Perceptual learning in an appetitive Pavlovian procedure: Analysis of the effectiveness of the common element

Mondragón, Esther; Murphy, Robin A.

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2009.12.007

Cited by 16 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given that A and B (and Y) do not play any roles in the conditioning and test phases of the experiment, and that N and Z are novel stimuli and therefore identical for all the animals, the observed transfer of perceptual learning should be attributed to the differential perceptual effectiveness of the com mon element X after intermixed and blocked preexposure. These results add to those reported by Mondragon and Hall (2002; see also Mondragon & Murphy, 2010) in showing that the salience or perceptual effectiveness of the common element X is lower following intermixed than blocked preexposure; and con firm that the salience of X can play a relevant role in the perceptual learning effect typically observed when comparing intermixed and blocked preexposure.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Perceptual learning transfer: Salience of the common element as a factor contributing to the intermixed/blocked effect.

Artigas¹,

Prados²

2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cogniti

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats received intermixed or blocked preexposure to 2 similar flavor compounds, AX and BX. Following preexposure, conditioning trials took place in which a novel compound stimulus NX was paired with an illness-induced unconditioned stimulus. Animals that were given intermixed preexposure to AX and BX showed lower generalization of the aversive response conditioned to NX to a new compound, ZX, than animals that were given blocked preexposure. The results support the proposal that intermixed preexposure reduces the salience of the common element X to a greater extent than blocked preexposure. The way in which current theories of perceptual learning can predict a differential salience of X after intermixed and blocked preexposure is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Perceptual learning transfer: Salience of the common element as a factor contributing to the intermixed/blocked effect.

Artigas¹,

Prados²

2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cogniti

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, in studies of perceptual learning, intermixed presentations of highly similar stimuli appear to enhance the discrimination, rather than generalization, between them (e.g., Mondragón & Murphy, 2010; Symonds & Hall, 1995). Although such results appear to contradict the present ones, they may well be unique to the highly similar stimuli that are studied in perceptual learning research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Secondary extinction in Pavlovian fear conditioning

Vurbic

Bouton

2011

Learn Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pavlov (1927/1960) reported that following the conditioning of several stimuli, extinction of one conditioned stimulus (CS) attenuated responding to others that had not undergone direct extinction. However, this secondary extinction effect has not been widely replicated in the contemporary literature. In three conditioned suppression experiments with rats, we further explored the phenomenon. In Experiment 1, we asked whether secondary extinction is more likely to occur with target CSs that have themselves undergone some prior extinction. A robust secondary extinction effect was obtained with a nonextinguished target CS. Experiment 2 showed that extinction of one CS was sufficient to reduce renewal of a second CS when it was tested in a neutral (nonextinction) context. In Experiment 3, secondary extinction was observed in groups that initially received intermixed conditioning trials with the target and nontarget CSs, but not in groups that received conditioning of the two CSs in separate sessions. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that CSs must be associated with a common temporal context during conditioning for secondary extinction to occur.Keywords Classical conditioning . Fear conditioning . Extinction . Secondary extinction . GeneralizationIn Pavlovian conditioning, a neutral cue acquires the ability to elicit a response as a result of pairings with a biologically relevant unconditional stimulus (US). The response to this cue, or conditional stimulus (CS), can later be extinguished by repeatedly presenting the CS alone. Pavlov (1927Pavlov ( /1960 reported that following conditioning of multiple CSs, extinction of one CS also attenuated responding to others that had not undergone any extinction. For example, his associate Babkin demonstrated the effect in at least one dog by first pairing three distinct stimuli (a buzzer, a metronome pulse, and tactile stimulation) with a US that elicited salivation. Immediately following conditioning, the metronome was presented for several trials without the US until the salivary response was extinguished. When the other two CSs were then tested (one CS of the same modality and one CS that was highly dissimilar), the responses to them were greatly attenuated even though neither CS had undergone any extinction. The finding that extinction of one CS can decrease responding to a second CS is known as secondary extinction (Pavlov, 1927(Pavlov, /1960 Although Pavlov's (1927Pavlov's ( /1960 findings are theoretically significant, over the years there has been only scattered interest in the secondary extinction phenomenon. Moreover, the contemporary literature contains several failures to observe the effect. The relevant contemporary research has been conducted mainly in fear conditioning. In three conditioned suppression experiments reported by Richards and Sargent (1983), a modest secondary extinction effect was found in the first experiment but was not replicated in the subsequent two. Two other reports using the conditioned suppression preparation failed ...

show abstract

“…In short, there we asserted that the comparator mechanism, which relies on mediation of an A-X within-compound association through associations with the common element B, accurately describes the development of inhibition between sensory cues. This approach departs from the suggestion that the common element has dampened salience following interspersed Espinet pretraining (e.g., Mondragón & Murphy, 2010). It is worth noting that Mondragón and Murphy evidenced retarded acquisition between the common element and the US under several conditions to illustrate decreased salience, whereas the comparator account emphasizes the development of associations between the common element and the unique features of each compound throughout pretraining.…”

mentioning

confidence: 81%

Associative structure of conditioned inhibition produced by inhibitory perceptual learning treatment

Polack

Miller

2018

Learn Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exposure to a set of complex stimuli yields an enhanced ability to discriminate between these stimuli. In previous experimental studies, two distinguishable stimuli, X and A, were each repeatedly paired with a common Stimulus B to create compound Stimuli XB and AB. Prior evidence suggests that unique Features X and A form mutually inhibitory associations. This was evidenced by pairing Feature A with a biologically relevant stimulus (i.e., an unconditioned stimulus [US]) and observing that Stimulus X alone later serves to inhibit anticipatory behaviors for that US. These observations may reflect the mutually inhibitory nature of the two Features X and A. However, by assessing the influence of X on behavior that anticipates the US rather than Feature A, these experiments tested inhibition only indirectly. In the present experiments, a more direct measure of inhibition is proposed and tested with rats. We found evidence of retardation and negative summation of associations between unique Features X and A in their capacity to serve as competing cues during overshadowing treatments. Stimulus X was less susceptible to overshadowing by A (which is indicative of retardation of the establishment of an X-A within-compound association) and was able to suppress overshadowing by A of another stimulus (Y) when X was presented with Yat test (which is indicative of negative summation of the representation of A by X). Thus, XB/AB trials were seen to establish an inhibitory relationship between X and A.

show abstract

Perceptual learning in an appetitive Pavlovian procedure: Analysis of the effectiveness of the common element

Cited by 16 publications

References 26 publications

Perceptual learning transfer: Salience of the common element as a factor contributing to the intermixed/blocked effect.

Perceptual learning transfer: Salience of the common element as a factor contributing to the intermixed/blocked effect.

Secondary extinction in Pavlovian fear conditioning

Associative structure of conditioned inhibition produced by inhibitory perceptual learning treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About