Learning to inhibit the response during instrumental (operant) extinction.

Abstract

Five experiments tested implications of the idea that instrumental (operant) extinction involves learning to inhibit the learned response. All experiments used a discriminated operant procedure in which rats were reinforced for lever pressing or chain pulling in the presence of a discriminative stimulus (S), but not in its absence. In Experiment 1, extinction of the response (R) in the presence of S weakened responding in S, but equivalent nonreinforced exposure to S (without the opportunity to make R) did not. Experiment 2 replicated that result and found that extinction of R had no effect on a different R that had also been reinforced in the stimulus. In Experiments 3 and 4, rats first learned to perform several different stimulus and response combinations (S1R1, S2R1, S3R2, and S4R2). Extinction of a response in one stimulus (i.e., S1R1) transferred and weakened the same response, but not a different response, when it was tested in another stimulus (i.e., S2R1 but not S3R2). In Experiment 5, extinction still transferred between S1 and S2 when the stimuli set the occasion for R's association with different types of food pellets. The results confirm the importance of response inhibition in instrumental extinction: Nonreinforcement of the response in S causes the most effective suppression of responding, and response suppression is specific to the response but transfers and influences performance of the same response when it is occasioned by other stimuli. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Occasion setting, inhibition, and the contextual control of extinction in Pavlovian and instrumental (operant) learning

“…Instead, the rats needed an opportunity to make the response for it to be weakened during extinction. A second experiment (Bouton et al, 2016, Experiment 2) replicated the result and also demonstrated that extinction of one response (e.g., chain pulling) had no discernible impact on a second response (e.g., lever pressing) that had also been reinforced in the same stimulus. Thus, nonreinforcement of the response was necessary to produce extinction, and it suppressed only that specific response.…”

“…A series of recent experiments has produced more direct evidence suggesting response inhibition in instrumental extinction (Bouton, Trask, & Carranza-Jasso, 2016). An initial experiment showed that making the response in extinction was necessary for effective operant extinction to occur (Bouton et al, 2016, Experiment 1).…”

“…An initial experiment showed that making the response in extinction was necessary for effective operant extinction to occur (Bouton et al, 2016, Experiment 1). Rats acquired a discriminated operant response (in which a response was only reinforced in the presence of a discriminative stimulus, S).…”

“…Another experiment (Bouton, et al, 2016; Experiment 4) asked whether learning to inhibit a response in one stimulus also suppressed it in another stimulus (see Table 2 for the experimental design). If the animal learned a general form of response inhibition, or if that inhibition were controlled by the background context (as suggested above), then one would expect response inhibition to transfer between separate stimuli trained and tested in the same context.…”

“…In a final experiment, Bouton et al (2016, Experiment 5) examined the nature of the response inhibition further (see Table 3 for the experimental design). Rats first acquired the same response (a lever press) in the presence of S1 and S2.…”