Associative status of the training context determines the effectiveness of compound extinction

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 52-65

  Witnauer, James E ^a   Miller, Ralph R ^b  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Associative learning; Conditioned inhibition; Cue competition; Pavlovian conditioning; Within compound associations

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CONDITIONED REFLEX; CONDITIONING; FEMALE; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING; LEARNING; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; RAT; REACTION TIME; REINFORCEMENT; SPRAGUE DAWLEY RAT; TIME;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; CONDITIONING (PSYCHOLOGY); CONDITIONING, CLASSICAL; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; CUES; EXTINCTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; FEMALE; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY; REACTION TIME; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84861141395     PISSN: 00977403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0026333     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Blaisdell, A. P., Bristol, A. S., Gunther, L. M., & Miller, R. R. (1998). Overshadowing and latent inhibition counteract each other: Support for the comparator hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 24, 335-351. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.24.3.335.
2. Bouton, M. E. (1993). Context, time, and memory retrieval in the interference paradigms of Pavlovian learning. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 80-99.
3. Bouton, M. E., & Bolles, R. C. (1979). Contextual control of the extinction of conditioned fear. Learning and Motivation, 10, 445-466. doi: 10.1016/0023-9690(79)90057-2.
4. Denniston, J. C., Savastano, H., & Miller, R. (2001). The extended comparator hypothesis: Learning by contiguity, responding by relative strength. In R. R. Mowrer & S. B. Klein (Eds.), Handbook of contemporary learning theories (pp. 65-117). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Laborda, M. A., McConnell, B. L., & Miller, R. R. (2011). Behavioral techniques to reduce relapse after exposure therapy: Applications of studies of experimental extinction. In T. R. Schachtman & S. Reilly (Eds.), Associative learning and conditioning theory: Human and nonhuman applications (pp. 79-103). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199735969.003.0025.
6. Laborda, M. A., Witnauer, J. E., & Miller, R. R. (2011). Contrasting AAC and ABC renewal: The role of context associations. Learning & Behavior, 39, 46-56. doi:10.3758/s13420-010-0007-1.
7. Larrauri, J. A., & Schmajuk, N. A. (2008). Attentional, associative, and configural mechanisms in extinction. Psychological Review, 115, 640-676. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.3.640.
8. Marlin, N. A. (1983). Second-order conditioning using a contextual stimulus as S1. Animal Learning & Behavior, 11, 290-294. doi:10.3758/BF03199778.
9. Miguez, G., Witnauer, J. E., & Miller, R. R. (in press). The role of contextual associations in producing the partial reinforcement acquisition deficit. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes.
10. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London, England: Oxford University Press.
11. Pearce, J. M., & Wilson, P. N. (1991). Effects of extinction with a compound conditioned stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 17, 151-162. doi:10.1037/00977403.17.2.151.
12. Pineño, O. (2007). A response rule for positive and negative stimulus interaction in associative learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 1115-1124. doi:10.3758/BF03193100.
13. Pineño, O., Zilski, J. M., & Schachtman, T. R. (2007). Second-order conditioning during a compound extinction treatment. Learning and Motivation, 38, 172-192. doi:10.1016/j.lmot.2006.08.004.
14. Rescorla, R. A. (2000). Extinction can be enhanced by a concurrent excitor. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 26, 251-260. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.26.3.251.
15. Rescorla, R. A. (2001). Experimental extinction. In R. R. Mowrer & S. B. Klein (Eds.), Handbook of contemporary learning theories (pp. 119-154). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Rescorla, R. A. (2006). Deepened extinction from compound stimulus presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 135-144. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.32.2.135.
17. 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: Current theory and research (pp. 64-99). New York, NY: Appleton-Century Crofts.
18. Stout, S. C., Chang, R., & Miller, R. R. (2003). Trial spacing is a determinant of cue interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 29, 23-38. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.29.1.23.
19. Stout, S. C., & Miller, R. R. (2007). Sometimes-competing retrieval (SOCR): A formalization of the extended comparator hypothesis. Psychological Review, 114, 759-783. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.759.
20. Thomas, B. L., & Ayres, J. J. B. (2004). Use of the ABA fear renewal paradigm to assess the effects of extinction with co-present fear inhibitors or excitors: Implications for theories of extinction and for treating human fears and phobias. Learning and Motivation, 35, 22-52. doi: 10.1016/S0023-9690(03)00040-7.
21. Thomas, B. L., Longo, C. L., & Ayres, J. J. B. (2005). Thwarting the renewal of conditioned fear with the explicitly unpaired procedure: Possible interpretations and implications for treating human fears phobias. Learning and Motivation, 36, 374-407. doi:10.1016/j.lmot.2004.11.005.
22. Urcelay, G. P., Lipatova, O., & Miller, R. R. (2009). Constraints on enhanced extinction resulting from extinction treatment in the presence of an added excitor. Learning and Motivation, 40, 343-363. doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2009.04.003.
23. Urcelay, G. P., & Miller, R. R. (2006). Counteraction between overshadowing and degraded contingency treatments: Support for the extended comparator hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 21-32. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.32.1.21.
24. Urcelay, G. P., & Miller, R. R. (2008). Counteraction between two kinds of conditioned inhibition training. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 103-107. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.1.103.
25. Urushihara, K., & Miller, R. R. (2006). Overshadowing and the outcomealone exposure effect counteract each other. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 253-270.
26. Van Hamme, L. J., & Wasserman, E. A. (1994). Cue competition in causality judgements: The role of nonpresentation of compound stimulus elements. Learning and Motivation, 25, 127-151. doi:10.1006/lmot.1994.1008.
27. Witnauer, J. E., & Miller, R. R. (2009). Contrasting the overexpectation and extinction effects. Behavioural Processes, 81, 322-327. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.01.010.
28. Witnauer, J. E., & Miller, R. R. (2011). Some determinants of second-order conditioning. Learning & Behavior, 39, 12-26.