Optimal behavior by rats in a choice task is associated to a persistent conditioned inhibition effect

Trujano, R. Emmanuel; López, P. del Valle; Rojas-Leguizamón, Maryed; Orduña, Vladimir

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2016.07.005

Cited by 37 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, like previous studies using lights as terminal-link stimuli to assess suboptimal choice behavior in rats using a similar procedure (Roper and Baldwin, 2004; Trujano and Orduna, 2015; Trujano et al 2016), we also demonstrated optimal choice behavior in rats when using lights as reward-associated stimuli. However, when levers were used as the reward-associated stimuli, rats exhibited suboptimal choice behavior.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Previous experiments with rats that assessed how a predictive versus a non-predictive terminal-link stimulus influence suboptimal choice have demonstrated that predictive utility had no effect on preference and did not promote suboptimal choice (Roper and Baldwin, 2004; Trujano and Orduna, 2015; Trujano et al 2016). While it is clear that rats, in both groups of the present experiment, preferred a predictive terminal-link stimulus over a non-predictive terminal-link stimulus when primary reinforcement probabilities were equivalent across both options, suboptimal choice behavior was not demonstrated until the expected value for the predictive-stimulus alternative, relative to the non-predictive alternative, was reduced to 1:2 and subsequently to 1:4.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the contrary, other approaches have been used that closely resemble the procedure used herein and have found contrasting results leading to different theories on the mechanisms that drive suboptimal choice behavior. For example, Trujano et al (2016) used a suboptimal choice procedure closely resembling the one used herein; however, a light stimulus, instead of a direct blackout, was used to signal losses on the predictive alternative. When a summation test (cf.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Smith and Zentall, 2016; Smith et al 2016) demonstrating that a terminal-link stimulus with the greatest predictive probability of reinforcement can produce suboptimal choice in pigeons, similar procedures applied in rodents fail to produce a similar effect; instead, rats tend to behave optimally and choose an alternative that provides the greatest amount of reinforcement, regardless of how predictive a terminal-link stimulus might be (Roper and Baldwin, 2004; Trujano and Orduna, 2015; Trujano et al 2016). While the above findings suggest species differences between pigeons and rats on the suboptimal choice procedure, it is also possible that the specific conditions used within the procedures could greatly influence choice behavior.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Parallel to suboptimal choice procedures with pigeons, studies using rats have also used lights (Roper and Baldwin, 2004; Trujano and Orduna, 2015; Trujano et al 2016). Notably, lights are known to elicit goal-tracking behavior (Holland, 1977; Cleland and Davey, 1983; Beckmann and Chow, 2015), described as approach to the location of reward delivery (Boakes, 1977), when a food US is used and are not accompanied by the attribution of incentive value that has been shown to promote suboptimal choice behavior.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Suboptimal choice in rats: Incentive salience attribution promotes maladaptive decision-making

Chow

Smith

Wilson

et al. 2017

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stimuli that are more predictive of subsequent reward also function as better conditioned reinforcers. Moreover, stimuli attributed with incentive salience function as more robust conditioned reinforcers. Some theories have suggested that conditioned reinforcement plays an important role in promoting suboptimal choice behavior, like gambling. The present experiments examined how different stimuli, those attributed with incentive salience versus those without, can function in tandem with stimulus-reward predictive utility to promote maladaptive decision-making in rats. One group of rats had lights associated with goal-tracking as the reward-predictive stimuli and another had levers associated with sign-tracking as the reward-predictive stimuli. All rats were first trained on a choice procedure in which the expected value across both alternatives was equivalent but differed in their stimulus-reward predictive utility. Next, the expected value across both alternatives was systematically changed so that the alternative with greater stimulus-reward predictive utility was suboptimal in regard to primary reinforcement. The results demonstrate that in order to obtain suboptimal choice behavior, incentive salience alongside strong stimulus-reward predictive utility may be necessary; thus, maladaptive decision-making can be driven more by the value attributed to stimuli imbued with incentive salience that reliably predict a reward rather than the reward itself.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Suboptimal choice in rats: Incentive salience attribution promotes maladaptive decision-making

Chow

Smith

Wilson

et al. 2017

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Testing the Δ‐∑ hypothesis in the suboptimal choice task: Same delta with different probabilities of reinforcement

González

Macías

Machado

et al. 2020

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a concurrent‐chain procedure, pigeons choose between 2 initial‐link stimuli; one is followed by terminal link stimuli that signal reliably whether food will be delivered after a delay; the other is followed by terminal link stimuli that do not signal whether food will be delivered after the delay. Pigeons prefer the former alternative even when it yields a lower overall probability of food. Recently, we proposed the Delta‐Sigma (∆‐∑) hypothesis to explain the effect: Preference depends on the difference (∆) between the reinforcement probabilities associated with the terminal link stimuli, and the overall probability of reinforcement (∑) associated with the alternative. The hypothesis predicts that, for constant ∑, animals should prefer alternatives with greater ∆ values regardless of the specific probabilities of reinforcement that determine ∆. In 2 experiments, we tested this prediction by comparing a ∆ = .5 against a ∆ = 0 alternative, with the former obtained with different pairs of reinforcement probabilities across conditions. The results supported the hypothesis when the 2 probabilities defining ∆ were significantly greater than 0, but not when one of them was close to 0. The results challenge our theoretical accounts of suboptimal choice and the variables considered to determine pigeons’ preference.

show abstract

The role of ‘jackpot’ stimuli in maladaptive decision-making: dissociable effects of D1/D2 receptor agonists and antagonists

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Optimal behavior by rats in a choice task is associated to a persistent conditioned inhibition effect

Cited by 37 publications

References 16 publications

Suboptimal choice in rats: Incentive salience attribution promotes maladaptive decision-making

Suboptimal choice in rats: Incentive salience attribution promotes maladaptive decision-making

Testing the Δ‐∑ hypothesis in the suboptimal choice task: Same delta with different probabilities of reinforcement

The role of ‘jackpot’ stimuli in maladaptive decision-making: dissociable effects of D1/D2 receptor agonists and antagonists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About