Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2015, Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology
…
28 pages
1 file
Pavlovian conditioning is the process by which we learn relationships between stimuli and thus constitutes a basic building block for how the brain constructs representations of the world. We first review the major concepts of Pavlovian conditioning and point out many of the pervasive misunderstandings about just what conditioning is. This brings us to a modern redefinition of conditioning as the process whereby experience with a conditional relationship between stimuli bestows these stimuli with the ability to promote adaptive behavior patterns that did not occur before the experience. Working from this framework, we provide an in-depth analysis of two examples, fear conditioning and food-based appetitive conditioning, which include a description of the only partially overlapping neural circuitry of each. We also describe how these circuits promote the basic characteristics that define Pavlovian conditioning, such as error-correction-driven regulation of learning.
Behavioral Neuroscience, 2012
The existence of value coding and salience coding neurons in the mammalian brain, including in habenula and ventral tegmental area, has sparked considerable interest in the interactions that occur between Pavlovian appetitive and aversive conditioning. Here we studied these appetitive-aversive interactions at the behavioral level by assessing the learning that occurs when a Pavlovian appetitive conditioned stimulus (conditional stimulus, CS) serves as a CS for shock in Pavlovian fear conditioning. A Pavlovian appetitive CS was retarded in the rate at which it could be transformed into a fear CS (counterconditioning), but the presence of the appetitive CS augmented fear learning to a concurrently presented neutral CS (superconditioning). Retardation of fear learning was not alleviated by manipulations designed to restore the associability of the appetitive CS before fear conditioning but was alleviated by manipulations designed to increase the aversive quality of the shock unconditioned stimulus (US). These findings are consistent with opponent interactions between the appetitive and aversive motivational systems and provide a behavioral approach for assessing the neural correlates of these appetitive-aversive interactions.
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2006
Pavlovian or classical fear conditioning is recognized as a model system to investigate the neurobiological mechanisms of learning and memory in the mammalian brain and to understand the root of fear-related disorders in humans. In recent decades, important progress has been made in delineating the essential neural circuitry and cellular-molecular mechanisms of fear conditioning. Converging lines of evidence indicate that the amygdala is necessarily involved in the acquisition, storage and expression of conditioned fear memory, and long-term potentiation (LTP) in the lateral nucleus of the amygdala is often proposed as the underlying synaptic mechanism of associative fear memory. Recent studies further implicate the prefrontal cortexamygdala interaction in the extinction (or inhibition) of conditioned fear. Despite these advances, there are unresolved issues and findings that challenge the validity and sufficiency of the current amygdalar LTP hypothesis of fear conditioning. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of evidence indicating that fear conditioning depend crucially upon the amygdalar circuit and plasticity.
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2021
In appetitive Pavlovian conditioning, experience with a conditional relationship between a cue [conditioned stimulus (CS)] and a reward [unconditioned stimulus (US)] bestows CS with the ability to promote adaptive behavior patterns. Different features of US (e.g., identity-specific sensory, general motivational) can be encoded by CS based on the nature of the CS-US relationship experienced (e.g., temporal factors such as training amount) and the content of association may determine the influence of CS over behavior (e.g., mediated learning, conditioned reinforcement). The content of association changed with varying conditioning factors, thereby altering behavioral consequences, however, has never been addressed in relevant brain signals evoked by CS. Our previous study found that phospholipase C β1-knockout (PLCβ1-KO) mice display persistent mediated learning over the extended course of odor-sugar conditioning, and that wild-type (WT) mice lose mediated learning sensitivity after ex...
Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.), 2013
We used Pavlovian counterconditioning in rats to identify the neural mechanisms for appetitive -aversive motivational interactions. In Stage I, rats were trained on conditioned stimulus (CS) -food (unconditioned stimulus [US]) pairings. In Stage II, this appetitive CS was transformed into a fear CS via pairings with footshock. The development of fear responses was retarded in rats that had received Stage I appetitive training. This counterconditioning was associated with increased levels of phosphorylated mitogen activated protein kinase immunoreactivity (pMAPK-IR) in several brain regions, including midline thalamus, rostral agranular insular cortex (RAIC), lateral amygdala, and nucleus accumbens core and shell, but decreased expression in the ventrolateral quadrant of the midbrain periaqueductal gray. These brain regions showing differential pMAPK-IR have previously been identified as part of the fear prediction error circuit. We then examined the causal role of RAIC MAPK in fear learning and showed that Stage II fear learning was prevented by RAIC infusions of the MEK inhibitor PD098059 (0.5 mg/hemisphere). Taken together, these results show that there are opponent interactions between the appetitive and aversive motivational systems during fear learning and that the transformation of a reward CS into a fear CS is linked to heightened activity in the fear prediction error circuit.
Behavioural Processes, 2012
This paper reviews a variety of studies designed to examine the effects of extinction upon control by specific stimulus-outcome (S-O) associations in Pavlovian conditioning. Studies conducted with rats in a magazine approach conditioning paradigm have shown that control by specific SO associations is normally unaffected by extinction treatments, although other aspects of conditioned responding seem affected in a more enduring way. However, recent work suggests that extinction can undermine control by such associations if it is administered after the conditioned stimulus is weakly encoded. The results from these studies suggest that it may be important to consider multiple response systems in assessing the impact of extinction. Studies conducted with the flavor preference learning paradigm in rats also show that specific SO associations can be undermined by procedures that involve presenting a flavor cue in the absence of its associated nutrient. These findings provide no support for the view that flavor preference learning necessarily entails some unique learning process that differs from more conventional processes. As in other situations, some of these effects likely involve a masking process, but the extent to which masking or true associative weakening occurs in extinction more generally is a topic that is not well understood. Finally, we present some data to suggest that extinction also involves conditional "occasionsetting" control by contextual cues. Special procedures are recommended in assessing such learning when the goal is to distinguish this form of learning from other more conventional mechanisms of extinction.
2021
Surprising violations of outcome expectancies have long been known to enhance the associability of Pavlovian cues; that is, the rate at which the cue enters into further associations. The adaptive value of such enhancements resides in promoting new learning in the face of uncertainty. However, it is unclear whether associability enhancements reflect increased associative plasticity within a particular behavior system, or whether they can facilitate learning between a cue and any arbitrary outcome, as suggested by attentional models of conditioning. Here, we show evidence consistent with the latter hypothesis. Violating the outcome expectancies generated by a cue in an appetitive setting (feeding behavior system) facilitated subsequent learning about the cue in an aversive setting (defense behavior system). In addition to shedding light on the nature of associability enhancements, our findings offer the neuroscientist a behavioral tool to dissociate their neural substrates from those...
Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 1995
We present a model of Pavlovian excitatory conditioning in which associative strength and malleable central representations of unconditional stimuli determine the strength of conditional responding. Presentation of a conditioned stimulus acts through an experientially determined associative bond to activate a representation of the unconditional stimulus. The activation of the representation produces a conditioned response. A striking feature of the model is its ability to describe changes in conditioned response magnitude in terms of alterations of representations of the unconditional stimulus. Another is its acknowledgement of the capacity of associative bonds to survive behavioral extinction. The model describes much of the data reported from excitatory conditioning experiments and predicts counterintuitive phenomena.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2009
The present experiments addressed a fundamental discrepancy in the Pavlovian conditioning literature concerning responding to a target cue following compound reinforced training with another cue of higher salience. Experiment 1 identified one determinant of whether the target cue will be overshadowed or potentiated by the more salient cue, namely contiguity between compound CS termination and US presentation. Overshadowing and potentiation were observed with delay and trace procedures, respectively. Experiments 2-3 contrasted elemental and configural explanations of potentiation. Both experiments supported a configural account. Experiments 3 and 4, by manipulating prior learning experiences to bias subjects to encode the same compound elementally or configurally, demonstrated decreased potentiation and overshadowing, respectively. Overall, these experiments demonstrate potentiation with non-taste stimuli and identify one variable that determines whether overshadowing or potentiation will occur. Moreover, they show that prior experiences can determine how a compound is encoded and are compatible with the idea of flexible encoding as a principle of information processing.
2021
Pavlovian fear conditioning, which offers the advantage of simplicity in both the control of conditioned and unconditioned stimuli (CS, US) presentation and the analysis of specific conditioned and unconditioned responses (CR, UR) in a controlled laboratory setting, has been the standard model in basic and translational fear research. Despite 100 years of experiments, the utility of fear conditioning has not been trans-situationally validated in real-life contexts. We thus investigated whether fear conditioning readily occurs and guides the animal’s future behavior in an ecologically-relevant environment. To do so, Long-Evans rats foraging for food in an open arena were presented with a tone CS paired with electric shock US to their dorsal neck/body that instinctively elicited escape UR to the safe nest. On subsequent test days, the tone-shock paired animals failed to exhibit fear CR to the CS. In contrast, animals that encountered a realistic agent of danger (a looming artificial o...
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Communications Biology
Learning & behavior, 2002
Annual Review of Psychology, 1993
Models, Methods and Applications, 2011
Learning & Memory, 2016
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2010
Animal Learning & Behavior, 2002
Journal of Neurophysiology, 2018
Learning & Behavior, 1992
Neuropharmacology, 1998
Physiology & Behavior, 2016
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1985
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1985
Neuron, 1999
International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 2005
Learning & Memory, 2000
Learning & …, 2010
Journal of Experimental Psychology: …, 2008
International Journal of Psychophysiology, 2015
Biological Psychology, 2002