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-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T04:15:19.082Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - From latent inhibition to retrospective revaluation: an attentional-associative model

from Current topics in latent inhibition research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

By
Nestor Schmajuk
Edited by
Robert Lubow  and
Ina Weiner
Robert Lubow
Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University
Ina Weiner
Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University
Get access

Summary

This chapter summarizes my work with Jeffrey Gray (1934–2004) on latent inhibition (LI), i.e., the retardation in the generation of the conditioned response (CR) during the pairing of the conditioned stimulus (CS) and the unconditioned stimulus (US) following CS preexposure. From 1996 to 2004, we published a series of articles on (a) a neural network model that describes LI and other classical conditioning paradigms (Schmajuk, Lam, & Gray,1996), (b) the mapping of variables in the model onto brain structures and neurotransmitters (Schmajuk, Cox, & Gray, 2001; Schmajuk, Gray, & Larrauri, 2005), (c) the application of the model to the description of the effect of brain lesions and drug administration on LI and the characterization of the neural activity and neurotransmitter release in different brain areas during LI (Buhusi, Gray, & Schmajuk, 1998; Schmajuk, Buhusi, & Gray, 1998), and (d) how the absence of LI, regarded as a positive symptom of schizophrenia, is caused by hippocampal dysfunction and ameliorated by DA blockers (Schmajuk, Christiansen, & Cox, 2000; Schmajuk, 2001; Schmajuk, 2002).

After 2004, still guided by Jeffrey's suggestions, Jose Larrauri and I (Schmajuk & Larrauri, 2006) successfully applied the model to data that seem to challenge the power of existing models of classical conditioning. Namely, recovery from blocking (the reduced responding to one CS of a conditioned compound when the other CS was separately conditioned first), backward blocking (the reduced responding to one CS of a conditioned compound when the other CS was separately conditioned following compound conditioning), the counteraction between LI and overshadowing (the reduced responding to one or both CSs of a conditioned compound compared with their individual conditioning), and super LI (decreased responding to a preexposed CS after a delay following conditioning,).

Type
Chapter
Information
Latent Inhibition
Cognition, Neuroscience and Applications to Schizophrenia
 , pp. 137 - 162
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.)

References

Ayres, J. J. B., Philbin, D., Cassidy, S., & Belling, L. (1992). Some parameters of latent inhibition. Learning and Motivation, 23, 269–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, A. G., Haskins, C. E., & Hall, G. (1990). Stimulus generalization decrement in latent inhibition to a compound following exposure to the elements of the compound. Animal Learning & Behavior, 18, 162–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, A. G., & Mercier, P. (1982). Extinction of the context and latent inhibition. Learning and Motivation, 13, 391–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baruch, I., Hemsley, D., & Gray, J. A. (1988). Differential performance of acute and chronic schizophrenics in a latent inhibition task. Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, 176, 598–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckers, T., Houwer, J., Pineño, O., & Miller, R. R. (2005). Outcome additivity and outcome maximality influence cue competition in human causal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 238–49.Google ScholarPubMed
Best, M. R., Gemberling, G. A., & Johnson, P. E. (1979). Disrupting the conditioned stimulus preexposure effect in flavor aversion learning: effects of interoceptive distractor manipulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 321–334.Google ScholarPubMed
Blaisdell, A., Bristol, A., Gunther, L., & Miller, R. (1998). Overshadowing and latent inhibition counteract each other: further support for the comparator hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 24, 335–251.Google ScholarPubMed
Bottjer, S. W. (1982). Conditioned approach and withdrawal behavior in pigeons: effects of a novel extraneous stimulus during acquisition and extinction. Learning and Motivation, 13, 44–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouton, M. E., & Swartzentruber, D. (1989). Slow reacquisition following extinction: context, encoding, and retrieval mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 43–53.Google Scholar
Buhusi, C. V., Gray, J. A., & Schmajuk, N. A. (1998). The perplexing effects of hippocampal lesions on latent inhibition: a neural network solution. Behavioral Neuroscience, 112, 316–351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Channell, S., & Hall, G. (1981). Facilitation and retardation of discrimination learning after exposure to the stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 7, 437–46.Google ScholarPubMed
Crowell, C. R., & Anderson, D. C. (1972). Variations in intensity, interstimulus interval, and interval between preconditioning CS exposures and conditioning with rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 79, 291–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casa, L., & Lubow, R. E. (2000). Super-latent inhibition with delayed conditioned taste aversion testing. Animal Learning & Behavior, 28, 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casa, L., & Lubow, R. E. (2002). An empirical analysis of the super-latent inhibition effect. Animal Learning & Behavior, 30, 112–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delamater, A. R. (1997). Selective reinstatement of stimulus-outcome associations. Animal Learning & Behavior, 25, 400–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delamater, A. R. (2004). Experimental extinction in Pavlovian conditioning: behavioural and neuroscience perspectives. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57B, 97–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denniston, J. C., Chang, R. C., & Miller, R. R. (2003). Massive extinction treatment attenuates the renewal effect. Learning and Motivation, 34, 68–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVietti, T. L., & Barrett, O. V. (1986). Latent inhibition: no effect of intertrial interval of the preexposure trials. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 24, 453–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, A., & Burke, J. (1996). Within-compound associations mediate the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B, 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, M. S. (1990). Factors governing one-trial contextual conditioning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 18, 264–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grahame, N. J., Barnet, R. C., Gunther, L. M., & Miller, R. R. (1994). Latent inhibition as a performance deficit resulting from CS-context associations. Animal Learning & Behavior, 22, 395–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G., & Channel, S. (1985a). Latent inhibition and conditioning after preexposure to the training context. Learning and Motivation, 16, 381–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G., & Channel, S. (1985b). 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., & Minor, H. (1984). A search for context-stimulus associations in latent inhibition. The 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
Hall, G., & Pearce, J. M. (1982). Restoring the associability of a preexposed CS by a surprising event. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34B, 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G., & Schachtman, T. R. (1987). Differential effects of a retention interval on latent inhibition and the habituation of an orienting response. Animal Learning & Behavior, 15, 76–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, P. C., & Forbes, D. R. (1980). Effects of compound or element preexposure on compound flavor aversion conditioning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 8, 199–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honey, R. C., & Hall, G. (1988). Overshadowing and blocking procedures in latent inhibition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B, 163–186.Google Scholar
Kasprow, W. J., Catterson, D., Schachtman, T. R., & Miller, R. R. (1984). Attenuation of latent inhibition by post-acquisition reminder. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36B, 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, H., & Pearce, J. M. (1984). The strength of the orienting response during Pavlovian conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavioral Processes, 10, 90–109.Google ScholarPubMed
Kiernan, M. J., & Westbrook, R. F. (1993). Effects of exposure to a to-be-shocked environment upon the rat's freezing response: evidence for facilitation, latent inhibition, and perceptual learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46B, 271–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Killcross, S. (2001). Loss of latent inhibition in conditioned taste aversion following exposure to a novel flavour before test. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54B, 271–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Killcross, S., & Balleine, B. (1996). Role of primary motivation in stimulus preexposure effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 96, 32–42.Google 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
Lantz, A. E. (1973). Effect of number of trials, interstimulus interval, and dishabituation on subsequent conditioning in a CER paradigm. Animal Learning & Behavior, 1, 273–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larrauri, J. A., & Schmajuk, N. A. (2008). Attentional, associative, and configural mechanisms of extinction. Psychological Review, 115, 640–676.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lovibond, P. F., Preston, G. C., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1984). Context specificity of conditioning, extinction, and latent inhibition. Journal of Experimental Pyschology: Animal Behavior Processes, 10, 360–375.Google Scholar
Lubow, R. E., & Moore, A. U. (1959). Latent inhibition: the effect of non-reinforced preexposure to the conditional stimulus. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 52, 415–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubow, R. E., Weiner, I., Schlossberg, A., & Baruch, I. (1987). Latent inhibition and schizophrenia. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25, 464–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackintosh, N. J. (1973). Stimulus selection: learning to ignore stimuli that predict no change in reinforcement. In Hinde, R. A. & Hinde, J. S. (Eds.), Constraints of Learning. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Miller, R., & Matute, H. (1996). Biological significance in forward and backward blocking: resolution of a discrepancy between animal conditioning and human causal judgement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 370–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagaishi, T., & Nakajima, S. (2008). Further evidence for the summation of latent inhibition and overshadowing in rats' conditioned taste aversion. Learning and Motivation, 39, 221–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pearce, J., & Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian conditioning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 332–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pineño, O., Usushihara, K., & Miller, R. R. (2005). Spontaneous recovery from forward and backward blocking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behaviour Processes, 31, 172–83.Google ScholarPubMed
Prados, J. (2000). Effects of varying the amount of preexposure to spatial cues on a subsequent navigation task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53B, 139–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiss, S., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). CS habituation produces a “latent inhibition effect” but no active “conditioned inhibition”. Learning and Motivation, 3, 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescorla, R. A. (1971). Summation and retardation tests of latent inhibition. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 75, 77–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rescorla, R. A. (2004). Spontaneous recovery varies inversely with the training-extinction interval. Learning & Behavior, 32, 401–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. 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
Ricker, S. T., & Bouton, M. E. (1996). Reacquisition following extinction in appetitive conditioning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 24, 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robbins, S. J. (1990). Mechanisms underlying spontaneous recovery in autoshaping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 235–249.Google Scholar
Rudy, J. W., Krauter, E. E., & Gaffuri, A. (1976). Attenuation of latent inhibition by prior preexposure to another stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2, 235–247.Google Scholar
Rudy, J. W., Rosenberg, L., & Sandell, J. H. (1977). Disruption of taste familiarity effect by novel exteroceptive stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 88, 665–669.Google Scholar
Schmajuk, N. A. (2001). Hippocampal dysfunction in schizophrenia. Hippocampus, 11, 599–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmajuk, N. A. (2002). Latent Inhibition and its Neural Substrates. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmajuk, N. A., Buhusi, C. V., & Gray, J. A. (1998). The pharmacology of latent inhibition: a neural network approach. Behavioural Pharmacology, 9, 711–730.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmajuk, N. A, Christiansen, B. A., & Cox, L. (2000). Haloperidol reinstates latent inhibition impaired by hippocampal lesions: data and theory. Behavioral Neuroscience, 114, 659–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmajuk, N. A., Cox, L., & Gray, J. A. (2001). The neurophysiological substrates of latent inhibition: a neural network approach. Behavioral Brain Research, 118, 123–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmajuk, N. A., Gray, J. A., & Larrauri, J. A. (2005). A pre-clinical study showing how dopaminergic drugs administered during pre-exposure can impair or facilitate latent inhibition. Psychopharmacology, 177, 272–279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmajuk, N. A., Lam, Y. W., & Gray, J. A. (1996). Latent inhibition: a neural network approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22, 321–349.Google ScholarPubMed
Schmajuk, N. A., & Larrauri, J. A. (2006). Experimental challenges to theories of classical conditioning: application of a computational model of storage and retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 1–20.Google Scholar
Schmajuk, N. A., & Moore, J. (1988). The hippocampus and the classically conditioned nictitating membrane response: a real-time attentional-associative model. Psychobiology, 16, 20–35.Google Scholar
Schnur, P., & Lubow, R. E. (1976). Latent inhibition: the effects of ITI and CS intensity during preexposure. Learning and Motivation, 7, 540–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidman, L. J. (1983). Schizophrenia and brain dysfunction: an integration of recent neurodiagnostic findings. Psychological Bulletin, 94, 195–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shanks, D. R. (1985). Forward and backward blocking in human contingency judgment. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37B, 1–21.Google Scholar
Solomon, P. R., Brennan, G., & Moore, J. W. (1974). Latent inhibition of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response as a function of CS intensity. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 4, 445–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, B. L., Larsen, N., & Ayres, J. J. B. (2003). Role of context similarity in ABA, ABC, and AAB renewal paradigms: implications for theories of renewal and for treating human phobias. Learning and Motivation, 34, 410–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trobalon, J. B., Chamizo, V. D., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1992). Role of context in perceptual learning in maze discriminations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44B, 57–73.Google Scholar
Wagner, A. R. (1979). Habituation and memory. In Dickinson, A. & Boakes, R. A. (Eds.), Mechanisms of Learning and Motivation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Wagner, A. R. (1981). SOP: a model of automatic memory processing in animal behavior. In Spears, N. E. and 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-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
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
Wickens, C., Tuber, D. S., & Wickens, D. D. (1983). Memory for the conditioned response: the proactive effect of preexposure to potential conditioning stimuli and context change. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, P. N., Boumphrey, P., & Pearce, J. M. (1992). Restoration of the orienting response to a light by a change in its predictive accuracy. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44B, 17–36.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@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
×