Familiarity-based stimulus generalization of conditioned suppression.

Ward-Robinson, Jasper; Whitt, Emma; Jones, Peter M.

doi:10.1037/xan0000134

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, it seems reasonable to assume that even stimuli from the same modality can be different enough to prevent strong generalization. In particular, in experiments in rats, generalization from an auditory stimulus C (clicker) to an auditory stimulus T (tone) has been shown to be restricted when the stimuli differ in terms of novelty (as is the case in a blocking experiment) (Honey, 1990; Robinson, Whitt, & Jones, 2017). Moreover, as stated, blocking has been reported repeatedly employing same-modality stimuli (e.g., Beckers, et al, 2006; Blaisdell et al, 1999; Wheeler et al, 2008), indicating that generalization was not an issue in those experiments.…”

Section: Other Considerations Brought Forward By Soto’s (In Press) Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failures to replicate blocking are surprising and informative—Reply to Soto (2018).

Maes¹,

Krypotos²,

Boddez³

et al. 2018

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The blocking effect has inspired numerous associative learning theories and is widely cited in the literature. We recently reported a series of 15 experiments that failed to obtain a blocking effect in rodents. On the basis of those consistent failures, we claimed that there is a lack of insight into the boundary conditions for blocking. In his commentary, Soto (2018) argued that contemporary associative learning theory does provide a specific boundary condition for the occurrence of blocking, namely the use of same- versus different-modality stimuli. Given that in 10 of our 15 experiments same-modality stimuli were used, he claims that our failure to observe a blocking effect is unsurprising. We disagree with that claim, because of theoretical, empirical, and statistical problems with his analysis. We also address 2 other possible reasons for a lack of blocking that are referred to in Soto's (2018) analysis, related to generalization and salience, and dissect the potential importance of both. Although Soto's (2018) analyses raise a number of interesting points, we see more merit in an empirically guided analysis and call for empirical testing of boundary conditions on blocking. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract

Section: Other Considerations Brought Forward By Soto’s (In Press) Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failures to replicate blocking are surprising and informative—Reply to Soto (2018).

Maes¹,

Krypotos²,

Boddez³

et al. 2018

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such findings concur with evidence from anatomy ( Burwell & Amaral, 1998 ) and from object recognition experiments in rodents (e.g., Albasser et al, 2009 ; Liu & Bilkey, 2001 ; Mumby & Pinel, 1994 ; Warburton et al, 2003 ; Winters et al, 2004 ). We noted that sensory preconditioning could be governed by an associative chain (A → X → +; for discussion, see, for example, Lin et al, 2017 ; Robinson et al, 2017 ) and/or by a form of stimulus generalisation, mediated by a unitary, undifferentiated representation of the AX compound stimulus (see, for example, Lin et al; Rescorla, 1981 ). We reasoned that Holmes et al’s use of serial compound, with no stimulus overlap, would favour the associative chain mechanism and that the simultaneous presentation would favour the AX-mediation mechanism.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Excitotoxic lesions of the perirhinal cortex leave intact rats’ gustatory sensory preconditioning

Ward-Robinson

Jones

Whitt

2021

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report findings from two sensory preconditioning experiments in which rats consumed two flavoured solutions, each with two gustatory components (AX and BY), composed of sweet, bitter, salt and acid elements. After this pre-exposure, rats were conditioned to X by pairing with lithium chloride. Standard sensory preconditioning was observed: Consumption of flavour A was less than that of B. We found that sensory preconditioning was maintained when X was added to A and B. Both experiments included one group of rats with lesions of the perirhinal cortex, which did not influence sensory preconditioning. We discuss our findings in the light of other sensory preconditioning procedures that do involve the perirhinal cortex and conclude that differences in experimental variables invoke different mechanisms of sensory preconditioning, which vary in their requirement of the perirhinal cortex.

show abstract

“…However, considering our present set of experiments, we cannot confirm stimulus generalization as the cause of the effects observed. The magnitude of stimulus generalization is proportional to the physical properties similarity between stimuli (Hanson 1959;Hoffman and Fleshler 1961) and the familiarity to the stimuli before conditioning (Robinson et al 2017). In our experiments, all animals received presentation of both stimuli before the trace conditioning, thus increasing the probability of stimulus generalization happening, although to formally establish stimulus generalization we would have to present multiple stimuli with distinct frequencies to inspect the response to stimuli other than CSϩ.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hippocampal and lateral entorhinal cortex physiological activity during trace conditioning under urethane anesthesia

Oliveira

Dickson

Reyes

2020

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant evidence shows that the acquisition of delay conditioning can occur in out-of-awareness states, such as under anesthesia. However, it is unclear to what extent and what type of conditioning animals may achieve during non-awake states. Trace conditioning is an appealing protocol to study under anesthesia, given the long empty gap separating the conditioned and unconditioned stimuli, which must be bridged for acquisition to happen. Here, we show evidence that rats display physiological activity during the trace conditioning paradigm under anesthesia. We recorded the activity of the hippocampus (HPC) and lateral entorhinal cortex (LEC) in urethane-anesthetized rats, along with an electromyogram and the electrocardiogram. The protocol consisted of randomly presenting two distinct sound stimuli (CS- and CS+), where only one of them (CS+) was assigned to be trace-paired with a footshock. A trial-average analysis revealed that animals developed a significant climbing heart rate activity initiating at the CS onset and persisting during the trace period. Such climbing arose for both CS- and CS+ with similar slopes, but different intercepts, suggesting CS+ heart rates typically above CS-. The power and coherence of HPC and LEC high frequency bands (> 100 Hz) significantly increased during CS presentation and trace, similarly to both CS- and CS+ and insensitive to either activated or deactivated states. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to perform a trace conditioning protocol under anesthesia. Confirmation of this procedure acquisition can allow a new preparation for the exploration of brain mechanisms that bind time-discontinuous events.

show abstract

Familiarity-based stimulus generalization of conditioned suppression.

Cited by 5 publications

References 49 publications

Failures to replicate blocking are surprising and informative—Reply to Soto (2018).

Failures to replicate blocking are surprising and informative—Reply to Soto (2018).

Excitotoxic lesions of the perirhinal cortex leave intact rats’ gustatory sensory preconditioning

Hippocampal and lateral entorhinal cortex physiological activity during trace conditioning under urethane anesthesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About