Recovery effects after extinction in the Morris swimming pool navigation task

Learning and Behavior

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 299-304

  Prados, José ^a   Manteiga, Raúl D ^a   Sansa, Joan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONDITIONING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; LEARNING; MALE; NONHUMAN; RAT; REINFORCEMENT; SWIMMING; SWIMMING POOL;

EID: 0141446371     PISSN: 15434494     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/bf03195991     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. ARCHER, T., SJÖDÉN, P., & NILSSON, L.-G. (1985). Contextual control of taste aversion conditioning and extinction. In P. D. Balsam & A. Tomie (Eds.), Context and learning (pp. 225-271). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. BOUTON, M. E., & KING, D. A. (1983). Contextual control of the extinction conditioned fear: Tests for the associative value of the context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 9, 248-265.
3. BOUTON, M. E., & PECK, C. A. (1989). Context effects on conditioning, extinction, and reinstatement in an appetitive conditioning preparation. Animal Learning & Behavior, 17, 188-198.
4. BROOKS, D. C. (2000). Recent and remote extinction cues reduce spontaneous recovery. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53B, 25-58.
5. BROOKS, D. C., & BOUTON, M. E. (1993). A retrieval cue for extinction attenuates spontaneous recovery. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 19, 77-89.
6. BROOKS, D. C., PALMATIER, M. I., GARCIA, E. O., & JOHNSON, J. L. (1999). An extinction cue reduces spontaneous recovery of a conditioned taste aversion. Animal Learning & Behavior, 27, 77-88.
7. CHAMIZO, V. D. (2002). Spatial learning: Conditions and basic effects. Psicológica, 23, 33-58.
8. HALL,G., & HONEY, R. C. (1989). Contextual effects in conditioning, latent inhibition, and habituation: Associative and retrieval functions of contextual cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 232-241.
9. MACKINTOSH, N. J. (2002). Do not ask whether they have a cognitive map, but how they find their way about. Psicológica, 23, 165-185.
10. MORRIS, R. G. M. (1981). Spatial localization does not require the presence of local cues. Learning & Motivation, 12, 239-260.
11. O'KEEFE, J., & NADEL, L. (1978). The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
12. PAVLOV, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes (G. V. Anrep, Trans.). London: Oxford University Press.
13. PRADOS, J., & REDHEAD, E. S. (2002). Preexposure effects in spatial learning: From gestaltic to associative and attentional cognitive maps. Psicológica, 23, 59-78.
14. RESCORLA, R. A. (2001). Experimental extinction. In R. R. Mowrer & S. B. Klein (Eds.), Contemporary learning theories (pp. 119-154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. RESCORLA, R. A., & WAGNER, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
16. ROSAS, J. M., & BOUTON, M. E. (1996). Spontaneous recovery after extinction of a conditioned taste aversion. Animal Learning & Behavior, 24, 341-348.
17. ROSAS, J. M., & BOUTON, M. E. (1997). Renewal of a conditioned taste aversion upon return to the conditioning context after extinction in another one. Learning & Motivation, 28, 216-229.
18. SJÖDÉN, P., & ARCHER, T. (1988). Exteroceptive cues in taste-aversion learning, no artifact: Reply to Holder. Animal Learning & Behavior, 16, 235-239.
19. SJÖDÉN, P., & ARCHER, T. (1989). Taste-aversion conditioning: The role of contextual stimuli. In T. Archer & L.-G. Nilsson (Eds.), Aversion, avoidance, and anxiety perspectives on aversively motivated behavior (pp. 87-120). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.