Literature DB >> 8189183

Trial spacing and trial distribution effects in Pavlovian conditioning: contributions of a comparator mechanism.

H Yin1, R C Barnet, R R Miller.   

Abstract

A potential basis for trial spacing and trial distribution effects was investigated in rats. In Experiment 1, a conditioned stimulus (e.g., CS A) was trained with either massed (e.g., A---->A---->A) or spaced (e.g., A-->A-->A) trials. When trials were massed, brief exposure to the training context (a condition typical of massed training) impaired responding, whereas more extensive exposure to the context during or after training reduced this apparent massed trials deficit. In Experiment 2, different CSs were trained in either a massed (e.g., A-->A-->A--> B-->B-->B-->C-->C-->C) or a distributed (e.g., A-->B-->C-->A-->B-->C, etc.) manner. Trials massed in this sense resulted in impaired responding to the CS, and this impairment was attenuated by posttraining extinction of the context cues. Thus, trial distribution and apparent trial spacing effects are at least in part reversible deficits in performance rather than failures of learning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8189183     DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.20.2.123

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process        ISSN: 0097-7403


  11 in total

1.  Learning performance of normal and mutant Drosophila after repeated conditioning trials with discrete stimuli.

Authors:  C D Beck; B Schroeder; R L Davis
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2000-04-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Studying the impact of intensity is important but complicated.

Authors:  Paul Yoder; Marc E Fey; Steven F Warren
Journal:  Int J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 2.484

3.  Consolidation of object-discrimination memory is independent of the hippocampus in rats.

Authors:  Hugo Lehmann; Melissa J Glenn; Dave G Mumby
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Contrasting reduced overshadowing and blocking.

Authors:  Daniel S Wheeler; Ralph R Miller
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2007-07

Review 5.  Determinants of cue interactions.

Authors:  Daniel S Wheeler; Ralph R Miller
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2008-02-08       Impact factor: 1.777

6.  Analysis of a trial-spacing effect with relatively long intertrial intervals.

Authors:  Ceyhun Sunsay; Mark E Bouton
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Context effects on choice.

Authors:  J N Goldshmidt; K M Lattal; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  A self-initiated cue-reward learning procedure for neural recording in rodents.

Authors:  Ingrid Reverte; Stephen Volz; Fahd H Alhazmi; Mihwa Kang; Keith Kaufman; Sue Chan; Claudia Jou; Mihaela D Iordanova; Guillem R Esber
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 2.390

9.  Two roles of the context in Pavlovian fear conditioning.

Authors:  Gonzalo P Urcelay; Ralph R Miller
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2010-04

10.  Spared anterograde memory for shock-probe fear conditioning after inactivation of the amygdala.

Authors:  Hugo Lehmann; Dallas Treit; Marise B Parent
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.