Abstract
In two experiments, rats (n = 228) received pretraining access to a distinctive novel flavor (saline) followed by aversion conditioning to a different novel conditioned stimulus (CS) (saccharin). Then the rats were tested for aversion to the CS (saccharin) or for conditioning-enhanced neophobia to a third novel flavor (casein hydrolysate). Pretraining access to a distinctive novel flavor that differed from the CS reliably reduced the magnitude of conditioning-enhanced neophobia to casein, but did not reliably affect conditioned aversion effects to the CS. Pretraining access to the CS reduced aversion effects to the CS and reduced postconditioning neophobia to casein to the performance level shown by ingestion-toxin controls. Results were consistent with the view (Braveman & Jarvis, 1978) that conditioned aversion and neophobia may be independent phenomena with separable underlying mechanisms.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ahlers, R. H., &Best, P. J. (1971). Novelty vs. temporal contiguity in learned taste aversions.Psychonomic Science,25, 34–36.
Barnett, S. A., &Cowan, P. E. (1976). Activity, exploration, curiosity and fear: An ethological study.Interdisciplinary Science Reviews,1, 43–62.
Best, M. R. (1975) Conditioned and latent inhibition in taste-aversion learning: Clarifying the role of learned safety.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,104, 97–113.
Best, M. R., &Batson, J. D. (1977). Enhancing the expression of flavor neophobia: Some effects of the ingestion-illness contingency.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,3, 132–143.
Braveman, N. S., St. Jarvis, P. S. (1978). Independence of neophobia and taste aversion learning.Animal Learning & Behavior,6, 406–412.
Carroll, M. E., Dinc, H. I., Levy, C. J., &Smith, J. C. (1975). Demonstrations of neophobia and enhanced neophobia in the albino rat.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,89, 457–467.
Domjan, M. (1976). Determinants of the enhancement of flavored-water intake by prior exposure.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,2, 17–27.
Domjan, M. (1980). Ingestional aversion learning: Unique and general processes. In J. S. Rosenblatt, R. A. Hinde, C. Beer, & M. C. Busnel (Eds.),Advances in the study of behavior (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press.
Franchina, J. J., &Fitzgerald, B. A. (1983). Poison-enhanced neophobia: Effects of CS-UCS/UCS-CS procedures and long-delay training.Learning & Motivation,14, 351–366.
Franchina, J. J., Silber, S., &May, B. (1981). Novelty and temporal contiguity in taste aversion learning Within-subjects conditioning effects.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,18, 99–102.
Krane, R. V., Sinnamon, H. M., &Thomas, G. J. (1976). Conditioned taste aversions and neophobia in rats with hippocampal lesions.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,90, 680–693.
Miller, R. R., &Holzman, A. D. (1981). Neophobias and conditioned taste aversions in rats following exposure to novel flavors.Animal Learning & Behavior,9, 89–100.
Mitchell, D., Winter, W., &Moffitt, T. (1980). Cross-modality transfer: Exteroceptive context habituation enhances taste neophobia and conditioned taste aversions.Animal Learning & Behavior,8, 524–528.
Revusky, S. H., &Bedarf, E. W. (1967). Association of illness with prior ingestion of novel food.Science,155, 219–220.
Siegel, S. (1974). Flavor preexposure and “learned safety.”Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,87, 1073–1082.
Tarpy, R. M., &McIntosh, S. M. (1977). Generalized latent inhibition in taste aversion learning.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,10, 379–381.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
These data were reported at the Midwestern Psychological Association Meeting, Detroit, May 1981.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Franchina, J.J., Gilley, D.W. Effects of pretraining on conditioning-enhanced neophobia: Evidence for separable mechanisms of neophobia and aversion conditioning. Animal Learning & Behavior 14, 155–162 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200050
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200050