The role of contextual associations in producing the partial reinforcement acquisition deficit.

Abstract

Three conditioned suppression experiments with rats as subjects assessed the contributions of the conditioned stimulus (CS)-context and context-unconditioned stimulus (US) associations to the degraded stimulus control by the CS that is observed following partial reinforcement relative to continuous reinforcement training. In Experiment 1, posttraining associative deflation (i.e., extinction) of the training context after partial reinforcement restored responding to a level comparable to the one produced by continuous reinforcement. In Experiment 2, posttraining associative inflation of the context (achieved by administering unsignaled outcome presentations in the context) enhanced the detrimental effect of partial reinforcement. Experiment 3 found that the training context must be an effective competitor to produce the partial reinforcement acquisition deficit. When the context was down-modulated, the target regained behavioral control thereby demonstrating higher-order retrospective revaluation. The results are discussed in terms of retrospective revaluation, and are used to contrast the predictions of a performance-focused model with those of an acquisition-focused model.

Spontaneous recovery and ABC renewal from retroactive cue interference

“…Other phenomena that decrease Pavlovian response could and should be compared to determine whether similar mechanisms govern all kinds of associative reductions in acquired behavior. One example of this is provided by Miguez, Laborda et al (2011), who have shown that retrospective revaluation occurs in retroactive cue interference (Cell 3; i.e., extinction of the Phase 2 association prior to testing decreases the interference), as has been reported in cue competition (Cell 1; e.g., Kaufman & Bolles, 1981;Miguez, Witnauer, & Miller, 2011). Comparisons between cue competition (Cell 1) and outcome competition (Cell 2) are scarce.…”

Prediction suppression in monkey inferotemporal cortex depends on the conditional probability between images

“…4B. This is evident in the induction of an acquisition deficit by partial reinforcement (Miguez et al 2012). Finally, and critically, it also depends on the conditional probability P(CS|US) as expected from operation of the rule depicted in Fig.…”

The functions of contexts in associative learning

“…When discrete CSs are tested in such contexts, fear to the context summates with fear to a discrete CS (e.g., Balaz et al, 1981, 1982; Polack, Laborda, & Miller, 2013). Contexts acting as cues may also interact with discrete stimuli by entering into competition with these cues, as is most evident when training trials are massed (e.g., Barela, 1999; Miguez, Witnauer, Laborda, & Miller, 2014), or when USs alone are administered before (e.g., Randich & Ross, 1984) or during conditioning (e.g., Rescorla, 1968; Miguez, Witnauer, & Miller, 2012; Urcelay & Miller, 2006). In some circumstances, the cue-like properties of a context as a direct predictor of a US and as a cue that competes with discrete CSs may interact (Polack et al, 2013).…”

“…Low contingency situations are characterized by unpaired presentations of either the cue or the outcome, or both, and these can be administered before or after cue-outcome pairings or interspersed between cue-outcome pairings (e.g., Miguez, Witnauer, & Miller, 2012). Context dependency of acquired responding is often observed when cue- or outcome-alone presentations are conducted before or after cue-outcome pairing (i.e., situations that introduce ambiguity; e.g., Miller & Escobar, 2002).…”