Dataset Information

Behavior Stability and Individual Differences in Pavlovian Extended Conditioning.

ABSTRACT: How stable and general is behavior once maximum learning is reached? To answer this question and understand post-acquisition behavior and its related individual differences, we propose a psychological principle that naturally extends associative models of Pavlovian conditioning to a dynamical oscillatory model where subjects have a greater memory capacity than usually postulated, but with greater forecast uncertainty. This results in a greater resistance to learning in the first few sessions followed by an over-optimal response peak and a sequence of progressively damped response oscillations. We detected the first peak and trough of the new learning curve in our data, but their dispersion was too large to also check the presence of oscillations with smaller amplitude. We ran an unusually long experiment with 32 rats over 3,960 trials, where we excluded habituation and other well-known phenomena as sources of variability in the subjects' performance. Using the data of this and another Pavlovian experiment by Harris et al. (2015), as an illustration of the principle we tested the theory against the basic associative single-cue Rescorla-Wagner (RW) model. We found evidence that the RW model is the best non-linear regression to data only for a minority of the subjects, while its dynamical extension can explain the almost totality of data with strong to very strong evidence. Finally, an analysis of short-scale fluctuations of individual responses showed that they are described by random white noise, in contrast with the colored-noise findings in human performance.

SUBMITTER: Calcagni G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7189120 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Behavior Stability and Individual Differences in Pavlovian Extended Conditioning.

Calcagni Gianluca G Caballero-Garrido Ernesto E Pellón Ricardo R

Frontiers in psychology 20200422

How stable and general is behavior once maximum learning is reached? To answer this question and understand post-acquisition behavior and its related individual differences, we propose a psychological principle that naturally extends associative models of Pavlovian conditioning to a <i>dynamical oscillatory model</i> where subjects have a greater memory capacity than usually postulated, but with greater forecast uncertainty. This results in a greater resistance to learning in the first few sessi ...[more]

PMID: 32390896

Similar Datasets

Project description:Threat conditioning is a common associative learning model with translational relevance. How threat-conditioned cues impact on formally unrelated instrumental behavior in humans is not well known. Such an effect is known as Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT). While PIT with aversive primary Pavlovian reinforcers is established in nonhuman animals, this is less clear in humans, where secondary reinforcers or instructed instrumental responses are most often investigated. We modified an existing human PIT procedure to include primary reinforcers. Participants first learned to obtain (or avoid losing) appetitive instrumental reinforcement (chocolate) by appropriate approach or avoidance actions. They either had to act (Go) or to withhold an action (NoGo), and in the Go condition either to approach a reward target to collect it or to withdraw from the reward target to avoid losing it. Then they learned to associate screen color (CS) with aversive Pavlovian reinforcement (electric shock US). In the transfer phase, we conducted the instrumental task during the presence of Pavlovian CS. In a first experiment, we show that the aversive Pavlovian CS+, compared to CS-, increased response rate in Go-Withdraw trials, i.e., induce conditioned facilitation of avoidance responses. This finding was confirmed in a second and independent experiment with an increased number of Go-Withdraw trials. Notably, we observed no appreciable conditioned suppression of approach responses. Effect size to distinguish CS+/CS- in Go-Withdraw trials was d = 0.42 in the confirmation sample. This would require n = 37 participants to demonstrate threat learning with 80% power. Thus, the effect size is on a practically useful scale although smaller than for model-based analysis of autonomic measures. In summary, our results indicate conditioned facilitation of formally unrelated instrumental avoidance behavior in humans and provide a novel behavioral threat learning measure that requires only key presses.

Dataset Information

Behavior Stability and Individual Differences in Pavlovian Extended Conditioning.

Publications

Behavior Stability and Individual Differences in Pavlovian Extended Conditioning.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets