Taste-mediated potentiation of noningestional stimuli in rats

Best, Michael R.; Brown, Elaine R.; Sowell, Michael K

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(84)90021-3

Cited by 51 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, consistent with previous observations (Best et al, 1984;Best et al, 1985), consumption of a novel taste in a distinctive environment prior to lithium-induced toxicosis potentiated aversive 'conditioning to the environmental stimuli. This was evidenced by the significantly diminished saline consumption in the No Pre group on the test as compared with the groups that drank familiar saccharin during environmental conditioning.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Environmental stimuli can be better associated with toxicosis when a taste stimulus is present during conditioning than when it is not (Best, Brown, & Sowell, 1984;Best, Batson, Meachum, Brown, & Ringer, 1985). This phenomenon resembles earlier observations that odorous stimuli condition better in compound with a taste on toxicosis trials than when consumed in the absence of taste (e.g., Durlach & Rescorla, 1980;Palmerino, Rusiniak, & Garcia, 1980;Rusiniak, Hankins, Garcia, & Brett, 1979).…”

Section: Southern Methodist University Dallas Texassupporting

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effects of stimulus preexposure on taste-mediated environmental conditioning: Potentiation and overshadowing

Best

Meachum

1986

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Southern Methodist University Dallas Texassupporting

confidence: 81%

The effects of stimulus preexposure on taste-mediated environmental conditioning: Potentiation and overshadowing

Best

Meachum

1986

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Finally, the results of the present experiments add to the growing body of evidence showing that exposure to a distinctive context followed by an injection of LiCl establishes a context-LiCl association in rats. Previously this association has been revealed by reexposing rats to the distinctive context and observing their behavior (e.g., Meachum & Bernstein, 1992;Parker et al, 1984) or by studying the ability of this learning to block subsequent flavor-illness learning in that context (e.g., Best, Brown, & Sowell, 1984;Krane, 1980;Rudy, Iwens, & Best, 1977;Symonds & Hall, 1997;Westbrook & Brookes, 1988;Willner, 1978). The present experiments show that this learning also reliably alters pain sensitivity in rats.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Effects of contextual cues previously paired with footshock or illness on behavior and pain sensitivity in the rat

McNally

Gorrisen

Low

et al. 1999

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats were used in four experiments to study the effects on behavior and pain sensitivity of exposure to a context previously paired with footshock or injection of the emetic drug lithium chloride (LiCl). Exposure to a context previously paired with footshock or injection of LiCl provoked the speciestypical defense response of freezing (Experiments 1A and 1B). Exposure to a context previously paired with footshock additionally produced hypoalgesia when rats were tested using the tailflick test (Experiment 1A). By contrast, exposure to a context previously paired with injection of LiCl produced hyperalgesia when rats were tested using the tailflick test (Experiment 1B). However, exposure to a context previously paired with injection of LiCl did provoke hypoalgesia when rats were tested for pain sensitivity using either the hotplate or formalin tests (Experiment 2), which was mediated by the release of endogenous opioid peptides (Experiment 3). These results are discussed with reference to the processes governing associative regulation of defensive behavior and pain control.

show abstract

“…First, it is possible that during Phase 2 conditioning of flavor X, the context itself also entered into an association with the US (see, e.g., Best, Brown, & Sowell, 1984;Symonds & Hall, 1997). Thus, for Group S, the test took place in a context that was potentially excitatory, whereas Group D was tested in a neutral context.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Context specificity of sensory preconditioning: Implications for processes of within-event learning

Ward-Robinson

Symonds

Hall

1998

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A variant of the taste aversion procedure for sensory preconditioning, as used by Rescorla and Cunningham (1978), was employed in a study of the context dependency of within-event learning. In two experiments, rats received Phase I exposure to a simultaneous flavor compound, AX; flavor X was paired with illness during Phase' 2, and any tendency for the resulting aversion to be elicited by A was measured. It was found that subjects were less likely to shun flavor A as a consequence of this training ifthe Phase 1 and test episodes were conducted in distinctively different contexts. This effect was evident both when the change of context occurred just before the test with flavor A (Experiment 1) and when it occurred before Phase 2 (Experiment 2). These results were taken to imply that, as is often found with serial associations, the retrieval of within-event associations is subject to contextual control. The implications of these findings for the interpretation of perceptual learning effects are discussed.A conditioned response (CR) established by Pavlovian conditioning in one context will often fail to appear in full strength when the conditioned stimulus (CS) is presented in a different context. For example, Hall and Honey (1989) gave rats training in which a CS was paired with the unconditioned stimulus (US) of food in an apparatus having distinctive visual and olfactory features; responding to the CS was found to be greater in this training apparatus than in a second apparatus characterized by different olfactory and visual cues. The interpretation offered by Hall and Honey (1989) was that the contextual cues had acquired the ability to facilitate the retrieval of associative information acquired in their presence; a change of context thus made retrieval less efficient and restricted the ability of the CS to evoke the CR.Although in some circumstances conditioned responding appears to be insensitive to a context change (e.g.,

show abstract

Taste-mediated potentiation of noningestional stimuli in rats

Cited by 51 publications

References 24 publications

The effects of stimulus preexposure on taste-mediated environmental conditioning: Potentiation and overshadowing

The effects of stimulus preexposure on taste-mediated environmental conditioning: Potentiation and overshadowing

Effects of contextual cues previously paired with footshock or illness on behavior and pain sensitivity in the rat

Context specificity of sensory preconditioning: Implications for processes of within-event learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About