Extinction and Spontaneous Recovery of Spatial Behavior in Pigeons

Overview

Journal J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn

Publisher American Psychological Association

Specialties Psychology
Social Sciences

Date 2015 Oct 6

PMID 26437383

Citations 1

Authors

Kenneth J Leising

Jared Wong

Aaron P Blaisdell

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

We investigated extinction and spontaneous recovery of spatial associations using a landmark-based appetitive search task in a touchscreen preparation with pigeons. Four visual landmarks (A, B, C, and D) were separately established as signals of a hidden reinforced target among an 8 × 7 array of potential target locations. The target was located above landmarks (LM) A and C and below B and D. After conditioning, A and B were extinguished. Responding to A and C was assessed on probe tests 2 days following extinction, whereas, B and D were tested 14 days after extinction. We observed spontaneous recovery from spatial extinction following a 14-day, but not a 2-day, postextinction retention interval. Furthermore, by plotting the spatial distribution of responding across the X and Y axes during testing, we found that spontaneous recovery of responding to the target in our task was due to enhanced spatial control (i.e., a change in the overall distribution of responses) following the long delay to testing. These results add spatial extinction and spontaneous recovery to the list of findings supporting the assertion that extinction involves new learning that attenuates the originally acquired response, and that original learning of the spatial relationship between paired events survives extinction. (PsycINFO Database Record

Citing Articles

How do animals weigh conflicting information about reward sources over time? Comparing dynamic averaging models.

Van Allsburg J, Shahan T Anim Cogn. 2024; 27(1):11.

PMID: 38429608 PMC: 10907467. DOI: 10.1007/s10071-024-01840-2.

References

Leising K, Blaisdell A . Associative Basis of Landmark Learning and Integration in Vertebrates. Comp Cogn Behav Rev. 2011; 4:80-102. PMC: 2895939. DOI: 10.3819/ccbr.2009.40010. View

Gallistel C, Mark T, King A, Latham P . The rat approximates an ideal detector of changes in rates of reward: implications for the law of effect. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2001; 27(4):354-72. DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.27.4.354. View

Vurbic D, Bouton M . Secondary extinction in Pavlovian fear conditioning. Learn Behav. 2011; 39(3):202-11. PMC: 3117985. DOI: 10.3758/s13420-011-0017-7. View

Chamizo V, Rodrigo T, Mackintosh N . Spatial integration with rats. Learn Behav. 2007; 34(4):348-54. DOI: 10.3758/bf03193198. View

Domjan M . Pavlovian conditioning: a functional perspective. Annu Rev Psychol. 2005; 56:179-206. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141409. View

Stahlman W, Roberts S, Blaisdell A . Effect of reward probability on spatial and temporal variation. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2010; 36(1):77-91. DOI: 10.1037/a0015971. View

Pavlov P . Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex. Ann Neurosci. 2014; 17(3):136-41. PMC: 4116985. DOI: 10.5214/ans.0972-7531.1017309. View

Gallistel C . The importance of proving the null. Psychol Rev. 2009; 116(2):439-53. PMC: 2859953. DOI: 10.1037/a0015251. View

Gallistel C, Gibbon J . Time, rate, and conditioning. Psychol Rev. 2000; 107(2):289-344. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.107.2.289. View

10.

Leising K, Hall J, Wolf J, Ruprecht C . Occasion setting during a spatial-search task with pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2015; 41(2):163-78. DOI: 10.1037/xan0000048. View

11.

Leising K, Wong J, Ruprecht C, Blaisdell A . Blocking between landmarks during 2-D (touchscreen) and 3-D (ARENA) search tasks with pigeons. Learn Behav. 2014; 42(4):357-64. PMC: 4221440. DOI: 10.3758/s13420-014-0153-y. View

12.

Prados J, Manteiga R, Sansa J . Recovery effects after extinction in the Morris swimming pool navigation task. Learn Behav. 2003; 31(3):299-304. DOI: 10.3758/bf03195991. View

13.

Lattal K, Mullen M, Abel T . Extinction, renewal, and spontaneous recovery of a spatial preference in the water maze. Behav Neurosci. 2003; 117(5):1017-28. DOI: 10.1037/0735-7044.117.5.1017. View

14.

Bouton M . Context, time, and memory retrieval in the interference paradigms of Pavlovian learning. Psychol Bull. 1993; 114(1):80-99. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.80. View

15.

Rodrigo T, Chamizo V, McLaren I, Mackintosh N . Blocking in the spatial domain. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1997; 23(1):110-8. DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.23.1.110. View

16.

Sawa K, Leising K, Blaisdell A . Sensory preconditioning in spatial learning using a touch screen task in pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2005; 31(3):368-75. DOI: 10.1037/0097-7403.31.3.368. View

17.

Leising K, Garlick D, Blaisdell A . Overshadowing between landmarks on the touchscreen and in arena with pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2011; 37(4):488-94. DOI: 10.1037/a0023914. View

18.

Delamater A . Issues in the extinction of specific stimulus-outcome associations in Pavlovian conditioning. Behav Processes. 2012; 90(1):9-19. PMC: 3335960. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2012.03.006. View

19.

Spetch M . Overshadowing in landmark learning: touch-screen studies with pigeons and humans. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1995; 21(2):166-81. DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.21.2.166. View

20.

Leising K, Sawa K, Blaisdell A . Factors that influence negative summation in a spatial-search task with pigeons. Behav Processes. 2012; 90(3):357-63. PMC: 3372616. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2012.03.018. View