Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Blocking is not 'pure' cue competition: Renewal-like effects in forward and backward blocking indicate contributions by associative cue interference.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition ( IF 1.2 ) Pub Date : 2022-02-28 , DOI: 10.1037/xan0000315
Gonzalo Miguez 1 , Ralph R Miller 1
Affiliation  

Blocking (i.e., reduced responding to cue X following YX-outcome pairings in Phase 2 as a consequence of cue Y having been paired with the outcome in Phase 1) is one of the signature phenomena in Pavlovian conditioning. Its discovery promoted the development of multiple associative models, most of which viewed blocking as an instance of pure cue competition (i.e., a decrease in responding attributable to training two conditioned stimuli in compound). Two experiments are reported in which rats were examined in a fear conditioning paradigm (i.e., lick suppression), and context dependency of retrieval at test was used as an index of associative cue interference (i.e., a decrease in responding to a target cue as a result of training a second cue with the same outcome but without concurrent presentation of the two cues). Specifically, we observed renewal of forward-blocking which parallels renewal of proactive interference, and renewal of backward-blocking which parallels renewal of retroactive interference. Thus, both backward-blocking (Experiment 1, embedded in a sensory preconditioning design) and forward-blocking (Experiment 2, conducted in first-order conditioning) appear to be influenced by retroactive and proactive interference, respectively, as well as cue competition. Consequently, blocking, long regarded as a benchmark example of pure cue competition, is sometimes a hybrid of cue competition and associative interference. Finally, the Discussion considers whether stimulus competition and associative interference are two independent phenomena or products of a single underlying process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译:

阻塞不是“纯粹”的提示竞争:向前和向后阻塞中类似更新的效果表明联想提示干扰的贡献。

阻塞(即,由于线索 Y 已与阶段 1 中的结果配对,在阶段 2 中 YX-结果配对后对线索 X 的响应减少)是巴甫洛夫条件反射中的标志性现象之一。它的发现促进了多种关联模型的发展,其中大多数将阻塞视为纯线索竞争的一个实例(即,由于在复合条件下训练两种条件刺激而导致的响应减少)。报告了两个实验,其中老鼠在恐惧条件反射范式(即舔抑制)中进行了检查,测试时检索的上下文依赖性被用作联想提示干扰的指标(即对目标提示的响应减少作为训练具有相同结果但没有同时呈现两个提示的第二个提示的结果)。具体来说,我们观察到前向阻塞的更新与主动干扰的更新并行,反向阻塞的更新与追溯干扰的更新并行。因此,后向阻断(实验 1,嵌入感官预处理设计)和前向阻断(实验 2,在一阶条件反射中进行)似乎分别受到追溯和主动干扰以及提示竞争的影响。因此,长期以来被视为纯线索竞争的基准示例的阻塞有时是线索竞争和联想干扰的混合体。最后,讨论考虑了刺激竞争和联想干扰是两个独立的现象还是单个潜在过程的产物。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA,保留所有权利)。
更新日期:2022-02-28
down
wechat
bug