The Role of Incentive in Conditioning and Extinction

Brogden, W. J.; Lipman, E. A.; Culler, Elmer

doi:10.2307/1416419

Cited by 158 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with the PR hypothesis, many studies of omission training using an aversion US have found enhanced responding (e.g., Bolles, Stokes, & Younger, 1966;Brogden, Lipman, & Culler, 1938;Holland, 1979;Kamin, 1956Kamin, , 1957Wahlsten & Cole, 1972), but in some instances responding was unchanged or deteriorated (e.g., Holland, 1979;Schlosberg, 1934). Moreover, Mackintosh (1974) argues that a microanalysis of the data indicating enhanced responding tends not to support a reinforcement interpretation of classical conditioning; for example, local CR enhancement is not seen immediately following the omission of an aversive US.…”

mentioning

confidence: 67%

Classically conditioned tail flexion in rats: CR-contingent modification of US intensity as a test of the preparatory response hypothesis

Miller

Greco

Vigorito

1981

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A classically conditioned tail flexionin rats with a white noise as the conditioned stimulus and a tailshock as the unconditioned stimulus is shown to arise as a result of contingent presentation of the two stimuli rather than from sensitization or pseudoconditioning. After achieving an asymptote for conditioned tail flexion, different groups received response-contingent tailshock increment, decrement, or omission. None of these treatments appreciably altered the probability of a conditioned response. Evidence is presented demonstrating that the response was sensitive to changes in the relationship between the stimuli and that the subjects could differentiate the various shock levels. The present data are viewed as inconsistent with the preparatory response hypothesis, which posits that classically conditioned behavior depends upon intrinsic reinforcement of components of the conditioned response syndrome. The possibility is discussed that classically conditioned responses observed in the laboratory are often only part of a larger, perhaps more clearly instrumental, set of behaviors that would occur in the unrestrained animal.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 67%

Classically conditioned tail flexion in rats: CR-contingent modification of US intensity as a test of the preparatory response hypothesis

Miller

Greco

Vigorito

1981

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pavlov (1927) found that additional extinction trials following zero responding promoted less spontaneous recovery; extinction and spontaneous recovery are inversely related. This phenomenon has been known as silent extinction (ct., Brogden, Lipman, & Culler, 1938). The concept of silent extinction has not clearly been applied to operant procedures, yet alone to discriminated operant responding under drug SDs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spontaneous Recovery During, But not Following, Extinction of the Discriminative Stimulus Effects of Nicotine in Rats: Reinstatement of Stimulus Control

Troisi

2003

Psychol Rec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extinction of the discriminative stimulus effects of drugs has received little research attention. Using a one-lever foodreinforcement (VI-1 min) operant procedure with rats (N = 16), the studies reported here assessed extinction, spontaneous recovery, and reinstatement of responding to the discriminative stimulus effects of nicotine. Experiment 1 found evidence for retention of differential responding to IP administrations of nicotine after a 3-month (87 days) delay following acquisition. Experiment 2 compared spontaneous recovery of discriminative control 2 and 4 weeks following extinction. Additionally, the impact of noncontingent reinforcement on discriminative control was evaluated (reinstatemen~. During extinction training, nicotine (.4 mg/kg) or saline was administered 15 min prior to each 15-min session, as they were during training, but responding was not reinforced under either stimulus condition. Spontaneous recovery (SR) of responding under the SD condition occurred during a session (11 th) preceded by two consecutive S'" sessions. Matched by response rate, 8 rats were randomly assigned to either a 2-week delay group or a 4-week delay group. There was no evidence for SR of discriminated responding to the drugs 2 or 4 weeks following the final extinction session. Between-group comparisons further revealed that SR did not vary as a function of delay following extinction. Reinstatement of stimulus control was observed following 2 brief sessions of noncontingent food delivery (levers retracted and conducted in the absence of the drug cues). These results suggest that the maintenance and extinction of the discriminative stimulus effects of nicotine are temporally stable. Theoretical ideas regarding drug self-administration, craving, and therapy are entertained.

show abstract

“…The assumption is based, in large part, upon a number of early studies (Brogden, Lipman, & Culler, 1938;Finch & Culler, 1935;Frey & Butler, 1977;Frey & Ross, 1968;Hilgard & Marquis, 1935;Hoehler, Kirschenbaum, & Leonard, 1973;Konorski & Szwejkowska, 1950, 1952a, 1952bSmith & Gormezano, 1965;Szwejkowska, 1950). In these experiments, responding during reconditioning of the CS was compared with responding during the original conditioning phase in the same animals.…”

Section: Sean T Ricker and Mark E Bouton University Of Vermont Burmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reacquisition following extinction in appetitive conditioning

Ricker

Bouton

1996

Animal Learning & Behavior

115

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In four experiments utilizing an appetitive conditioning preparation, reacquisition of conditioned responding was found to occur both rapidly and slowly following extinction. In Experiment 1, acquisition of responding to a tone that had been conditioned and extinguished occurred more rapidly than acquisition in either a group that received equivalent exposure to the food unconditioned stimulus or a "rest" control group that received only exposure to the apparatus in the first two phases. However, reacquisition was impaired relative to acquisition in a "learning-experienced" group that had previously received conditioning and extinction with a different stimulus. Experiments 2 and 3 produced similar results, but also found that high responding during reacquisition was confined to trials that followed reinforced, rather than nonreinforced, trials. Experiment 4, in which very few initial conditioning trials were used, produced reacquisition that was slow compared with both learning-experienced and rest controls. The results are consistent with a role for sequential learning: Reacquisition is rapid when animals have learned that reinforced trials signal other reinforced trials.

show abstract

The Role of Incentive in Conditioning and Extinction

Cited by 158 publications

References 0 publications

Classically conditioned tail flexion in rats: CR-contingent modification of US intensity as a test of the preparatory response hypothesis

Classically conditioned tail flexion in rats: CR-contingent modification of US intensity as a test of the preparatory response hypothesis

Spontaneous Recovery During, But not Following, Extinction of the Discriminative Stimulus Effects of Nicotine in Rats: Reinstatement of Stimulus Control

Reacquisition following extinction in appetitive conditioning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About