Conditioned suppression is an inverted-U function of footshock intensity

Learning and Behavior

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 94-106

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

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Computational modeling; Cue competition; Error reduction; Fear conditioning; US intensity

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CONDITIONED REFLEX; ELECTRIC SHOCK; FEMALE; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LEARNING; LIMB; MALE; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RAT; REINFORCEMENT;

ANIMALS; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; CONDITIONING, CLASSICAL; CUES; ELECTROSHOCK; EXTINCTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; EXTREMITIES; FEMALE; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; RATS;

EID: 84874345088     PISSN: 15434494     EISSN: 15434508     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13420-012-0088-0     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Annau, Z., & Kamin, L. J. (1961). The conditioned emotional response as a function of intensity of the US. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 54, 428-432.
2. Aston-Jones, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2005). An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 28, 403-450. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.28. 061604.135709 (Pubitemid 41098911)
3. 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. (Pubitemid 128741627)
4. Bott, L., Hoffman, A. B., & Murphy, G. L. (2007). Blocking in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 136, 685-699.
5. Bouton, M. E., Frohardt, R., Sunsay, C., Waddell, J., & Morris, R. (2008). Contextual control of inhibition with reinforcement: Adaptation and timing mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 34, 223-236. (Pubitemid 351671860)
6. Cross, D. V., Tursky, B., & Lodge, M. (1975). The role of regression and range effects in determination of the power function for electric shock. Perception & Psychophysics, 18, 9-14.
7. Davis, M., & Astrachan, D. I. (1978). Conditioned fear and startle magnitude: Effects of different footshock and backshock intensities used in training. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 4, 95-103.
8. Domjan, M. (2005). Principles of learning and behavior (5th ed.). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
9. Fanselow, M. S., & Lester, L. S. (1988). A functional behavioristic approach to aversively motivated behavior: Predatory imminence as a determinant of the topography of defensive behavior. In R. C. Bolles & M. D. Beecher (Eds.), Evolution and learning (pp. 185-211). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
10. Godsil, B. P., Tinsley, M. R., & Fanselow, M. S. (2003). Motivation. In A. F. Healy & R. W. Proctor (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Experimental psychology, Vol. 4, pp. 33-60). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
11. Kurtz, K. J. (2007). The divergent autoencoder (DIVA) model of category learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 560-576.
12. 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
13. Leaton, R. N., & Borszcz, G. S. (1985). Potentiated startle: Its relation to freezing and shock intensity in rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 421-428.
14. Morris, R. W., & Bouton, M. E. (2006). The effect of unconditioned stimulus magnitude on the emergence of conditioned responding. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 371-385. (Pubitemid 44600903)
15. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes (G. V. Anrep, Trans.). London: Oxford University Press.
16. Rescorla, R. A. (2000). Associative changes in excitors and inhibitors differ when they are conditioned in compound. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 26, 428-438. doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.26.4. 428
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 research and theory (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
18. Rusiniak, K. W., Hankins, W. G., Garcia, J., & Brett, L. P. (1979). Flavor-illlness aversions: Potentiation of odor by taste in rats. Behavioral and Neural Biology, 25, 1-17. (Pubitemid 9238629)
19. Sissons, H. T., & Miller, R. R. (2008). Overexpectation and trial spacing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 35, 186-196.
20. Stevens, S. S. (1961). To honor Fechner and repeal his law. Science, 133, 80-86.
21. Stout, S. C., Chang, R. C., & Miller, R. R. (2003). Trial spacing is a determinant of cue interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 29, 23-38. (Pubitemid 38360905)
22. Stout, S. C., & Miller, R. R. (2007). Sometimes-competing retrieval (SOCR): A formalization of the comparator hypothesis. Psychological Review, 114, 759-783. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.759
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. (Pubitemid 43145705)
24. Urcelay, G. P., & Miller, R. R. (2009). Potentiation and overshadowing in Pavlovian fear conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 35, 340-356.
25. Urcelay, G. P., & Miller, R. R. (2010). Two roles of the context in Pavlovian fear conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 36, 268-280. doi: 10.1037/a0017298
26. Urcelay, G. P., Witnauer, J. E., & Miller, R. R. (2012). The dual role of the context in postpeak performance decrements resulting from extended training. Learning & Behavior. doi: 10.3758/s13420-012-0068-4
27. Urushihara, K., & Miller, R. R. (2006). Overshadowing and the outcome-alone exposure effect counteract each other. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 253-270. doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.32.3. 253 (Pubitemid 44157636)
28. Urushihara, K., & Miller, R. R. (2007). CS-duration and partial-reinforcement effects counteract overshadowing in select situations. Learning & Behavior, 35, 268-271.
29. Wheeler, D. S., & Miller, R. R. (2008). Determinants of cue interactions. Behavioural Processes, 78, 191-203.
30. Witnauer, J. E., Urcelay, G. P., & Miller, R. R. (2008). Reduced blocking as a result of increasing the number of blocking cues. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 651-655. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.3.651
31. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482.