Classically conditioned tongue-licking and operant bar pressing recorded simultaneously in the rat.

Control of fluid palatability by exteroceptive Pavlovian signals.

“…The data presented here support other data showing that discrete exteroceptive conditioned stimuli that have been paired with tastes can, by themselves, elicit some ingestive behaviors, that is, mouth movements (Miller & DeBold, 1965;Patten & Deaux, 1966;Rudy & Hyson, 1984). The present data extend other work by suggesting that a discrete auditory CS+ Tor sucrose can acquire the ability to enhance the palatability of a relatively neutral taste.…”

“…The data presented here support other data showing that discrete exteroceptive conditioned stimuli that have been paired with tastes can, by themselves, elicit some ingestive behaviors, that is, mouth movements (Miller & DeBold, 1965;Patten & Deaux, 1966;Rudy & Hyson, 1984). The present data extend test presentation of distilled water following presentation of the former signal for sucrose; CS-= test presentation of distilled water following presentation of the previously nonreinforced CS; W = test presentation of unsignaled distilled water; S = test presentation of sucrose following the former signal for sucrose.)…”

Transfer from classical conditioning and extinction to acquisition, extinction, and stimulus generalization of a positively reinforced instrumental response.

“…Consider first the assumption that the mediating responses are classically conditioned. There is no doubt that some responses do, in fact, become classically conditioned when a stimulus is paired with food, both when the food is response contingent (e.g., Miller & DeBold, 1965;Shapiro & Miller, 1965;Williams, 1965) and when it is not (e.g., DeBold, Miller, & Jensen, 1965). Thus, a plausible empirical basis exists for assuming that classically conditioned responses mediate transfer effects of the kind reported here and in related experiments (e.g., Bower & Grusec, 1964;Trapold, Carlson, & Myers, 1965;Trapold & Fairlie, 1965;Trapold & Odom, 1965).…”

Conditioned licking in the wild F1 and domestic Norway rats.

“…However, work with water intake in wild rats (Richter, 1954) and with the reflexive properties of licking in rats (Schaeffer & Premack, 1961) suggests that the licking response to water might be readily and reliably elicited in highly emotional rats. Thus a conditioned licking paradigm (Miller & DeBold, 1965) should not favor either type of rat in a learning comparison. The present study compared conditioned licking in genetically wild and domestic rats in terms of general performance levels and progressive stages of learning.…”