A comparison of latent inhibition and learned irrelevance pre-exposure effects in rabbit and human eyeblink conditioning

被引:20
作者
Allen, MT
Chelius, L
Masand, V
Gluck, MA
Myers, CE
Schnirman, G
机构
[1] Rutgers State Univ, Ctr Mol & Behav Neurosci, Newark, NJ 07102 USA
[2] Rutgers State Univ, Dept Psychol, Newark, NJ 07102 USA
[3] Fordham Univ, Dept Psychol, New York, NY 10023 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
D O I
10.1007/BF02734181
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The learning of an association between a CS and a US can be retarded by unreinforced presentations of the CS alone (termed latent inhibition or LI) or by un-correlated presentations of the CS and US (termed learned irrelevance or LIRR). In rabbit eyeblink conditioning, there have been some recent failures to replicate LI. LIRR has been hypothesized as producing a stronger retardation effect than LI based on both empirical studies and computational models. In the work presented here, we examined the relative strength of LI and LIRR in eyeblink conditioning in rabbits and humans. In both species, a number of pre-exposure trials sufficient to produce LIRR failed to produce LI (Experiments 1 & 3). Doubling the number of CS pre-exposures did produce LI in rabbits (Experiment 2), but not in humans (Experiment 4). LI was demonstrated in humans only after manipulations including an increased inter-trial interval or ITI (Experiment 5). Overall, it appears that LIRR is a more easily producible pre-exposure retardation effect than LI for eyeblink conditioning in both rabbits and humans. Several theoretical mechanisms for LI including the conditioned attention theory, stimulus compression, novelty, and the switching theory are discussed as possible explanations for the differences between LIRR and LI. Overall, future work involving testing the neural substrates of pre-exposure effects may benefit from the use of LIRR rather than LI.
引用
收藏
页码:188 / 214
页数:27
相关论文
共 78 条
[1]  
ALLEN MT, 1997, SOC NEUR ABSTR, V23
[2]   PREEXPOSURE TO THE CS ALONE, US ALONE, OR CS AND US UNCORRELATED - LATENT INHIBITION, BLOCKING BY CONTEXT OR LEARNED IRRELEVANCE [J].
BAKER, AG ;
MACKINTOSH, NJ .
LEARNING AND MOTIVATION, 1979, 10 (03) :278-294
[3]   LEARNED IRRELEVANCE AND LEARNED HELPLESSNESS - RATS LEARN THAT STIMULI, REINFORCERS, AND RESPONSES ARE UNCORRELATED [J].
BAKER, AG .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-ANIMAL BEHAVIOR PROCESSES, 1976, 2 (02) :130-141
[4]  
BENNETT CH, 1995, Q J EXP PSYCHOL-B, V48, P117
[5]  
BERRY SD, 2000, EYEBLINK CLASSICAL C
[6]   Learned irrelevance: No more than the sum of CS and US preexposure effects? [J].
Bonardi, C ;
Hall, G .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-ANIMAL BEHAVIOR PROCESSES, 1996, 22 (02) :183-191
[7]  
BORGNIS RL, 1993, THESIS MIAMI U OXFOR
[8]   SINGLE SESSION CONDITIONING OF THE NICTITATING-MEMBRANE IN THE RABBIT - EFFECT OF INTERTRIAL INTERVAL [J].
BRELSFORD, J ;
THEIOS, J .
PSYCHONOMIC SCIENCE, 1965, 2 (03) :81-82
[9]   Perplexing effects of hippocampal lesions on latent inhibition: A neural network solution [J].
Buhusi, CV ;
Gray, JA ;
Schmajuk, NA .
BEHAVIORAL NEUROSCIENCE, 1998, 112 (02) :316-351
[10]   CONTEXTUAL EFFECTS IN LATENT INHIBITION WITH AN APPETITIVE CONDITIONING PROCEDURE [J].
CHANNELL, S ;
HALL, G .
ANIMAL LEARNING & BEHAVIOR, 1983, 11 (01) :67-74