US alone trials presented during acquisition do not disrupt classical eyeblink conditioning: Empirical and computational findings
被引:3
|
作者:
Allen, M. T.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Northern Colorado, Sch Psychol Sci, Greeley, CO 80639 USA
Rutgers State Univ, Stress & Motivated Behav Inst, Rutgers Biomed Hlth Sci, Newark, NJ 07102 USAUniv Northern Colorado, Sch Psychol Sci, Greeley, CO 80639 USA
Allen, M. T.
[1
,2
]
Myers, C. E.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
VA New Jersey Hlth Care Syst, Dept Vet Affairs, E Orange, NJ USA
Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, Dept Pharmacol Physiol & Neurosci, Newark, NJ USAUniv Northern Colorado, Sch Psychol Sci, Greeley, CO 80639 USA
Myers, C. E.
[3
,4
]
Williams, D.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Northern Colorado, Sch Psychol Sci, Greeley, CO 80639 USAUniv Northern Colorado, Sch Psychol Sci, Greeley, CO 80639 USA
Williams, D.
[1
]
Servatius, R. J.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Rutgers State Univ, Stress & Motivated Behav Inst, Rutgers Biomed Hlth Sci, Newark, NJ 07102 USA
Syracuse Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Dept Vet Affairs, Syracuse, NY USA
SUNY Upstate Med Univ, Dept Psychiat, Syracuse, NY 13210 USAUniv Northern Colorado, Sch Psychol Sci, Greeley, CO 80639 USA
Servatius, R. J.
[2
,5
,6
]
机构:
[1] Univ Northern Colorado, Sch Psychol Sci, Greeley, CO 80639 USA
[2] Rutgers State Univ, Stress & Motivated Behav Inst, Rutgers Biomed Hlth Sci, Newark, NJ 07102 USA
[3] VA New Jersey Hlth Care Syst, Dept Vet Affairs, E Orange, NJ USA
[4] Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, Dept Pharmacol Physiol & Neurosci, Newark, NJ USA
[5] Syracuse Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Dept Vet Affairs, Syracuse, NY USA
[6] SUNY Upstate Med Univ, Dept Psychiat, Syracuse, NY 13210 USA
Studies of partial reinforcement in eyeblink conditioning have typically shown slower learning of a CS-US association when paired CS-US trials are interleaved with CS-alone trials. However, recent work has shown that CS-US learning is not slowed by interleaved US-alone trials. This discrepancy is surprising since both partial reinforcement protocols reduce the total number of paired CS-US trials. Previously, Kimble et al. (1955) reported that inserting a block of US-alone trials during CS-US training did not disrupt eyeblink acquisition. Here, we sought to replicate and extend these findings by comparing interleaved vs. blocked US-alone trials during CS-US paired training. Ninety-seven undergraduates volunteered for this experiment for research credit. Participants received 60 acquisition trials, consisting of either 100% CS-US paired trials, 50% US-alone trials intermixed with CS-US paired trials, or a block of 20 US-alone trials inserted between blocks of 20 CS-US trials. We also utilized a previously published computational model of hippocampal and cerebellar learning to test the effects of these US alone protocols. Both empirical and computational results supported the finding that US-alone trials, either intermixed or inserted as a block of trials, do not disrupt acquisition of conditioned eyeblinks. Possible neural substrates of these US-alone effects are discussed.