

Abstract

While interest in active avoidance has recently been resurgent, many concerns relating to the nature of this form of learning remain unresolved. By separating stimulus and response acquisition, aversive Pavlovian-instrumental transfer can be used to measure the effect of avoidance learning on threat processing with more control than typical avoidance procedures. However, the motivational substrates that contribute to the aversive transfer effect have not been thoroughly examined. In three studies using rodents, the impact of a variety of aversive signals on shock-avoidance responding (i.e., two-way shuttling) was evaluated. Fox urine, as well as a tone paired with the delivery of the predator odor were insufficient modulatory stimuli for the avoidance response. Similarly, a signal for the absence of food did not generate appropriate aversive motivation to enhance shuttling. Only conditioned Pavlovian stimuli that had been paired with unconditioned threats were capable of augmenting shock-avoidance responding. This was true whether the signaled outcome was the same (e.g., shock) or different (e.g., klaxon) from the avoidance outcome (i.e., shock). These findings help to characterize the aversive transfer effect and provide a more thorough analysis of its generalization to warning signals for different kinds of threats. This feature of aversive motivation has not been demonstrated using conventional avoidance procedures and could be potentially useful for applying avoidance in treatment settings.

Aversive motivation and cognitive control

“…Aversive Pavlovian Instrumental Transfer (PIT; also referred to as transfer-of-control paradigms) is nearly identical to conditioned suppression, in that animals receive separate Pavlovian and instrumental training in separate phases. However, the main difference is that the test phase (transfer) occurs under extinction (Campese et al, 2013(Campese et al, , 2020Cartoni et al, 2016;Estes, 1943). Specifically, during the test (transfer) phase, the animal is presented with the Pavlovian CS in extinction (e.g., tone but no shock) while they perform the instrumental task (Scobie, 1972).…”

Development of Novel Tasks to Assess Outcome-Specific and General Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer in Humans

“…PIT describes a phenomenon by which a classically conditioned stimulus (CS) influences instrumental responding, or in a broader sense, how one's operant behavior is modulated by environmental cues [5][6][7]. Appetitive and aversive CSs are frequently utilized to elicit PIT effects [8][9][10][11], which can be quantified by various behavioral and motivational measures. Appetitive cues have previously been shown to induce approach behavior, while aversive cues tend to induce withdrawal behavior.…”

Dual-system free-operant avoidance: extension of a theory

“…When subsequently presented while the dogs were engaged in shuttling, the tone increased the rate of responding (Rescorla & Lolordo, 1965). It is unlikely that increase was due an expectation of a shock during the tone because LoLordo subsequently demonstrated that a signal for a loud aversive klaxon produced as great an elevation of shock-reinforced avoidance responding by the dogs (LoLordo, 1967), a finding recently replicated with rats (Campese et al, 2020). Rather it would appear that the avoidance PIT reflects a general motivating effect of aversive signals.…”