Occasion setting: A neural network approach.

Schmajuk, Néstor A.; Lamoureux, Jeffrey A.; Holland, Peter C.

doi:10.1037/0033-295x.105.1.3

Cited by 129 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(196 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

111

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…What is perhaps surprising is that the SUP rats show no loss of conditioned responding when undergoing extinction training in the novel context. This result can be explained by neural-network models of associative learning in which enhanced contextual processing in the hippocampus (as may be occurring in SUP rats) leads to a greater loss of associative strength for contextual cues during extinction than would be expected under moderate or impaired levels of contextual processing during initial acquisition, as observed in CON and DEF rats, respectively (e.g., Schmajuk and DiCarlo 1992;Schmajuk et al 1998). As a consequence, enhanced contextual processing in combination with extinction of the "CS/context" complex would be expected to result in less reliance upon the training context for production of the CR and greater transfer of CS-US associations from one context to another.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prenatal choline availability alters the context sensitivity of Pavlovian conditioning in adult rats

Lamoureux¹,

Meck²,

Williams³

2008

Learn. Mem.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of prenatal choline availability on Pavlovian conditioning were assessed in adult male rats (3-4 mo). Neither supplementation nor deprivation of prenatal choline affected the acquisition and extinction of simple Pavlovian conditioned excitation, or the acquisition and retardation of conditioned inhibition. However, prenatal choline availability significantly altered the contextual control of these learned behaviors. Both control and choline-deprived rats exhibited context specificity of conditioned excitation as exhibited by a loss in responding when tested in an alternate context after conditioning; in contrast, choline-supplemented rats showed no such effect. When switched to a different context following extinction, however, both choline-supplemented and control rats showed substantial contextual control of responding, whereas choline-deficient rats did not. These data support the view that configural associations that rely on hippocampal function are selectively sensitive to prenatal manipulations of dietary choline during prenatal development.There is increasing evidence that variations in maternal dietary choline intake during the second half of pregnancy cause structural, biochemical, and physiological changes in basal forebrain neurons and their projections to the hippocampal complex as well as long-term cognitive changes in the offspring (e.g., Meck and Williams 2003;McCann et al. 2006;Meck et al. 2008). We know, for instance, that the adult offspring of pregnant rats supplemented with 4.5 times the amount of choline in the standard laboratory diet display improved memory capacity and precision on the radial-arm maze (e.g., Meck et al.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prenatal choline availability alters the context sensitivity of Pavlovian conditioning in adult rats

Lamoureux¹,

Meck²,

Williams³

2008

Learn. Mem.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most analyses of the way in which feature-positive discriminations are solved have focused on the role of occasion setting and configural learning. This has been the case particularly when comparisons have been made between the solution of simultaneous and serial feature-positive discriminations (see Schmajuk, Lamoureux, & Holland, 1998, for a review and theoretical analysis). To the best of our knowledge, there has been no analysis of the role of attention in the solution of a feature-positive discrimination.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two kinds of attention in Pavlovian conditioning: Evidence for a hybrid model of learning.

Haselgrove

Esber

Pearce³

et al. 2010

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four appetitive Pavlovian conditioning experiments with rats examined the rate at which the discrimination between compounds AY and AX was solved relative to the discrimination between compounds AY and BY. In Experiments 1 and 2, these discriminations were preceded by training in which A and B were continuously reinforced and X and Y were partially reinforced. Consistent with the Pearce and Hall (1980) model, the results showed that the AY/AX discrimination was solved more readily than the AY/BY discrimination. In Experiments 3 and 4, the discriminations were preceded by feature-positive training in which trials with AX and BY signaled food but trials with X and Y did not. Consistent with the Mackintosh (1975) model, the results showed that the AY/BY discrimination was solved more readily than the AY/AX discrimination. These results are discussed with respect to a hybrid model of conditioning and attention.Keywords: partial reinforcement, continuous reinforcement, feature positive, predictive validity, attention, associabilityCentral to many theories of learning is the assumption that variation in stimulus processing determines the degree to which an association between a conditioned stimulus (CS) and an unconditioned stimulus (US) will be modified. Perhaps most influentially, Rescorla and Wagner (1972) proposed that associative learning is determined by the extent to which the CS and the US are processed. According to Rescorla and Wagner, US processing is variable and is a function of the discrepancy between the magnitude of the US and the total associative strength of all stimuli present ( Ϫ ⌺V). Effects such as blocking (Kamin, 1968), conditioned inhibition (Pavlov, 1927), and the influence of degrading the contingency between the CS and US (Rescorla, 1968) were all cited as phenomena that supported the notion that learning is influenced by variations in US processing. In contrast, processing of the CS (␣) was assumed to be fixed and determined by the physical properties of the CS. Although sympathetic to the idea that CS processing, or attention, 1 may vary as a consequence of experience , no attempt was made to formalize this mechanism.Since the publication of the Rescorla-Wagner (1972) model, however, there has been considerable interest in the idea that CS processing, like US processing, varies as a consequence of learning, and efforts have been made to specify the conditions under which this variation takes place. Two theories, in particular, have come to dominate the study of CS processing. The first, by Mackintosh (1975), proposed that a CS will be processed more when it is a good predictor of a US than when it is a poor predictor of a US (see also Kruschke, 2001;Lovejoy, 1968;Sutherland & Mackintosh, 1971;Zeaman & House, 1963). The second, by Pearce and Hall (1980; see also Pearce, Kaye, & Hall, 1982;Schmajuk, Lam, & Gray, 1996), proposed the opposite: that a CS will be processed more when it is followed by unpredictable events (such as the US) than when it is followed by predictable events. As we sha...

show abstract

“…Recently, neural network models have been used to capture the thrust of each theory in a unified fashion (e.g., Schmajuk, Lamoureux, & Holland, 1998;Zackheim, Myers, & Gluck, 1998). In brief, these theories assume that responding to a feature-target compound is determined by both direct, single-layer linkages and indirect, hidden-layer linkages between input and output units.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal discrimination using different feature-target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Kehoe

Boesenberg

2002

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a typical conditional discrimination, a target stimulus (X) is reinforced during one feature cue (A®X+), but not during another feature cue (B®X2). The present experiments used only a single "feature" cue (a 66-sec tone). On half of the trials, the target stimulus (a 400-msec light) was paired with the reinforcer when the feature-target interval was one duration (e.g., 5 sec). On the remaining trials, the interval was different (e.g., 45 sec), and the target stimulus was presented without the reinforcer. All the animals acquired this temporal discrimination, and subsequent testing with other feature-target intervals yielded generalization-like gradients. These results provide solid evidence that each portion of a feature cue is encoded in a distinctive fashion. Had temporal encoding not occurred, the feature cue would have been just as ambiguous a predictor of the reinforcer as was the target stimulus, and discrimination would not have been possible. The integration of real-time temporal encoding mechanisms into models of conditional discrimination is discussed.

show abstract

Occasion setting: A neural network approach.

Cited by 129 publications

References 52 publications

Prenatal choline availability alters the context sensitivity of Pavlovian conditioning in adult rats

Prenatal choline availability alters the context sensitivity of Pavlovian conditioning in adult rats

Two kinds of attention in Pavlovian conditioning: Evidence for a hybrid model of learning.

Temporal discrimination using different feature-target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About