Different mnemonic outcomes have been observed when associative memories are reactivated by CS exposure and followed by amnestics. These outcomes include mere retrieval, destabilization-reconsolidation, a transitional period (which is insensitive to amnestics), and extinction learning. However, little is known about the interaction between initial learning conditions and these outcomes during a reinforced or nonreinforced reactivation. Here we systematically combined temporally specific memories with different reactivation parameters to observe whether these four outcomes are determined by the conditions established during training. First, we validated two training regimens with different temporal expectations about US arrival. Then, using Midazolam (MDZ) as an amnestic agent, fear memories in both learning conditions were submitted to retraining either under identical or different parameters to the original training. Destabilization (i.e., susceptibly to MDZ) occurred when reactivation was reinforced, provided the occurrence of a temporal prediction error about US arrival. In subsequent experiments, both treatments were systematically reactivated by nonreinforced context exposure of different lengths, which allowed to explore the interaction between training and reactivation lengths. These results suggest that temporal prediction error and trace dominance determine the extent to which reactivation produces the different outcomes.

With the discovery of the blocking effect, learning theory took a huge leap forward, because blocking provided a crucial clue that surprise is what drives learning. This in turn stimulated the development of novel association-formation theories of learning. Eventually, the ability to explain blocking became nothing short of a touchstone for the validity of any theory of learning, including propositional and other nonassociative theories. The abundance of publications reporting a blocking effect and the importance attributed to it suggest that it is a robust phenomenon. Yet, in the current article we report 15 failures to observe a blocking effect despite the use of procedures that are highly similar or identical to those used in published studies. Those failures raise doubts regarding the canonical nature of the blocking effect and call for a reevaluation of the central status of blocking in theories of learning. They may also illustrate how publication bias influences our perspective toward the robustness and reliability of seemingly established effects in the psychological literature.

It has been suggested that, unlike pure extinction which typically results in the return of the fear response under a variety of circumstances, memory reactivation followed by extinction can attenuate the reemergence of conditioned fear. The reactivation-extinction procedure has attracted the attention of basic and clinical researchers due to its potential clinical value for the treatment of psychiatric conditions, such as anxiety and drug abuse disorders. However, mixed results have been achieved so far in replicating and understanding this paradigm. It has been proposed that memory destabilization could be critical in this sense. Using contextual fear conditioning in rats and midazolam as an amnesic agent, we first determined what reactivation conditions are necessary to destabilize the mnemonic trace. After establishing the conditions for memory destabilization, a series of experiments was conducted to determine if destabilization is critical for the success of the reactivation-extinction procedure. Data confirmed the importance of memory destabilization prior to extinction inside the reconsolidation window to attenuate spontaneous recovery and retard reacquisition of conditioned fear. The present report offers a candidate explanation of the discrepancy in results obtained with the reactivation -extinction procedure by different laboratories.

Two experiments using rats in a contextual fear memory preparation compared two approaches to reduce conditioned fear: (1) pharmacological reconsolidation blockade and (2) reactivation-plus-extinction training. In Experiment 1, we explored different combinations of reactivation-plus-extinction parameters to reduce conditioned fear and attenuate reacquisition. In Experiment 2, memory reactivation was followed by extinction training or administration of midazolam (MDZ) (vs. vehicle) to reduce conditioned fear and attenuate spontaneous recovery. We found both treatments to be equally effective in both experiments. This study suggests that parameters leading to memory destabilization during reactivation are critical to observe long-lasting effects of MDZ or reactivation plus extinction.