Environment-dependent taste-aversion extinction: A question of stimulus novelty at conditioning

Archer, Trevor; Sjödén, Per‐Olow

doi:10.3758/bf03326966

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Two considerations suggest the possibility that the present experiments might not have fulfilled this requirement. First, there is evidence to suggest that if exteroceptive (contextual) cues are to be associated with LiCl, they must be novel when they are paired with LiCI (e.g., Archer & Sjoden, 1981;Krane, 1980). In the traditional reinstatement design, the animal is exposed to the US in a familiar context; the test context was not novel when the rats were given reinstatement injections in the present experiments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent evidence suggests that the conditioning of contextual stimuli may also be involved in taste aversion learning (e.g., Archer & Sjoden, 1981;Archer, Sjoden, Nilsson, & Carter, 1979Batson & Best, 1979;Krane, 1980;Willner, 1978). We therefore began our investigation of the reinstatement of taste aversions by attempting to determine whether reinstatement would occur only if the US were presented in the context in which the aversion was subsequently tested for reinstatement.…”

Section: University Of Vermont Burlington Vermontmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lack of reinstatement of an extinguished taste aversion

Bouton

1982

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: University Of Vermont Burlington Vermontmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lack of reinstatement of an extinguished taste aversion

Bouton

1982

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Even in the rare experiments where the aversion was not reduced with the contextual change (Archer & Sjoden, 1981), differences in the familiarity of the contexts permit alternative explanations ofthe effect. While these remain open, the renewal oftaste aversion found by these authors is not a strong argument against the unlearning hypothesis.…”

Section: Spontaneous Recovery After Extinction Of a Conditioned Tastementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some of the experiments, the blocking effect was actually confounded with a US preexposure effect. Finally, Archer and his colleagues (e.g., Archer & Sjoden, 1981;Archer, Sjoden, & Nilsson, 1985;Archer, Sjoden, Nilsson, & Carter, 341 Copyright 1996 Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1979Inc.…”

Section: Spontaneous Recovery After Extinction Of a Conditioned Tastementioning

confidence: 99%

Spontaneous recovery after extinction of a conditioned taste aversion

Rosas

Bouton

1996

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experiments examined whether or not spontaneous recovery could occur after extinction in the conditioned taste-aversion paradigm. After three extinction trials, spontaneous recovery was obtained over an 18-dayretention interval (Experiments 1, 2, and 3). The effect was not due to changes in the unconditioned preference for saccharin over the retention interval (Experiment 2) or to an increase in a nonextinguished aversion over time, as indicated by tests with both the original, nonextinguished aversion (Experiment 1) and with a weaker one (Experiment 3). Spontaneous recovery was not obtained when extinction was overtrained (eight trials) and a 49-day retention interval was used (Experiment 4). However, saccharin intake at asymptote reached the level of baseline water intake, and not the highly preferred level shown by never-conditioned controls. Results of all four experiments suggest that extinction does not return an averted taste to the status of an unconditioned one.Nonreinforced exposure to a conditioned stimulus (CS) that has been previously paired with an unconditioned stimulus (US) yields a progressive decrease in the conditioned response (CR) that is known as extinction. Spontaneous recovery is the increase in the CR that is usually found when the CS is presented again in a test conducted after a retention interval. This well-known phenomenon was discovered by Pavlov (1927) at the beginning of the century, and is one of the main phenomena used to argue against the possibility that extinction causes unlearning of the original CS-US association.The present article is concerned with taste-aversion learning, in which a flavor is associated with illness. The resulting flavor aversion can be extinguished ifthe flavor is then repeatedly presented alone. However, to the best of our knowledge, no published work has reported spontaneous recovery of an aversion after extinction. A near exception is an experiment conducted by Kraemer and Spear (1992).

show abstract