The Experts below are selected from a list of 282 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Michael S. Fanselow - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the origins and organization of vertebrate Pavlovian Conditioning
Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, 2016Co-Authors: Michael S. Fanselow, Kate M WassumAbstract: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.
-
Pavlovian Conditioning of multiple opioid like responses in mice
Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 2009Co-Authors: Camron D Bryant, Kristofer W Roberts, Christopher S Culbertson, Christopher J Evans, Michael S. FanselowAbstract:Conditional responses in rodents such as locomotion have been reported for drugs of abuse and similar to the placebo response in humans, may be associated with the expectation of reward. We examined several conditional opioid-like responses and the influence of drug expectation on conditioned place preference and concomitant conditional locomotion. Male C57BL/6J mice were conditioned with the selective mu opioid receptor agonist fentanyl (0.2 mg/kg, i.p.) in a novel context and subsequently given a vehicle injection. In separate experiments, locomotor activity, Straub tail, hot plate sensitivity, and conditioned place preference (CPP) were measured. Mice exhibited multiple conditional opioid-like responses including conditional hyperlocomotion, a conditional pattern of opioid-like locomotion, Straub tail, analgesia, and place preference. Modulating drug expectation via administration of fentanyl to “demonstrator” mice in the home cage did not affect the expression of conditioned place preference or the concomitant locomotor activity in “observer” mice. In summary, Pavlovian Conditioning of an opioid in a novel context induced multiple conditional opioid-like behaviors and provides a model for studying the neurobiological mechanisms of the placebo response in mice.
-
Pavlovian Conditioning negative feedback and blocking mechanisms that regulate association formation
Neuron, 1998Co-Authors: Michael S. FanselowAbstract:Department of Psychologyand Brain Research InstituteUniversity of CaliforniaLos Angeles, California 90024expect to get. In Phase 2, the blocking group expecteda shock because of its prior learning about the noise.It got that shock, so it was not surprised and did notFrom accounts of the neural substrates postulated tolearn about the light. Rescorla and Wagner (1972) for-underlie memory to psychology textbook descriptions, malized this notionof surprisewitha single,veryinfluen-there is a pervasive but inaccurate perception of the tial equation that formed the basis of “US-processing”learningprocess: that associationformationresults sim- models of Conditioning. Their model stated that USsply through the contiguity or pairing of events. Indeed, supported increases in associative strength propor-if one asked for a one-word description of what causes tional to the degree that they exceeded what the envi-Pavlovian Conditioning, the modal response will likely ronment already predicted.SinceRescorlaand Wagner,be “pairing.” In the archetypal experiment, an arbitrary a number of very different interpretations of blockingstimulus such as a bell is paired with placement of food have been invoked, and there is still little agreementin a dog’s mouth. On the first experience with these over what is the best way to account for the phenome-stimuli the dog does little but orient toward the bell, non. One convergent line of evidence that would go abut it chews, salivates on, and swallows the food or longway towarddeciding theissuewould bethediscov-unconditional stimulus (US). Following pairing of these ery of a specific neural circuit capable of implementingstimuli the bell, now a conditional stimulus (CS), causes the type of computations called for by one of thesethedog tomoveaboutexcitedly,wagitstail,andsalivate models. Of course, such a circuit would have to be(Zener, 1937). The word “pairing” not only reflects the essential for blocking as well. Until recently, there hascasual observer’s understanding of Conditioning; it is been only scant evidence for such a mechanism (Kim etalso at the core of traditional theoretical models of the al., 1998).Now, theavailable mechanisticdata supportaprocesses that cause Conditioning. This view is that US-processing account of blocking.temporal contiguity, the learning theorist’s technical Thefirstsuggestionofa specificphysiologicalmecha-term for pairing, is the necessary and sufficient require- nism for blocking came from the Pavlovian fear condi-ment for the acquisition of conditional responding to tioning preparation and was based on the finding thatthe CS. At the cellular level, the mechanisms proposed fear Conditioning producedananalgesic state mediatedas the neural substrates of learning, such as long-term by endogenous opioids (Bolles and Fanselow, 1980). Inpotentiation, are simply contiguity detectors. fear Conditioning, an initially neutral CS is paired with aBecause it directly challenged this simple contiguity painful electric shock. The CS acquires the ability tonotion,Leon Kamin’s(1968)discoveryof a phenomenon engage anumberoffear-relatedbehaviors,one ofwhichhe labeled “blocking” is perhaps the most significant is an opioid form of analgesia (Fanselow, 1984). Sinceempirical observationabout Conditioningsince Pavlov’s fear Conditioningdepends on the painfulness of the US,initial descriptions. His fear Conditioning experiment is an analgesic state engaged by the CS could eventuallydiagrammed in Table 1. The CS of interest was a light. diminish the reinforcingefficacy of theshock. FollowingTable 1, Phase1 would condition analgesia tothe noise.Two groups of rats received the same eight pairingsof this light with an aversive electric shock. A second During Phase 2, the light would be paired with a shockrendered ineffective by the analgesia produced by thestimulus, a white noise, was presented simultaneouslynoise.Thus, analgesia wouldprovide negativefeedbackwith the light. It is important to note that both groupson the acquisition of fear Conditioning and would auto-received the exact same experience with the light andmatically perform the calculations that comprise thethey differed only with how the noise was treated. ForRescorla–Wagnermodelof Conditioning(Fanselow, 1981).one group, the noise was pairedwith shock in an earlier The general form of such a negative feedback model isphase of the experiment; for the other, the noise had illustrated inFigure1. Theview isquite testablebecauseno pretraining. For the sake of simplicity, I converted theanalgesiceffectsofconditionalfeararereadilyblockedKamin’s data to show the percentage of Conditioning by opioid antagonists. Initial support of this negativeobservable with the measure he used. The rats with no feedbackview was providedbythe findingthat adminis-prior experience with the noise showed near maximal tering theopioid antagonist naloxone during Phase 2 ofconditionedfear tothe light,but thosethat had received the blocking procedure attenuates blocking (Fanselownoise–shock pairings earlier exhibited almost no condi- and Bolles, 1979).tionedfear.Pretrainingtothenoise“blocked”condition- In fear Conditioning,the CS and the US become asso-ing to the light. The critical point here is that despite the ciated via long-termpotentiationin theamygdala,whichfact that both groups experienced identical temporal receives information about both the neutral CS and thecontiguity between the light and shock, Conditioning in painful US (Rogan etal., 1997). Outputsof theamygdalathe two groups was about as different as you could get. generate a constellation of conditional fear responses.Contiguity does not seem to be a sufficient requirement Theamygdalaisessentialforconditional analgesia (Helm-of Conditioning. stetter and Bellgowan,1993). The analgesia is mediated
-
Pavlovian Conditioning alters cortical microtubule-associated protein-2.
Neuroreport, 1994Co-Authors: Nancy J. Woolf, Gail V. W. Johnson, Stacey L. Young, Michael S. FanselowAbstract:: Three experiments indicate that Pavlovian Conditioning to tone alters microtubule-associated protein-2 (MAP-2) in the temporal cortex. First, increased MAP-2 immunohistochemistry was evident in temporal cortex following tone-shock pairings but not light-shock pairings. In the second experiment, animals given tone paired with shock (compared with animals trained with tone unpaired with shock or given tone only) showed MAP-2 immunohistochemical changes in the temporal cortex, as well as in the frontal and cingulate cortex, the hippocampus and amygdala. In experiment 3, quantitative immunoblots showed decreased intact MAP-2 and increased breakdown products selectively in temporal cortex following fear Conditioning to tone. Conditioning to tone also increased sizes of MAP-2 rich pyramidal somata and apical dendrites in temporal and frontal cortex.
Allison M Waters - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the development of an attentional bias for angry faces following Pavlovian fear Conditioning
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 2009Co-Authors: Leah Katrina Pischeksimpson, David Lester Neumann, Mark Justin Boschen, Allison M WatersAbstract:Abstract Although it is well documented that fear responses develop following aversive Pavlovian Conditioning, it is unclear whether fear learning also manifests in the form of attentional biases for fear-related stimuli. Boschen, Parker, and Neumann (Boschen, M. J., Parker, I., & Neumann, D. L. (2007). Changes in implicit associations do not occur simultaneously to Pavlovian Conditioning of physiological anxiety responses. Journal of Anxiety Disorders , 21 , 788–803.) showed that despite the acquisition of differential skin conductance conditioned responses to angry faces paired (CS+) and unpaired (CS−) with an aversive shock, development of implicit associations was not subsequently observed on the Implicit Association Test. In the present study, participants ( N = 76) were assigned either to a Shock or NoShock group and completed a similar aversive Pavlovian Conditioning procedure with angry face CS+ and CS− stimuli. Participants next completed a visual probe task in which the angry face CS+ and CS− stimuli were paired with angry face control stimuli and neutral faces. Results confirmed that differential fear Conditioning was observed in the Shock group but not in the NoShock group, and that the Shock group subsequently showed a selective attentional bias for the angry face CS+ compared with the CS− and control stimuli during the visual probe task. The findings confirm the interplay between learning-based mechanisms and cognitive processes, such as attentional biases, in models of fear acquisition and have implications for treatment of the anxiety disorders.
-
aversive Pavlovian Conditioning in childhood anxiety disorders impaired response inhibition and resistance to extinction
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 2009Co-Authors: Allison M Waters, Julie D Henry, David L NeumannAbstract:Learning-based models of anxiety disorders emphasize the role of aversive Conditioning and retarded extinction in the etiology and maintenance of anxiety disorders. Yet few studies have examined these underlying processes in children, despite that some anxiety disorders typically onset during childhood. The authors examined the acquisition and extinction of conditioned responses in 17 anxious children and 18 nonanxious control children between 8 and 12 years old using a discriminative Pavlovian Conditioning procedure. One geometric shape conditional stimulus was paired with an unpleasant loud tone unconditional stimulus (CS+) whereas another geometric shape was presented alone (CS-). In the context of similar levels of discriminative Conditioning in both groups, anxious children showed larger skin conductance responses to the CS+ and the CS- during acquisition and evaluated the CS+ as more arousing than the CS- compared with control children. They also showed greater resistance to extinction in skin conductance responses but not in arousal ratings to the CS+ vs. the CS- relative to control children. Results suggest that deficits in response inhibition to safety cues and retarded extinction may underlie learning processes involved in the pathogenesis of childhood anxiety disorders.
-
the use of an unpleasant sound as an unconditional stimulus in a human aversive Pavlovian Conditioning procedure
Biological Psychology, 2006Co-Authors: David L Neumann, Allison M WatersAbstract:Ethical considerations can limit the use of traditional unconditional stimuli (US), such as electric shock and loud tones, when used in a human aversive Pavlovian Conditioning procedure. The risk of the US causing pain or excessive anxiety is a particular concern when testing sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with psychological or neurodevelopmental disorders. Two experiments used a differential Conditioning procedure to determine whether an unpleasant sound (metal scraping on slate) could support the acquisition and extinction of conditioned responses to the same extent as either electric shock or a 100 dB(A) tone US. Experiment 1 (N = 48) demonstrated equivalent or superior Conditioning effects for the signal-based learning measures of US expectancy, skin conductance responses, and heart rate. Experiment 2 (N = 57) yielded similar outcomes in the affective-based learning measures of startle blink modulation and pleasantness ratings. The results support the use of an unpleasant sound as a US in human Pavlovian Conditioning experiments.
Peter C Holland - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
reinforcer specificity of appetitive and consummatory behavior of rats after Pavlovian Conditioning with food reinforcers
Physiology & Behavior, 2007Co-Authors: Ezequiel M Galarce, Hans S Crombag, Peter C HollandAbstract:We examined the reinforcer-specificity of Pavlovian Conditioning in the control of appetitive and consummatory behaviors in Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer, cue-potentiated eating, and devaluation procedures. Rats received pairings of one conditioned stimulus with sucrose and another conditioned stimulus with maltodextrin. In Experiment 1, rats were also trained to earn sucrose for one instrumental response and maltodextrin for another. In a transfer test, the Pavlovian cues enhanced the rate of instrumental responding more when the food reinforcer predicted by the instrumental response and the Pavlovian cue were consistent than when they were inconsistent, but both cues enhanced both responses. In Experiment 2, sated rats' consumption of each food was potentiated in the presence of a cue for that food, but not in the presence of a cue for the other food. In Experiment 3, one food was devalued by pairing it with lithium chloride, prior to testing food consumption and food-cup directed behaviors. The food cues selectively controlled food-cup related behaviors, regardless of the presence of the devalued or nondevalued foods in the food cup. Together, these results are consistent with the view that conditioned cues modulate appetitive and consummatory behaviors with increasing levels of specificity. The closer an action comes to ingestion, the more it is controlled by sensory properties conveyed by learned cues. These data are discussed in the context of allostatic regulation of food foraging and intake.
-
Brain mechanisms for changes in processing of conditioned stimuli in Pavlovian Conditioning: Implications for behavior theory
Animal Learning & Behavior, 1997Co-Authors: Peter C HollandAbstract:This article is a review of the results of a series of experiments designed to identify brain systems involved in appetitive Conditioning of rats. It discusses some of their implications for behavioral theories of learning, especially those that concern changes in processing of conditioned stimuli (CSs). Evidence is presented which suggests that separable brain circuits are involved in (1) the production of CS-dependent conditioned orienting responses, (2) the enhancement of CS associability produced when expectancies about upcoming events are violated, (3) the reduction of CS associability produced when stimuli are consistent predictors of other events or are presented without consequence, and (4) the abilities of CSs to serve as reinforcers for second-order Conditioning and to be sensitive to postConditioning changes in the value of the unconditioned stimulus (US). Finally, none of these circuits seems critical for normal acquisition of the most common indicator of Pavlovian Conditioning, US-dependent conditioned responses (CRs). Although the independence of brain pathways does not demand independence of behavioral function, clustering of behavioral phenomena on anatomical grounds may provide useful guides for constructing behavior theories.
-
Amygdala central nucleus lesions disrupt increments, but not decrements, in conditioned stimulus processing.
Behavioral Neuroscience, 1993Co-Authors: Peter C Holland, Michela GallagherAbstract:: The effects of neurotoxic lesions of the amygdala central nucleus (CN) on changes in the associability of a conditioned stimulus (CS) in appetitive Pavlovian Conditioning were examined in 2 experiments with rats. In Experiment 1, CN lesions had no effect on the reduction in the associability of a CS produced by preexposure to that cue (latent inhibition). In Experiment 2, CN lesions prevented the enhancement of the associability of a CS that is normally observed when an inconsistent predictive relation is arranged between that CS and another cue. The results support previous claims that the amygdala CN is involved in broad-based incremental, but not decremental, changes in the processing of CSs in Pavlovian Conditioning.
-
occasion setting in Pavlovian Conditioning
Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 1992Co-Authors: Peter C HollandAbstract:Publisher Summary This chapter describes Pavlovian Conditioning as the transfer of control of reflexes (unconditioned responses or URs) from stimuli that elicit them unconditionally (USs) to other stimuli that normally are incapable of eliciting them. Although auditory cues seldom elicit substantial salivation spontaneously, a tone provokes that response if it consistently predicts food delivery. This new-found control of salivation by the tone is typically attributed to the acquisition of some association or potentiated connection between the CS and US pathways: by virtue of that association, the CS becomes a substitute elicitor of activity along some portion of the US-UR pathway. This is often described as the CS's “activating a representation of the US”. Another behavioral control function occasionally ascribed to Pavlovian CSsis modulation. Rather than acquiring its own ability to elicit behavior usually controlled by another reflex system, a Pavlovian CS influences the efficacy of the normal elicitor of a response. The chapter is concerned with a particular modulatory function of CSs in rats solutions of elementary conditional discriminations, in which one CS modifies the efficacy of Pavlovian associations between other cues and the US. This function is called as occasion setting, which is readily distinguished from elicitation both conceptually and empirically, and perhaps anatomically as well. Furthermore, this occasion-setting function involves a hierarchical, multilayered organization of representations of events and relations and thus may aid the expansion of the domain of Pavlovian accounts of behavior.
Michael Domjan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Learning Effects on Sperm Competition and Reproductive Fitness
Psychological science, 2007Co-Authors: R. Nicolle Matthews, Michael Domjan, Mary E. Ramsey, David CrewsAbstract:Learning and other common psychological processes presumably evolved because they contribute to reproductive fitness, but reproductive outcomes are rarely measured in psychology experiments. We examined the effects of Pavlovian Conditioning on reproductive fitness in a sperm-competition situation. Typically, two males mating with the same female in immediate succession sire similar numbers of offspring. In a study with domesticated quail (Coturnix japonica), we increased paternity success by presenting a Pavlovian signal that permitted one of two competing males to predict copulatory opportunity. Using microsatellite-based DNA fingerprinting, we found that signaled males sired 72% of the offspring when competing with control males, and this effect was independent of copulation order. In the absence of Pavlovian Conditioning, rates of fertilization were not significantly different for two males that copulated with the same female. These findings demonstrate that Pavlovian Conditioning contributes to reprod...
-
Pavlovian Conditioning a functional perspective
Annual Review of Psychology, 2005Co-Authors: Michael DomjanAbstract:From a functional perspective, Pavlovian Conditioning involves learning about conditioned stimuli (CSs) that have a pre-existing relation to an unconditioned stimulus (US) rather than learning about arbitrary or neutral CSs. In addition, the most important product of learning involves changes in how the organism responds to the US, not in how it responds to the CS, because the US is the more biologically relevant stimulus. These concepts are illustrated using examples from a variety of behavioral and physiological situations including caloric intake and digestion, breast feeding, poison-avoidance learning, eyeblink Conditioning, sexual Conditioning, fear Conditioning, aggression, and drug tolerance and sensitization.
George V. Rebec - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Extinction and reinstatement of phasic dopamine signals in the nucleus accumbens core during Pavlovian Conditioning.
Behavioral Neuroscience, 2014Co-Authors: Ceyhun Sunsay, George V. RebecAbstract:The prediction-error model of dopamine (DA) signaling has largely been confirmed with various appetitive Pavlovian Conditioning procedures and has been supported in tests of Pavlovian extinction. Studies have repeatedly shown, however, that extinction does not erase the original memory of Conditioning as the prediction-error model presumes, putting the model at odds with contemporary views that treat extinction as an episode of learning rather than unlearning of Conditioning. Here, we combined fast-scan cyclic voltammetry (FSCV) with appetitive Pavlovian Conditioning to assess DA release directly during extinction and reinstatement. DA was monitored in the nucleus accumbens core (NAc), which plays a key role in reward processing. Following at least 4 daily sessions of 16 tone-food pairings, FSCV was performed while rats received additional tone-food pairings followed by tone alone presentations (i.e., extinction). Acquisition memory was reinstated with non-contingent presentations of reward and then tested with cue presentation. Tone-food pairings produced transient (1–3 s) DA release in response to tone. During extinction, the amplitude of the DA response decreased significantly. Following presentation of two non-contingent food pellets, subsequent tone presentation reinstated the DA signal. Our results support the prediction-error model for appetitive Pavlovian extinction but not for reinstatement.
