State-Dependent Learned Valuation Drives Choice in an Invertebrate

Pompilio, Lorena; Kacelnik, Alex; Behmer, Spencer T.

doi:10.1126/science.1123924

Cited by 156 publications

(162 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Design of experiment by Clement & Zentall (2002, Exp. 3 Kacelnik, and Behmer (2006) were able to show similar effects in grasshoppers.…”

Section: Hunger As the Aversive Eventsupporting

confidence: 54%

Animals prefer reinforcement that follows greater effort: Justification of effort or within-trial contrast?

Zentall¹

2013

CCBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Justification of effort by humans is a form of reducing cognitive dissonance by enhancing the value of rewards when they are more difficult to obtain. Presumably, assigning greater value to rewards provides justification for the greater effort needed to obtain them. We have found such effects in adult humans and children with a highly controlled laboratory task. More importantly, under various conditions we have found similar effects in pigeons, animals not typically thought to need to justify their behavior to themselves or others. To account for these results, we have proposed a mechanism based on within-trial contrast between the end of the effort and the reinforcement (or the signal for reinforcement) that follows. This model predicts that any relatively aversive event can serve to enhance the value of the reward that follows it, simply through the contrast between those two events. In support of this general model, we have found this effect in pigeons when the prior event consists of: (a) more rather than less effort (pecking), (b) a long rather than a short delay, and (c) the absence of food rather than food. We also show that within-trial contrast can occur in the absence of relative delay reduction theory. Contrast of this kind may also play a role in other social psychological phenomena that have been interpreted in terms of cognitive dissonance. Keywords: cognitive dissonance, justification of effort, contrast, delay reduction When humans behave in a way that is inconsistent with the way they think they should behave, they will often try to justify their behavior by altering their beliefs. The theory on which this behavior is based is known as cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957). Evidence for the attempt to reduce cognitive dissonance comes from the classic study by Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) who found that subjects, who were given a small reward for agreeing to tell a prospective subject that a boring task was interesting, then rated the task more interesting than subjects who were given a large reward. Presumably, those given a small reward could not

show abstract

“…Design of experiment by Clement & Zentall (2002, Exp. 3 Kacelnik, and Behmer (2006) were able to show similar effects in grasshoppers.…”

Section: Hunger As the Aversive Eventsupporting

confidence: 54%

Animals prefer reinforcement that follows greater effort: Justification of effort or within-trial contrast?

Zentall¹

2013

CCBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…State dependence of memory has been demonstrated for aversive fear memory, emotional memory, and drug-related behaviors. 96,97 In the desert locust, decision making in an odor-associated food choice test occurs based on a state-dependent valuation of the choices 98 It is possible that the effects of sleep deprivation that we observed on long-term memory in Aplysia were state dependent, with the neuronal effects of sleep deprivation incorporated as part of the learning context. In mice, memory impairments due to sleep deprivation of REM sleep can be state dependent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Acute Sleep Deprivation Blocks Short- and Long-Term Operant Memory inAplysia

Krishnan

Gandour

Ramos

et al. 2016

Sleep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Objectives: Insufficient sleep in individuals appears increasingly common due to the demands of modern work schedules and technology use. Consequently, there is a growing need to understand the interactions between sleep deprivation and memory. The current study determined the effects of acute sleep deprivation on short and long-term associative memory using the marine mollusk Aplysia californica, a relatively simple model system well known for studies of learning and memory. Methods: Aplysia were sleep deprived for 9 hours using context changes and tactile stimulation either prior to or after training for the operant learning paradigm, learning that food is inedible (LFI). The effects of sleep deprivation on short-term (STM) and long-term memory (LTM) were assessed. Results: Acute sleep deprivation prior to LFI training impaired the induction of STM and LTM with persistent effects lasting at least 24 h. Sleep deprivation immediately after training blocked the consolidation of LTM. However, sleep deprivation following the period of molecular consolidation did not affect memory recall. Memory impairments were independent of handling-induced stress, as daytime handled control animals demonstrated no memory deficits. Additional training immediately after sleep deprivation failed to rescue the induction of memory, but additional training alleviated the persistent impairment in memory induction when training occurred 24 h following sleep deprivation. Conclusions: Acute sleep deprivation inhibited the induction and consolidation, but not the recall of memory. These behavioral studies establish Aplysia as an effective model system for studying the interactions between sleep and memory formation.

show abstract

“…Additional support for this view is that the underlying mechanism seems to differ across taxa: In birds the manipulation of energetic state during learning affects preferences but not accuracy of representation of absolute properties (10); in insects, in contrast, the effect of past needs may alter the perception of each option (7).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If the objectively inferior option B is typically encountered when the subject is in greater need, then B can be remembered as yielding greater utility than A. This phenomenon is called state-dependent valuation learning and has been shown in mammals (2), birds (3)(4)(5), fish (6) and insects (7). In humans, contradictions between expectations based on utility versus absolute gains are observed in various context-dependent phenomena that violate the principle of invariance, suggesting that the same concept may apply to human decisionmaking (8,9).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Context-dependent utility overrides absolute memory as a determinant of choice

Pompilio

Kacelnik

2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A core problem of decision theories is that although decisionmakers' preferences depend on learning, their choices could be driven either by learned representations of the physical properties of each alternative (for instance reward sizes) or of the benefit (utility and fitness) experienced from them. Physical properties are independent of the subject's state and context, but utility depends on both. We show that starlings' choices are better explained by memory for context-dependent utility than by representations of the alternatives' physical properties, even when the decisionmakers' state is controlled and they have accurate knowledge about the options' physical properties. Our results support the potential universality of utility-driven preference control.state-dependent preferences | rationality | starling | optimal foraging | decision-making

show abstract

State-Dependent Learned Valuation Drives Choice in an Invertebrate

Cited by 156 publications

References 16 publications

Animals prefer reinforcement that follows greater effort: Justification of effort or within-trial contrast?

Animals prefer reinforcement that follows greater effort: Justification of effort or within-trial contrast?

Acute Sleep Deprivation Blocks Short- and Long-Term Operant Memory inAplysia

Context-dependent utility overrides absolute memory as a determinant of choice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About