Abstract
The mechanisms of extinction were examined by reducing the intensity of the unconditioned stimulus (US) after acquisition training to determine whether such reductions lie on a continuum with CS-alone extinction. The experiments revealed that reductions in US intensity yielded extinction-like effects. Specifically, there were proportional reductions in the daily mean level of responding across sessions. There were also persistent within-session declines and between-session increases of responding analogous to spontaneous recovery. Surprisingly, even when US intensity was held constant, within-session declines and between-session increases were apparent. The results are discussed with respect to possible contributions from unlearning, new learning, generalization decrement, and nonassociative loss, especially CS-specific attentional changes and CR-specific reactive inhibition.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aguado, L., de Brugada, I., Hall, G., &Agate, L. (2001). Tests for inhibition after extinction of a conditioned stimulus in the flavour aversion procedure.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,54B, 201–217.
Aoyama, K., &McSweeney, F. K. (2001). Habituation may contribute to within-session decreases in responding under high-rate schedules of reinforcement.Animal Learning & Behavior,29, 79–91.
Ayres, J. J. B., Moore, J. W., &Vigorito, M. (1984). Hall and Pearce negative transfer: Assessments in conditioned suppression and nictitating membrane conditioning experiments.Animal Learning & Behavior,12, 428–438.
Barnet, R. C., Grahame, N. J., &Miller, R. R. (1993). Local context and the comparator hypothesis.Animal Learning & Behavior,21, 1–13.
Booream, C. D., &Flowers, J. V. (1974). Positive and negative contrast in successive nondifferential conditioning: A new approach to between-subjects methodology.Journal of General Psychology,46, 63–68.
Bouton, M. E. (1991). Context and retrieval in extinction and in other examples of interference in simple associative learning. In L. Dachowski & C. F. Flaherty (Eds.),Current topics in animal learning: Brain, emotion, and cognition (pp. 25–49). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bouton, M. E. (1993). Context, time, and memory retrieval in the interference paradigms of Pavlovian conditioning.Psychological Bulletin,114, 80–99.
Bouton, M. E., &Bolles, R. C. (1985). Contexts, event-memories and extinction. In P. D. Balsam & A. Tomie (Eds.),Context and learning (pp. 133–166). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bouton, M. E., &Nelson, J. B. (1998). The role of context in classical conditioning: Some implications for cognitive behavior therapy. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.),Learning and behavior therapy (pp. 59–84). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Bouton, M. E., &Swartzentruber, D. (1986). Analysis of the associative and occasion-setting properties of contexts participating in a Pavlovian discrimination.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,12, 333–350.
Bouton, M. E., &Swartzentruber, D. (1989). Slow reacquisition following extinction: Context, encoding, and retrieval mechanisms.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,15, 43–53.
Bush, R. R., &Mosteller, F. A. (1951). A mathematical model for simple learning.Psychological Review,58, 313–323.
Capaldi, E. J. (1967). A sequential hypothesis of instrumental learning. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 1, pp. 67–91). New York: Academic Press.
Capaldi, E. J. (1994). The sequential view: From rapidly fading stimulus traces to the organization of memory and the abstract concept of number.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 156–181.
Capaldi, E. J., &Ziff, D. R. (1969). Schedule of partial reward and the negative contrast effect.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,68, 593–596.
Carlton, J. L., Mitchell, K. G., &Schachtman, T. R. (1996). Conditioned inhibition produced by extinction of a conditioned stimulus.Learning & Motivation,27, 335–361.
Collier, G., Knarr, F. A., &Marx, M. H. (1961). Some relations between the intensive properties of the consumatory response and reinforcement.Journal of Experimental Psychology,62, 484–495.
Cox, W. M. (1975). A review of recent incentive contrast studies involving discrete-trial procedures.Psychological Record,25, 373–395.
Estes, W. K. (1955). Statistical theory of spontaneous recovery and regression.Psychological Review,62, 145–154.
Falls, W. A. (1998). Extinction: A review of theory and evidence suggesting that memories are not erased with nonreinforcement. In W. O. Donohue (Ed.),Learning and behavior therapy (pp. 205–229). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Flaherty, C. F. (1982). Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward.Animal Learning & Behavior,10, 409–440.
Gallistel, C. R., &Gibbon, J. (2000). Time, rate, and conditioning.Psychological Review,107, 289–344.
Gallistel, C. R., Mark, T. A., King, A. P., &Latham, P. E. (2001). The rat approximates an ideal detector of changes in rates of reward: Implications for the law of effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,27, 354–372.
Gibbs, C. M., Latham, S. B., &Gormezano, I. (1978). Classical conditioning of the rabbit nictitating membrane response: Effects of reinforcement schedule on response maintenance and resistance to extinction.Animal Learning & Behavior,6, 209–215.
Gluck, M. A., &Thompson, R. F. (1987). Modeling the neural substrates of associative learning and memory: A computational approach.Psychological Review,94, 176–191.
Gormezano, I. (1966). Classical conditioning. In J. B. Sidowski (Ed.),Experimental methods and instrumentation in psychology (pp. 385–420). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gormezano, I., &Gibbs, C. M. (1988). Transduction of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,20, 18–21.
Gunther, L. M., Denniston, J. C., &Miller, R. R. (1998). Renewal of comparator stimuli.Learning & Motivation,29, 200–219.
Hart, J. A., Bourne, M. J., &Schachtman, T. R. (1995). Slow reacquisition of a conditioned taste aversion.Animal Learning & Behavior,23, 297–303.
Hinson, R. E. (1982). Effects of UCS preexposure on excitatory and inhibitory rabbit eyelid conditioning: An associative effect of conditioned contextual stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,8, 49–61.
Hoehler, F. K., &Leonard, D. W. (1973). Classical nictitating membrane conditioning in the rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus): Single alternation with differential intertrial intervals.Journal of Comparative á Physiological Psychology,85, 277–288.
Hoehler, F. K., &Leonard, D. W. (1981). Motivational vs. associative role of the US in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Animal Learning & Behavior,9, 239–244.
Hoehler, F. K., &Thompson, R. F. (1979). The effect of temporal single alternation on learned increase in hippocampal unit activity in classical conditioning of the rabbit nictitating membrane response.Physiological Psychology,7, 345–351.
Holland, P. C., &Rescorla, R. A. (1975). The effect of two ways of devaluing the unconditioned stimulus after first- and second-order appetitive conditioning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,1, 355–363.
Hull, C. L. (1943).Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Kehoe, E. J. (1988). A layered network model of associative learning: Learning-to-learn and configuration.Psychological Review,95, 411–433.
Kehoe, E. J., Cool, V., &Gormezano, I. (1991). Trace conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response as a function of CS-US interstimulus interval and trials per session.Learning & Motivation,22, 269–290.
Kehoe, E. J., &Weidemann, G. (2001, July).Reduction but not elimination of savings after extinction in classical conditioning of the rabbit. Paper presented at the 2nd Australian Learning Group Conference, Magnetic Island, Queensland.
Kim, K. S. (1986). Effects of context manipulation on latent inhibition: A study on the nature of context in classical conditioning.Korean Journal of Psychology,5, 75–86.
Klopf, A. H. (1988). A neuronal model of classical conditioning.Psychobiology,16, 85–125.
PscKonorski, J. (1948).Conditioned reflexes and neuron organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Konorski, J. (1967).Integrative activity of the brain: An interdisciplinary approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variation in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement.Psychological Review,82, 276–298.
Macrae, M., &Kehoe, E. J. (1995). Transfer between conditional and discrete discriminations in conditioning of the rabbit nictitating membrane response.Learning & Motivation,26, 380–402.
Macrae, M., &Kehoe, E. J. (1999). Savings after extinction in conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Psychobiology,27, 85–94.
Mazur, J. E. (1996). Past experience, recency, and spontaneous recovery in choice behavior.Animal Learning & Behavior,24, 1–10.
McSweeney, F. K., &Roll, J. M. (1993). Responding changes systematically within sessions during conditioning procedures.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,60, 621–640.
Medina, J. F., Garcia, K. S., &Mauk, M. D. (2001). A mechanism for savings in the cerebellum.Journal of Neuroscience,21, 4081–4089.
Miller, R. R., &Matzel, L. D. (1989). Contingency and relative associative strength. In S. B. Klein & R. R. Mowrer (Eds.),Contemporary learning theories: Pavlovian conditioning and the status of traditional learning theory (pp. 61–84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Napier, R. M., Macrae, M., &Kehoe, E. J. (1992). Rapid reacquisition in conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,18, 182–192.
Nevin, J. A., McLean, A. P., &Grace, R. C. (2001). Resistance to extinction: Contingency termination and generalization decrement.Animal Learning & Behavior,29, 176–191.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927).Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex (G. V. Anrep, Trans.). London: Oxford University Press.
Pearce, J. M., &Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli.Psychological Review,87, 532–552.
Poulos, C. X., Sheafor, P. J., &Gormezano, I. (1974). Classical appetitive conditioning of the rabbit’s (Oryctolagus cuniculus) jawmovement response with a single-alternation schedule.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,75, 231–238.
Rescorla, R. A. (2001). Retraining of extinguished Pavlovian stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,27, 115–124.
Rescorla, R. A., &Cunningham, C. L. (1978). Recovery of the US representation over time during extinction.Learning & Motivation,9, 373–391.
Rescorla, R. A., &Heth, C. D. (1975). Reinstatement of fear to an extinguished conditioned stimulus.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,1, 88–96.
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 (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Ricker, S. T., &Bouton, M. E. (1996). Reacquisition following extinction in appetitive conditioning.Animal Learning & Behavior,24, 423–436.
Robbins, S. J. (1990). Mechanisms underlying spontaneous recovery in autoshaping.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,16, 235–249.
Rogers, R. F., &Steinmetz, J. E. (1998). Contextually based conditional discrimination of the rabbit eyeblink response.Neurobiology of Learning & Memory,69, 307–319.
Saladin, M. E., &Tait, R. W. (1986). US preexposures retard excitatory and facilitate inhibitory conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Animal Learning & Behavior,14, 121–132.
Scandrett, J., &Gormezano, I. (1980). Microprocessor control and A/D data acquisition in classical conditioning.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,12, 120–125.
Schachtman, T. R., &Reilly, S. (1987). The role of local context in autoshaping.Learning & Motivation,18, 343–355.
Schreurs, B. G., Oh, M. M., Hirashima, C., &Alkon, D. L. (1995). Conditioning-specific modification of the rabbit’s unconditioned nictitating membrane response.Behavioral Neuroscience,1, 24–33.
Schreurs, B. G., Shi, T., Pineda, S., III, &Buck, D. L. (2000). Conditioning the unconditioned response: Modification of the rabbit’s (Oryctolagus cuniculus) unconditioned nictitating membrane response.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,26, 144–156.
Smith, M. C. (1968). CS-US interval and US intensity in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,66, 679–687.
Smith, M. [C.], &Gormezano, I. (1965). Effects of alternating classical conditioning and extinction sessions on the conditioned nictitating membrane response of the rabbit.Psychonomic Science,3, 91–92.
Spear, N. E. (1971). Forgetting as retrieval failure. In W. K. Honig & P. H. R. James (Eds.),Animal memory (pp. 45–109). New York: Academic Press.
Spence, K. W. (1958). An emotionally based theory of drive (D) and its relation to performance in simple learning situations.American Psychologist,13, 131–141.
Spence, K. W., Haggard, D. F., &Ross, L. E. (1958). UCS intensity and the associative (habit) strength of the eyelid CR.Journal of Experimental Psychology,55, 404–411.
Sutton, R. S., &Barto, A. G. (1981). Toward a modern theory of adaptive networks: Expectation and prediction.Psychological Review,88, 135–171.
Sutton, R. S., &Barto, A. G. (1990). Time-derivative models of Pavlovian reinforcement. In M. Gabriel & J. W. Moore (Eds.),Learning and computational neuroscience (pp. 497–537). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tait, R. W., Kehoe, E. J., &Gormezano, I. (1983). Effects of US duration on classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,9, 91–101.
Wagner, A. R., &Brandon, S. E. (1989). Evolution of a structured connectionist model of Pavlovian conditioning (AESOP). In S. B. Klein & R. R. Mowrer (Eds.),Contemporary learning theories: Pavlovian conditioning and the status of traditional learning theory (pp. 149–190). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Weidemann, G., &Kehoe, E. J. (1997). Transfer and counterconditioning of conditional control in the rabbit nictitating membrane response.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,50B, 295–316.
Weidemann, G., &Kehoe, E. J. (2001, July).Concurrent recovery of an extinguished conditioned response in the rabbit. Paper presented at the 2nd Australian Learning Group Conference, Magnetic Island, Queensland.
Yin, H., Grahame, N. J., &Miller, R. R. (1993). Extinction of comparator stimuli during and after acquisition: Differential facilitative effects on Pavlovian responding.Learning & Motivation,24, 219–241.
Zeaman, D. (1949). Response latency as a function of the amount of reinforcement.Journal of Experimental Psychology,39, 466–483.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Preparation of this manuscript was supported by Australian Research Council Grant A79917018.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kehoe, E.J., white, N.E. Extinction revisited: Similarities between extinction and reductions in US intensity in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response. Animal Learning & Behavior 30, 96–111 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192912
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192912