Variations in Unconditioned Stimulus Processing in Unblocking

Overview

Journal J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process

Specialties Psychology
Social Sciences

Date 2005 Apr 21

PMID 15839773

Citations 17

Authors

Peter C Holland

Cynthia Kenmuir

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Three experiments examined the mechanisms by which downward shifts in reinforcer value influence learning in appetitive unblocking procedures. The downward shift was accomplished by omitting the 2nd of a 2-reinforcer sequence (food-food or food-sucrose). Performance of normal rats was compared with that of rats with lesions of the central nucleus of the amygdala, which are thought to interfere with surprise-induced enhancements of event processing. The results suggested that, in normal rats, omission of the 2nd reinforcer enhanced processing of the 1st reinforcer rather than processing of the conditioned stimuli and that lesions of the central nucleus eliminated this enhancement. The roles of reinforcement error signals in conditioning are discussed.

Citing Articles

A systems-neuroscience model of phasic dopamine.

Mollick J, Hazy T, Krueger K, Nair A, Mackie P, Herd S Psychol Rev. 2020; 127(6):972-1021.

PMID: 32525345 PMC: 8453660. DOI: 10.1037/rev0000199.

Optogenetic Blockade of Dopamine Transients Prevents Learning Induced by Changes in Reward Features.

Chang C, Gardner M, Di Tillio M, Schoenbaum G Curr Biol. 2017; 27(22):3480-3486.e3.

PMID: 29103933 PMC: 5698141. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.09.049.

Dopamine transients are sufficient and necessary for acquisition of model-based associations.

Sharpe M, Chang C, Liu M, Batchelor H, Mueller L, Jones J Nat Neurosci. 2017; 20(5):735-742.

PMID: 28368385 PMC: 5413864. DOI: 10.1038/nn.4538.

Effects of amygdala lesions on overexpectation phenomena in food cup approach and autoshaping procedures.

Holland P Behav Neurosci. 2016; 130(4):357-75.

PMID: 27176564 PMC: 4961541. DOI: 10.1037/bne0000149.

Mini-review: Prediction errors, attention and associative learning.

Holland P, Schiffino F Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2016; 131:207-15.

PMID: 26948122 PMC: 4862921. DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2016.02.014.

References

Schultz W, Dickinson A . Neuronal coding of prediction errors. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2000; 23:473-500. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.23.1.473. View

Holland P . Second-order conditioning with and without unconditioned stimulus presentation. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1980; 6(3):238-50. DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.6.3.238. View

HOLLAND , Gallagher . Amygdala circuitry in attentional and representational processes. Trends Cogn Sci. 1999; 3(2):65-73. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01271-6. View

Gonzales C, Chesselet M . Amygdalonigral pathway: an anterograde study in the rat with Phaseolus vulgaris leucoagglutinin (PHA-L). J Comp Neurol. 1990; 297(2):182-200. DOI: 10.1002/cne.902970203. View

Holland P, Fox G . Effects of hippocampal lesions in overshadowing and blocking procedures. Behav Neurosci. 2003; 117(3):650-6. DOI: 10.1037/0735-7044.117.3.650. View

Holland P, Thornton J, Ciali L . The influence of associability changes in negative patterning and other discriminations. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2000; 26(4):462-76. DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.26.4.462. View

WAGNER A, Mazur J, Donegan N, Pfautz P . Evaluation of blocking and conditioned inhibition to a CS signaling a decrease in US intensity. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1980; 6(4):376-85. View

Holland P . Excitation and inhibition in unblocking. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1988; 14(3):261-79. View

Hall G, Pearce J . Latent inhibition of a CS during CS-US pairings. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1979; 5(1):31-42. View

10.

Holland P . Conditioned stimulus as a determinant of the form of the Pavlovian conditioned response. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1977; 3(1):77-104. DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.3.1.77. View

11.

Holland P, Gallagher M . Effects of amygdala central nucleus lesions on blocking and unblocking. Behav Neurosci. 1993; 107(2):235-45. DOI: 10.1037//0735-7044.107.2.235. View

12.

Baxter M, Holland P, Gallagher M . Disruption of decrements in conditioned stimulus processing by selective removal of hippocampal cholinergic input. J Neurosci. 1997; 17(13):5230-6. PMC: 6573295. View

13.

Pearce J, Hall G . A model for Pavlovian learning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychol Rev. 1980; 87(6):532-52. View

14.

Holland P, Bashaw M, Quinn J . Amount of training and stimulus salience affect associability changes in serial conditioning. Behav Processes. 2002; 59(3):169. DOI: 10.1016/s0376-6357(02)00092-x. View

15.

Holland P, Chik Y, Zhang Q . Inhibitory learning tests of conditioned stimulus associability in rats with lesions of the amygdala central nucleus. Behav Neurosci. 2001; 115(5):1154-8. View

16.

Holland P . Element pretraining influences the content of appetitive serial compound conditioning in rats. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1985; 11(3):367-87. View

17.

Wasserman E, Miller R . What's elementary about associative learning?. Annu Rev Psychol. 1997; 48:573-607. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.573. View

18.

Holland P, Gallagher M . Amygdala central nucleus lesions disrupt increments, but not decrements, in conditioned stimulus processing. Behav Neurosci. 1993; 107(2):246-53. DOI: 10.1037//0735-7044.107.2.246. View

19.

Holland P, Rescorla R . Second-order conditioning with food unconditioned stimulus. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1975; 88(1):459-67. DOI: 10.1037/h0076219. View

20.

Han J, Gallagher M, Holland P . Hippocampal lesions disrupt decrements but not increments in conditioned stimulus processing. J Neurosci. 1995; 15(11):7323-9. PMC: 6578090. View