Pavlovian backward conditioned inhibition in humans: Summation and retardation tests

Abstract

Two experiments using human participants investigated whether a Pavlovian backward inhibitory treatment (nonreinforced trials in phase 1 followed by reinforced trials in phase 2; i.e., AX-followed by A+) produces a stimulus which can pass summation and retardation tests for inhibition. The rationale for conducting these experiments was that previous demonstrations of Pavlovian backward inhibition informed participants about the nature of the outcome before starting the experiment. According to some theoretical views, this is a potential confound. In the present experiments we used a predictive task in which participants had no knowledge about the outcome until phase 2, when reinforcement occurred. The results of Experiment 1 (summation test) and Experiment 2 (retardation test) provide a clear demonstration of backward conditioned inhibition.

An instance theory of associative learning

“…Second, retrieval of X given B was less in the backward inhibition condition than in either of the control conditions. Consistent with the preceding simulations, the size of the backward-blocking effect was correlated with L. Urcelay, Perelmuter, and Miller (2008) evaluated backward inhibition using a summation test. In phase 1 of training, AB was presented without an outcome.…”

Explaining compound generalization in associative and causal learning through rational principles of dimensional generalization.

“…Our simulations above demonstrate the ability of the model to explain stimulus competition effects such as blocking and overshadowing. As other Bayesian models of associative learning, the model is also capable of explaining so-called retrospective revaluation effects, such as unovershadowing and backward blocking (e.g., Chapman, 1991; Chapman & Robbins, 1990; Denniston, Miller, & Matute, 1996; Miller & Matute, 1996; Shanks, 1985; Urcelay, Perelmuter, & Miller, 2008; Wasserman & Berglan, 1998). Retrospective revaluation refers to a group of experimental observations indicating that humans and animals are able to update their knowledge about some events even in the absence of those events.…”

Conditioned inhibition of emotional responses: Retardation and summation with cues for IAPS outcomes

“…Safety signal stimuli generated by the animal"s actions, provide feedback confirming the successful execution of the avoidance response and can thus act as secondary reinforcers of this behaviour (Cándido et al, 1991;Cicala & Owen, 1976;Dickinson, 1980;Dinsmoor, 2001;Galvany & Twitty, 1978;Morris 1975). In the case of human participants, CSs and CIs would be predicted to be rated differently for emotional valence (Konorski, 1967 (Grillon & Ameli, 2001;He et al, 2011He et al, , 2012Kantini et al, 2011aKantini et al, , 2011bKarazinov & Boakes, 2004;McNally & Reiss, 1984;Migo et al, 2006;Neumann et al, 1997, Wilkinson, 1989 but also in animal studies (Cole et al, 1997;Horne & Pearce, 2010;Pineño, 2010;Rescorla & Holland, 1977;Sansa et al, 2009;Urcelay et al, 2008). Moreover, conditioned inhibition via summation test was relatively simple to demonstrate in the present study (in comparison with the retardation test method which a required trial-by-trial examination of the rate of learning).…”

“…Thus, the two test strategy for testing conditioned inhibition is widely adopted in animal studies (Cole, Barnet, & Miller 1997;Horne & Pearce, 2010;Rescorla & Holland, 1977;Sansa, Rodrigo, Santamaria, Manteiga & Chamizo, 2009;Urcelay, Perelmuter, & Miller, 2008). However, many studies using human participants have used only a summation test (Grillon & Ameli, 2001;He et al, 2011He et al, , 2012Kantini et al, 2011aKantini et al, , 2011bKarazinov & Boakes, 2004;Migo et al, 2006;Neumann, Lipp, & Siddle, 1997).…”

“…However, many studies using human participants have used only a summation test (Grillon & Ameli, 2001;He et al, 2011He et al, , 2012Kantini et al, 2011aKantini et al, , 2011bKarazinov & Boakes, 2004;Migo et al, 2006;Neumann, Lipp, & Siddle, 1997). To our knowledge, there has been only one successful demonstration of conditioned inhibition via both summation and retardation in humans, and this was in a non-standard backward conditioned inhibition procedure (Urcelay et al, 2008). Retardation tests may present a particular challenge in that inhibitors are known to generate opponent processes (Dickinson & Dearing, 1979;Konorski, 1948;1967;Solomon & Corbit, 1978).…”