Abstract
Two experiments were conducted to examine the effects of US preexposure on differential conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response. Both experiments consisted of three phases: a 10-day US preexposure phase, a 7-day differential conditioning phase, and a 3-day retardation of learning test for inhibition. In Experiment 1, US preexposures retarded the development of excitation to CS+ but facilitated the development of inhibition to CS−. In Experiment 2, half of the preexposed subjects received the preexposures in one experimental environment and differential conditioning in a second environment. The remaining preexposed subjects received both phases in a single environment. Retarded excitatory and facilitated inhibitory conditioning were observed only in the preexposed subjects that received both phases in the same environment. Rabbits that received a context shift performed at control levels. The results are discussed in terms of current theories of US preexposure effects, and the best account was provided by a modified associative theory.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ayres, J. J. B., Bombace, J. C., Shurtleff, D., &Vigorito, M. (1985). Conditioned suppression tests of the context-blocking hypothesis: Testing in the absence of the preconditioned context.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,11, 1–14.
Baker, A. G. (1974). Conditioned inhibition is not the symmetrical opposite of conditioned excitation: A test of the Rescorla-Wagner model.Learning & Motivation,5, 369–379.
Baker, A. G., &Mercier, P. (1982). Manipulation of the apparatus and response context may reduce the US pre-exposure interference effect.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,34B, 221–234.
Baker, A. G., Mercier, P., Gabel, J., &Baker, P. A. (1981). Contextual conditioning and the US preexposure effect in conditioned fear.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,7, 109–128.
Balaz, M. A., Capra, S., Hartl, P., &Miller, R. R. (1981). Contextual potentiation of acquired behavior after devaluing direct context-US associations.Learning & Motivation,12, 383–397.
Desmond, J. E., Romano, A. G., &Moore, J. W. (1980). Amplitude of the rabbit’s unconditioned nictitating membrane response in the presence of a conditioned inhibitor.Animal Learning & Behavior,8, 225–230.
Donegan, N. H. (1981). Priming-produced facilitation or diminution of responding to a Pavlovian unconditioned stimulus.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,7, 295–312.
Gibbon, J., &Balsam, P. (1981). Spreading association in time. In C. M. Locurto, H. S. Terrace, & J. Gibbon (Eds.),Autoshaping and conditioning theory. New York: Academic Press.
Gormezano, I. (1966). Classical conditioning. In J. B. Sidowski (Ed.),Experimental methods and instrumentation in psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
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.
Hupka, R. B., Kwaterski, S. E., &Moore, J. W. (1970). Conditioned diminution of the UCR: Differences between the human eyeblink and the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Journal of Experimental Psychology,83, 45–51.
Kamin, L. J. (1968). Attention-like processes in classical conditioning. In M. R. Jones (Ed.),Miami symposium on the prediction of behavior: Aversive stimulation. Miami: University of Miami Press.
Kamin, L. J. (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention and conditioning. In B. A. Campbell & R. M. Church (Eds.),Punishment and aversive behavior. New York: Appleton.
Kimmel, H. D. (1966). Inhibition of the unconditioned response in classical conditioning.Psychological Review,73, 232–240.
LoLordo, V. M., &Randich, A. (1981). Effects of experience of electric shock upon subsequent conditioning of an emotional response: Associative and non-associative accounts. In P. Harzen & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.),Advances in analysis of behavior: Predictability, correlation, and contiguity (Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.
Macdonald, A. (1946). The effects of adaptation to the unconditioned stimulus upon the formation of conditioned avoidance responses.Journal of Experimental Psychology,36, 1–12.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1973). Stimulus selection: Learning to ignore stimuli that predict no change in reinforcement. In R. A. Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.),Constraints on learning. London: Academic Press.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement.Psychological Review,82, 276–298.
Maier, S. F., &Seligman, M. E. P. (1976). Learned helplessness: Theory and evidence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,105, 3–46.
Marlin, N. A. (1983). Second-order conditioning using a contextual stimulus as S1.Animal Learning & Behavior,11, 290–294.
McAllister, W. R., &McAllister, D. E. (1971). Behavioral measurement of conditioned fear. In F. R. Brush (Ed.),Aversive conditioning and learning. New York: Academic Press.
Mis, R. W., &Moore, J. W. (1973). Effects of preacquisition UCS exposure on classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Learning & Motivation,4, 108–114.
Moore, J. W. (1972). Stimulus control: Studies of auditory generalization in rabbits. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.),Classical conditioning: II. Current theory and research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927).Conditioned reflexes. New York: Dover.
Quesnel, L. J. (1983).Classical aversive conditioning of the rabbit’s leg flexion response. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Manitoba.
Randich, A., &LoLordo, V. M. (1979). Associative and nonassociative theories of the UCS preexposure phenomenon: Implications for Pavlovian conditioning.Psychological Bulletin,86, 523–548.
Reberg, D., &Black, A. H. (1969). Compound testing of individually conditioned stimuli as an index of excitatory and inhibitory properties.Psychonomic Science,17, 30–31.
Rescorla, R. A. (1971). Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement following prior inhibitory conditioning.Learning & Motivation,2, 113–123.
Rescorla, R. A., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.),Classical conditioning: II. Current theory and research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Siegel, S., &Domjan, M. (1971). Backward conditioning as an inhibitory training procedure.Learning & Motivation,2, 1–11.
Solomon, R. L., &Corbit, J. D. (1974). An opponent-process theory of motivation: I. Temporal dynamics of affect.Psychological Review,81, 119–145.
Suboski, M. D., Di Lollo, V., &Gormezano, I. (1964). Effects of unpaired pre-acquisition exposure of CS and US on classical conditioning of the nictitating membrane response of the albino rabbit.Psychological Reports,15, 571–576.
Tait, R. W., &Gormezano, I. (1974). A microcomputer program for stimulus control and analog data for discrete trials paradigm in biological preparation: Classical conditioning.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,6, 295–300.
Taylor, J. A. (1956). Level of conditioning and the intensity of the adaptation stimulus.Journal of Experimental Psychology,51, 127–130.
Terry, W. S. (1976). Effects of priming unconditioned stimulus representations in short-term memory on Pavlovian conditioning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,2, 354–369.
Terry, W. S., &Wagner, A. R. (1975). Short-term memory for “surprising” vs. “expected” unconditioned stimuli in Pavlovian conditioning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,1, 122–133.
Tomie, A. (1976). Retardation of autoshaping: Control by contextual stimuli.Science,192, 1244–1245.
Tomie, A., Murphy, A. L., Fath, S., &Jackson, R. L. (1980). Retardation of autoshaping following pretraining with unpredictable food: Effects of changing the context between pretraining and testing.Learning & Motivation,11, 117–134.
Wagner, A. R. (1981). SOP: A model of automatic memory processing in animal behavior. In N. E. Spear & R. R. Miller (Eds.),Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms. Hillsdale, NJ. Erlbaum.
Wagner, A. R., &Rescorla, R. A. (1972). Inhibition in Pavlovian conditioning: Application of a theory. In R. A. Boakes & M. S. Halliday (Eds),Inhibition and learning. London: Academic Press.
Wessels, M. G. (1973). Errorless discrimination, autoshaping and conditioned inhibition.Science,182, 941–943.
Williams, D. A., & Tait, R. W. (1983, June).Associative inhibition: A failure of the Rescorla-Wagner model Poster presented at the Canadian Psychological Association Annual Convention, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Willner, J. A. (1978). Blocking of a taste aversion by prior pairings of exteroceptive stimuli with illness.Learning & Motivation,9, 125–140.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant A0312 from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to R. W. Tait.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Saladin, M.E., Tait, R.W. US preexposures retard excitatory and facilitate inhibitory conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response. Animal Learning & Behavior 14, 121–132 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200046
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200046