Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-rg895 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T01:50:39.627Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Inter-stage context and time as determinants of latent inhibition

from Current topics in latent inhibition research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

By
Luis Gonzalo De la Casa  and
Oskar Pineño
Edited by
Robert Lubow  and
Ina Weiner
Robert Lubow
Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University
Ina Weiner
Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University
Get access

Summary

Introduction: effects of time and context on latent inhibition

Despite its apparent simplicity, the phenomenon of latent inhibition (LI) represents one of the most sophisticated and flexible mechanisms that organisms with complex nervous systems have developed through evolution to ensure efficient interaction with the environment. Because the environment is constantly changing, mechanisms that determine the processing of a neutral stimulus depend on a large range of different circumstances. In this chapter we will focus on the role played by two factors, namely, time and context, that seemingly affect LI separately, as well as in combination. The impact of these factors (both apart and conjointly) on LI is still one of the greatest challenges to associative theories of learning.

In any learning process there is a series of elements that determine the intensity and type of association that is formed. In the case of classical conditioning, some of the parameters on which Pavlov (1927) concentrated in his original studies were related to the temporal contiguity between stimuli (e.g., whether the stimuli involved in the pairings were presented simultaneously or sequentially, or the order in their presentation when presented sequentially), as well as to the excitatory vs. inhibitory nature of the association acquired under different treatments. Some other elements that have subsequently demonstrated their relevance to associative learning were also pointed out by Pavlov, although sometimes in a quite intuitive manner. For example, he mentioned that conditioned reflexes could be affected by the surrounding stimuli during conditioning in the animal's environment.

Type
Chapter
Information
Latent Inhibition
Cognition, Neuroscience and Applications to Schizophrenia
 , pp. 40 - 61
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aguado, L., Symonds, M., & Hall, G. (1994). Interval between preexposure and test determines the magnitude of latent inhibition: implications for an interference account. Animal Learning & Behavior, 22, 188–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R., & Lopez, M. (1995). Effects of elements or compound preexposure on conditioned taste aversion as a function of retention interval. Animal Learning & Behavior, 23, 391–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakner, L., Strohen, K., Nordeen, M., & Riccio, D. C. (1991). Post-conditioning recovery from the latent inhibition effect in conditioned taste aversion. Physiology and Behavior, 50, 1269–1272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balsam, P. D., & Tomie, A. (1985). Context and Learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bouton, M. E. (1993). Context, time, and memory retrieval in the interference paradigms of Pavlovian learning. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 80–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bouton, M. E. (1997). Signals for whether versus when an event will occur. In Bouton, M. E. & Fanselow, M. S. (Eds.), Learning, Motivation, and Cognition. The Functional Behaviorism of Robert C. Bolles. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouton, M. E., & Bolles, R. C. (1979). Contextual control of the extinction of conditioned fear. Learning and Motivation, 10, 445–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouton, M. E., & King, D. A. (1983). Contextual control of the extinction of conditioned fear: tests for the associative value of the context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 9, 248–265.Google ScholarPubMed
Bouton, M. E., & Peck, C. A. (1989). Context effects on conditioning, extinction, and reinstatement in an appetitive conditioning preparation. Animal Learning & Behavior, 17, 188–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouton, M. E., & Ricker, S. T. (1994). Renewal of extinguished responding in a second context. Animal Learning & Behavior, 22, 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovbjerg, D. H. (2006). The continuing problem of post chemotherapy nausea and vomiting: contributions of classical conditioning. Autonomic Neuroscience – Basic & Clinical, 129, 92–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carey, M. P., & Burish, T. G. (1988). Etiology and treatment of the psychological side effects associated with cancer chemotherapy: a critical review and discussion. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 307–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Channell, S., & Hall, G. (1981). Facilitation and retardation of discrimination learning after exposure to the stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 7, 437–446.Google ScholarPubMed
Davey, G. C. L. (1989). Dental phobias and anxieties: evidence for conditioning processes in the acquisition and modification of a learned fear. Behavior Research and Therapy, 27, 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casa, L. G., & Lubow, R. E. (1995). Latent inhibition in conditioned taste aversion: the roles of stimulus frequency and duration, and amount of fluid ingested during preexposure. Neurobiology of Learning & Memory, 64, 125–132.Google ScholarPubMed
Casa, L. G., & Lubow, R. E. (2000). Super-latent inhibition with delayed conditioned taste aversion testing. Animal Learning & Behavior, 28, 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casa, L. G., & Lubow, R. E. (2002). An empirical analysis of the super-latent inhibition effect. Animal Learning & Behavior, 30, 112–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casa, L. G., & Lubow, R. E. (2005). Delay-induced super-latent inhibition as a function of order of exposure to two flavours prior to compound conditioning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 58B, 1–18.Google Scholar
Denniston, J. C., Savastano, H. I., Blaisdell, A. P., & Miller, R. R. (2003). Cue competition as a retrieval deficit. Learning and Motivation, 34, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denniston, J. C., Savastano, H. I., & Miller, R. R. (2001). The extended comparator hypothesis: learning by contiguity, responding by relative strength. In Mowrer, R. R. & Klein, S. B. (Eds.), Handbook of Contemporary Learning Theories. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 65–117.Google Scholar
Dickinson, A., & Burke, J. (1996). Within-compound associations mediate the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B, 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eiche, K. D., & Cook, J. H. (2001). A learning-based approach to preventing dental phobias. Clinical Update, 23. Bethesda, MD: Naval Postgraduate Dental School, pp. 20–21.Google Scholar
Escobar, M., Arcediano, F., & Miller, R. R. (2003). Latent inhibition in human adults without masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 1028–1040.Google ScholarPubMed
Escobar, M., Arcediano, F., & Miller, R. R. (2005). Disruption of latent inhibition by interpolation of irrelevant stimulation between preexposure and conditioning. Learning & Behavior, 33, 371–385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eysenck, H. J. (1968). A theory of the incubation of anxiety/fear responses. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 6, 309–322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, G., & Channell, S. (1985). Differential effects of contextual change on latent inhibition and on the habituation of an orienting response. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 470–481.Google Scholar
Hall, G., & Channell, S. (1986). Context specifity of latent inhibition in taste aversion learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38B, 121–139.Google Scholar
Hall, G., & Minor, H. (1984). A search for context-stimulus associations in latent inhibition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36B, 145–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G., & Pearce, J. M. (1979). Latent inhibition of a CS during CS-US pairings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 31–42.Google Scholar
Kamin, L. J. (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention, and conditioning. In Campbell, B. A. & Church, M. R. (Eds.), Punishment and Aversive Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, pp. 279–296.Google Scholar
Killcross, A. S., Kiernan, M. J., Dwyer, D., & Westbrook, R. F. (1998). Loss of latent inhibition of contextual conditioning following non-reinforced context exposure in rats. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51B, 75–90.Google Scholar
Knoedler, A. J., Hellwig, K. A., & Neath, I. (1999). The shift from recency to primacy with increasing delay. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 474–487.Google Scholar
Konorski, J. (1967). Integrative Activity of the Brain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Konorski, J., & Szwejkowska, G. (1952). Chronic extinction and restoration of conditioned reflexes: IV. The dependence of the course of extinction and restoration of conditioned reflexes on the “history” of the conditioned stimulus (the principle of the primacy of the training). Acta Biologiae Experimentalis, 16, 95–113.Google Scholar
Kraemer, P. J., & Ossenkopp, K. P. (1986). The effects of flavor preexposure and test interval on conditioned taste aversions in rats. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 24, 219–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraemer, P. J., Randall, C. K., & Carbary, T. J. (1991). Release from latent inhibition with delayed testing. Animal Learning & Behavior, 19, 139–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraemer, P. J., & Roberts, W. A. (1984). The influence of flavor preexposure and test interval on conditioned taste aversion in the rat. Learning and Motivation, 15, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraemer, P. J., & Spear, N. E. (1992). The effect of nonreinforced stimulus exposure on the strength of a conditioned taste aversion as a function of retention interval: do latent inhibition and extinction involve a shared process?Animal Learning & Behavior, 20, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantz, A. E. (1973). Effect of number of trials, interstimulus interval, and dishabituation during CS habituation on subsequent conditioning in a CER paradigm. Animal Learning & Behavior, 1, 273–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovibond, P., Preston, G. C., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1984). Contextual control of conditioning and latent inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 10, 360–375.Google Scholar
Lubow, R. E. (1989). Latent Inhibition and Conditioned Attention Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubow, R. E. (1998). Latent inhibition and behavioral pathology: some effects of stimulus preexposure. In O'Donohue, W. (Ed.), Learning and Behavior Therapy. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, pp. 107–121.Google Scholar
Lubow, R. E., & Casa, L. G. (2002). Super-latent inhibition and spontaneous recovery: differential effects of pre- and post-conditioning CS-alone presentations after long delays in different contexts. Animal Learning & Behavior, 30, 376–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubow, R. E., & Casa, L. G. (2005). Time-induced super-latent inhibition is dependent on the distinctiveness of the retention-interval context from the other experimental contexts. Learning and Motivation, 36, 322–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubow, R. E., & Moore, A. U. (1959). Latent inhibition: the effect of nonreinforced preexposure to the conditioned stimulus. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 52, 415–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubow, R. E., Weiner, I., & Schnur, P. (1981). Conditioned attention theory. In Bower, G. H. (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol. 13. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 1–55.Google Scholar
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, M., & Cohen, N. (1989). Catastrophic interference in connectionist networks: the sequential learning problem. In Bower, G. H. (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 109–165.Google Scholar
McLaren, I. P. L., Kaye, H., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1989). An associative theory of the representation of stimuli: applications to perceptual learning and latent inhibition. In Morris, R. G. M. (Ed.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Implications for Psychology and Neurobiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 102–130.Google Scholar
McLaren, I. P. L., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2000). An elemental model of associative learning: I. Latent inhibition and perceptual learning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 28, 211–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, R. R., & Matzel, L. D. (1988). The comparator hypothesis: a response rule for the expression of associations. In Bower, G. H. (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol. 22. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 51–92.Google Scholar
Neath, I. (1993). Distinctiveness and serial position effects in recognition. Memory & Cognition, 21, 689–698.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes. London: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Pearce, J. M., & Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 532–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pineño, O., Casa, L. G., Lubow, R. E., & Miller, R. R. (2006). Some determinants of latent inhibition in humans. Learning and Motivation, 37, 42–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In Black, A. H. & Prokasy, W. F. (Eds.), Classical Conditioning II: Current Research and Theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, pp. 64–99.Google Scholar
Rosas, J. M., & Bouton, M. E. (1997). Additivity of the effects of retention interval and context change on latent inhibition: toward resolution of the context forgetting paradox. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 283–294.Google ScholarPubMed
Rudy, J. W., Rosenberg, L., & Sandell, J. H. (1977). Disruption of a taste familiarity effect by novel exteroceptive stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 3, 26–36.Google ScholarPubMed
Schmajuk, N. A. (2002). Latent Inhibition and its Neural Substrates. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, M. D., Jacobsen, P. B., & Bovbjerg, D. H. (1996). Role of nausea in the development of aversions to a beverage paired with chemotherapy treatment in cancer patients. Physiology & Behavior, 59, 659–663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stout, S., Amundson, J. C., & Miller, R. R. (2005). Trial order and retention interval in human contingency judgment. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1368–1376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swartzentruber, D. E., & Bouton, M. E. (1992). Context sensitivity of conditioned suppression following preexposure to the conditioned stimulus. Animal Learning & Behavior, 20, 97–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, A. R. (1979). Habituation and memory. In Dickinson, A. & Boakes, R. A. (Eds.), Mechanisms of Learning and Motivation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 53–82.Google Scholar
Wagner, A. R. (1981). SOP: a model of automatic memory processing in animal behavior. In Spear, N. E. & Miller, R. R. (Eds.), Information Processing in Animals: Memory Mechanisms. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 5–47.Google Scholar
Westbrook, R. F., Bond, N. W., & Feyer, A. M. (1981). Short-term and long-term decrements in toxicosis-induced odor-aversion learning: the role of duration of exposure to an odor. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 7, 362–381.Google Scholar
Westbrook, R. F., Jones, M. L., Bailey, G. K., & Harris, J. A. (2000). Contextual control over conditioned responding in a latent inhibition paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 26, 157–173.Google Scholar
Wheeler, D. S., Stout, S. C., & Miller, R. R. (2004). Interaction of retention interval with CS-preexposure and extinction treatments: symmetry with respect to primacy. Learning & Behavior, 32, 335–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×