The partial reinforcement extinction effect depends on learning about nonreinforced trials rather than reinforcement rate.

Conditioned responding extinguishes more slowly after partial (inconsistent) reinforcement than after consistent reinforcement. This Partial Reinforcement Extinction Effect (PREE) is usually attributed to learning about nonreinforcement during the partial schedule. An alternative explanation attributes it to any difference in the rate of reinforcement, arguing that animals can detect the change to nonreinforcement more quickly after a denser schedule than a leaner schedule. Experiments 1a and 1b compared extinction of magazine responding to a conditioned stimulus (CS) reinforced with 1 food pellet per trial and a CS reinforced with 2 pellets per trial. Despite the difference in reinforcement rate, there was no reliable difference in extinction. Both experiments did demonstrate the conventional PREE comparing a partial CS (50% reinforced) with a consistent CS. Experiments 2 and 3 tested whether the PREE depends specifically on learning about nonreinforced trials during partial reinforcement. Rats were trained with 2 CS configurations, A and AX. One was partially reinforced, the other consistently reinforced. When AX was partial and A consistent, responding to AX extinguished more slowly than to A. When AX was consistent and A was partial, there was no difference in their extinction. Therefore, pairing X with partial reinforcement allowed rats to show a PREE to AX that did not generalize to A. Pairing A with partial reinforcement meant that rats showed a PREE to A that generalized to AX. Thus, the PREE depends on learning about nonreinforced trials during partial reinforcement and is not because of any difference in per-trial probability of reinforcement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The partial-reinforcement extinction effect does not result from reduced sensitivity to nonreinforcement.

Five experiments used a magazine approach paradigm with rats to investigate whether learning about nonreinforcement is impaired in the presence of a conditioned stimulus (CS) that had been partially reinforced (PRf). Experiment 1 trained rats with a PRf CS and a continuously reinforced (CRf) CS, then extinguished responding to both CSs presented together as a compound. Probe trials of each CS presented alone revealed that extinction was slower for the PRf CS than the CRf CS, despite being extinguished in compound. In Experiment 2, a CRf light was extinguished in compound with either a CRf CS or a PRf CS that had been matched for overall reinforcement rate. Responding to the light extinguished at the same rate regardless of the reinforcement schedule of the other CS. Experiment 3 replicated this result with a PRf light. Thus, we found no evidence that a PRf CS impairs extinction of another CS presented at the same time. Experiments 4 and 5 extended this approach to study the acquisition of conditioned inhibition by training an inhibitor in compound with either a PRf or CRf excitatory CS. The reinforcement schedule of the excitatory CS had no effect on the acquisition of inhibition. In sum, conditioning with a PRf schedule slows subsequent extinction of that CS but does not affect learning about the nonreinforcement of other stimuli presented at the same time. We conclude that the Partial Reinforcement Extinction Effect is not attributable to a decrease in sensitivity to nonreinforcement following presentation of a PRf CS. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The probability of reinforcement per trial affects posttrial responding and subsequent extinction but not within-trial responding.

During magazine approach conditioning, rats do not discriminate between a conditional stimulus (CS) that is consistently reinforced with food and a CS that is occasionally (partially) reinforced, as long as the CSs have the same overall reinforcement rate per second. This implies that rats are indifferent to the probability of reinforcement per trial. However, in the same rats, the per-trial reinforcement rate will affect subsequent extinction-responding extinguishes more rapidly for a CS that was consistently reinforced than for a partially reinforced CS. Here, we trained rats with consistently and partially reinforced CSs that were matched for overall reinforcement rate per second. We measured conditioned responding both during and immediately after the CSs. Differences in the per-trial probability of reinforcement did not affect the acquisition of responding during the CS but did affect subsequent extinction of that responding, and also affected the post-CS response rates during conditioning. Indeed, CSs with the same probability of reinforcement per trial evoked the same amount of post-CS responding even when they differed in overall reinforcement rate and thus evoked different amounts of responding during the CS. We conclude that reinforcement rate per second controls rats' acquisition of responding during the CS, but at the same time, rats also learn specifically about the probability of reinforcement per trial. The latter learning affects the rats' expectation of reinforcement as an outcome of the trial, which influences their ability to detect retrospectively that an opportunity for reinforcement was missed, and, in turn, drives extinction. (PsycINFO Database Record

Timing of interfering events in one-trial serial overshadowing of a taste aversion.

This set of experiments examined the question of when a stimulus would be most effective in overshadowing the acquisition of long-delay taste aversion learning. In Experiment 1 rats drank sucrose, the target solution, followed by a hydrochloric acid (HCl) solution before lithium injection some time later; HCl was presented either early or late in the interval. The late condition produced greater overshadowing than the early condition. The importance of the HCl-injection interval was confirmed by Experiment 2, in which the sucrose-injection interval was varied. Experiment 3 found that even placement in a different context - an event that normally produces little overshadowing of a CTA - produced one-trial overshadowing of a sucrose aversion as long as the context was novel and exposure to it occurred immediately before lithium injection. No current theoretical account of one-trial overshadowing predicts that a late event produces more overshadowing than an early event. This result can, however, be accommodated within a modified version of the Rescorla-Wagner model.

Asymmetry between excitatory and inhibitory learning.

Five experiments investigated how learning about the added feature in a feature-positive discrimination or feature-negative discrimination is related to the change in reinforcement rate that the feature signals. Rats were trained in a magazine-approach paradigm with 2 concurrent discriminations between A versus AX and B versus BY. In 2 experiments (1 and 3), X and Y signaled an increase of 0.3 in the probability of reinforcement, from 0.1 to 0.4 (A vs. AX), or from 0.6 to 0.9 (B vs. BY). After extended training, each session included probe test trials in which X and Y were presented alone (Experiment 1) or in compound with another excitatory conditional stimulus (CS), C (Experiment 3). There was no difference in response rate between the 2 types of test trial (X vs. Y; XC vs. YC), consistent with the fact that X and Y signaled the same absolute change in reinforcement. In Experiments 2 and 4, X and Y signaled a decrease of 0.3 in the probability of reinforcement, from 0.4 to 0.1 (A vs. AX) or from 0.9 to 0.6 (B vs. BY). Test trials in which X or Y was presented with C showed that X had greater inhibitory strength than Y, consistent with the fact that X signaled a larger relative change in reinforcement. This was confirmed in Experiment 5, in which X and Y had the same inhibitory strength on test after training in which they signaled the same relative change in reinforcement but different absolute changes (0.3 to 0.1 for A vs. AX; 0.9 to 0.3 for B vs. BY). The results show that excitatory conditioning is linearly related to the increase in reinforcement rate, whereas inhibitory learning is not linearly related to the decrease in reinforcement rate. Implications of this for theories of associative learning are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

Mediated overshadowing and potentiation of long-delay taste aversion learning: Two versus six cue-taste pairings.

Mediated overshadowing occurs when an evoked representation of one stimulus interferes with the formation of an association between two other stimuli. This study tested whether such an effect can be found in long-delay taste aversion learning. The general methodology was to pair a cue with a sour taste (hydrochloric acid [HCl]) and then introduce the cue during the delay between the target taste, sucrose, and injection with lithium chloride (LiCl). Either 2 or 6 cue-HCl pairings were given. In Experiment 1, introduction of the cue, an almond flavor, produced overshadowing of the sucrose aversion in the group given 2 cue-HCl pairings (Paired-2), relative to an unpaired control, but potentiation of the sucrose aversion in the group given 6 cue-HCl pairings (Paired-6). This confirms that few pairings can be better than many in determining whether representation-mediated effects occur (Holland, 1990). A possible explanation for the Paired-6 results is that almond evoked an aversive response rather than memory of the sour HCl and that this added to the aversion produced by the sucrose-lithium pairing. Experiment 2 obtained similar results when a context was used as the cue intended to evoke an HCl representation.

Proximal, but not distal, pre-exposure reduces serial overshadowing in one-trial taste aversion learning.

This experiment tested whether pre-exposing a taste would reduce its ability to overshadow conditioning to a target taste and whether this effect would depend on the delay between pre-exposure and conditioning. Two groups of rats were pre-exposed to an interfering taste (HCl) either a week before conditioning (Group Distal) or the day preceding conditioning (Group Proximal). In the single conditioning trial, rats were given the target taste (sucrose) and 65min later were injected with lithium. The groups differed as to what they were given to drink 50min after sucrose: The Distal, Proximal and Novel groups were given HCl, while the Control group was given water. Pre-exposure to HCl reduced overshadowing of the sucrose aversion by HCl in Group Proximal but not in Group Distal. Possible explanations for the latter result include extinction of the context-HCl association and loss of context control over an HCl-no outcome association.

Conditioned inhibition and reinforcement rate.

We investigated conditioned inhibition in a magazine approach paradigm. Rats were trained on a feature negative discrimination between an auditory conditioned stimulus (CS) reinforced at one rate versus a compound of that CS and a visual stimulus (L) reinforced at a lower rate. This training established L as a conditioned inhibitor. We then tested the inhibitory strength of L by presenting it in compound with other auditory CSs. L reduced responding when tested with a CS that had been reinforced at a high rate, but had less or even no inhibitory effect when tested with a CS that had been reinforced at a low rate. The inhibitory strength of L was greater if it signaled a decrease in reinforcement from an already low rate than if it signaled an equivalent decrease in reinforcement from a high rate. We conclude that the strength of inhibition is not a linear function of the change in reinforcement that it signals. We discuss the implications of this finding for models of learning (e.g., Rescorla & Wagner, 1972) that identify inhibition with a difference (subtraction) rule.

Magazine approach during a signal for food depends on Pavlovian, not instrumental, conditioning.

In the conditioned magazine approach paradigm, rats are exposed to a contingent relationship between a conditioned stimulus (CS) and the delivery of food (the unconditioned stimulus, US). As the rats learn the CS-US association, they make frequent anticipatory head entries into the food magazine (the conditioned response, CR) during the CS. Conventionally, this is considered to be a Pavlovian paradigm because food is contingent on the CS and not on the performance of CRs during the CS. However, because magazine entries during the CS are reliably followed by food, the increase in frequency of those responses may involve adventitious ("superstitious") instrumental conditioning. The existing evidence, from experiments using an omission schedule to eliminate the possibility of instrumental conditioning (B. J. Farwell & J. J. Ayres, 1979, Stimulus-reinforcer and response-reinforcer relations in the control of conditioned appetitive headpoking (goal tracking) in rats. Learning and Motivation, 10, 295-312; P. C. Holland, 1979, Differential effects of omission contingencies on various components of Pavlovian appetitive conditioned responding in rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 178-193), is ambiguous: rats acquire magazine CRs despite the omission schedule, demonstrating that the response does not depend on instrumental conditioning, but the response rate is greatly depressed compared with that of rats trained on a yoked schedule, consistent with a contribution from instrumental conditioning under normal (nonomission) schedules. Here we describe experiments in which rats were trained on feature-positive or feature-negative type discriminations between trials that were reinforced on an omission schedule versus trials reinforced on a yoked schedule. The experiments show that the difference in responding between omission and yoked schedules is due to suppression of responding under the omission schedule rather than an elevation of responding under the yoked schedule. We conclude that magazine responses during the CS are largely or entirely Pavlovian CRs.

Flavor avoidance learning based on missing calories but not on palatability reduction.

Avoidance of a target flavor can be produced by providing rats with a highly nutritious solution of 20 % maltodextrin (20 %Malto) in some sessions and a 3 % maltodextrin (3 %Malto) solution containing the target flavor in intermixed sessions. Since 20 %Malto is both more nutritious and more palatable than 3 %Malto, flavor avoidance could arise because the flavor signals either a reduction in calories or reduced palatability, or both. Pilot testing established that rats strongly preferred 3 %Malto plus 0.1 % saccharin to both unflavored 3 %Malto and unflavored 20 %Malto. The two main experiments tested whether the palatability difference, which the pilot data had suggested was larger than the difference between 20 %Malto and 3 %Malto, could produce flavor avoidance. In both experiments, one group of rats were given 3 %Malto plus 0.1 % saccharin on some days, intermixed with other days on which this group was given 3 %Malto plus the target flavor, almond. Neither when trained and tested under conditions of food deprivation (Experiment 1) nor when trained and tested sated (Experiment 2) did palatability reduction produce almond avoidance. In contrast, calorie reduction produced almond avoidance under both conditions. These results suggest that flavor avoidance can be produced by intermixed training involving solutions that differ in nutritious value and palatability, but not when they differ only in palatability.

Serial overshadowing of taste aversion learning by stimuli preceding the target taste.

Three experiments tested whether events taking place before a rat has access to a target taste, sucrose, can proactively interfere with the acquisition of a sucrose aversion when sucrose is followed by a lithium chloride injection. Using a serial overshadowing procedure with various delays before lithium injection, proactive interference by a taste (Experiments 1 and 3) and by a novel context (Experiment 2) was found following two conditioning sessions, but not after a single conditioning session. Conversely, overshadowing by a taste given after the target was detectable after a single conditioning trial (Experiment 3) and, thus, indicated that retroactive interference involves a process different from that producing proactive interference. A simulation confirmed that the results are consistent with a modified Rescorla and Wagner (1972) interpretation of Revusky's (1971) concurrent interference theory of delay learning.

Blocking of acquisition of a taste aversion by a context experienced prior to the taste.

This experiment tested the proposal that events taking place before a rat has access to a taste can proactively interfere with acquisition of an aversion to the taste when this has been followed by lithium chloride injection. Rats were initially given context discrimination whereby placement in one distinctive context (target) was followed by lithium injection, while placement in a second context (safe) was followed by saline injection. In the subsequent 1-trial taste conditioning session, rats were first placed in either their target context (Blocking group), their safe context (Control-Safe group) or a neutral context (Control-Neutral group), then given access to sucrose and 30 min later were injected with lithium. Subsequent tests of sucrose intakes revealed a blocking effect. These results indicate that proactive interference with taste aversion learning by a context can occur that is unlikely to be based on generalization decrement.