Degraded contingency effect on running-based flavor aversion in rats: Testing the associative cue-competition account with flavors of minimal similarity

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL Learning and Motivation Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.lmot.2024.102061
Sadahiko Nakajima, Kenji Okuda
{"title":"Degraded contingency effect on running-based flavor aversion in rats: Testing the associative cue-competition account with flavors of minimal similarity","authors":"Sadahiko Nakajima,&nbsp;Kenji Okuda","doi":"10.1016/j.lmot.2024.102061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Wheel running endows aversion to a paired flavor in laboratory rats, reflecting a form of Pavlovian conditioning, where the contingency between the flavor and running is crucial for the development of flavor aversion. This study investigates the impact of additional wheel running (extra running) opportunities on the development of flavor aversion based on the contingent flavor-running training. All rats had access to a target solution, followed by the opportunity to run on 5 out of 10 training days. The three groups of rats differed in treatment on the remaining 5 days: Unsignaled rats ran after consuming familiar tap water, while signaled rats ran after ingesting a solution of another flavor (a cover cue), and control rats drank tap water without running. The post-training choice test revealed that the unsignaled rats exhibited a weaker aversion for the target flavor compared to the control rats, indicating an attenuating effect of the extra running on running-based conditioned flavor aversion. This \"degraded contingency effect\" remained unchanged when the running was signaled by another flavor cue: the target flavor preference of the signaled rats was equivalent to that of the unsignaled rats. The failure to obtain any effect of the second flavor on the target aversion suggests that the degraded contingency effect demonstrated here is better explained by either habituation or the comparator mechanism, rather than cue competition.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47305,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Motivation","volume":"88 ","pages":"Article 102061"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Motivation","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0023969024001036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Wheel running endows aversion to a paired flavor in laboratory rats, reflecting a form of Pavlovian conditioning, where the contingency between the flavor and running is crucial for the development of flavor aversion. This study investigates the impact of additional wheel running (extra running) opportunities on the development of flavor aversion based on the contingent flavor-running training. All rats had access to a target solution, followed by the opportunity to run on 5 out of 10 training days. The three groups of rats differed in treatment on the remaining 5 days: Unsignaled rats ran after consuming familiar tap water, while signaled rats ran after ingesting a solution of another flavor (a cover cue), and control rats drank tap water without running. The post-training choice test revealed that the unsignaled rats exhibited a weaker aversion for the target flavor compared to the control rats, indicating an attenuating effect of the extra running on running-based conditioned flavor aversion. This "degraded contingency effect" remained unchanged when the running was signaled by another flavor cue: the target flavor preference of the signaled rats was equivalent to that of the unsignaled rats. The failure to obtain any effect of the second flavor on the target aversion suggests that the degraded contingency effect demonstrated here is better explained by either habituation or the comparator mechanism, rather than cue competition.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对大鼠基于奔跑的味道厌恶的退化应急效应:用相似性最小的味道检验联想线索-竞争账户
车轮跑使实验鼠对配对的味道产生厌恶,这反映了一种巴甫洛夫条件反射,其中味道和跑步之间的或然性对味道厌恶的形成至关重要。本研究调查了基于或然味道-奔跑训练的额外车轮奔跑(额外奔跑)机会对味道厌恶发展的影响。所有大鼠都有机会接触目标溶液,然后在 10 个训练日中的 5 天有机会跑步。在剩下的 5 天中,三组大鼠的待遇不同:无信号大鼠在喝下熟悉的自来水后奔跑,而有信号大鼠在喝下另一种味道的溶液(掩护线索)后奔跑,对照组大鼠喝下自来水后不奔跑。训练后的选择测试表明,与对照组大鼠相比,无信号大鼠对目标味道的厌恶程度较弱,这表明额外的奔跑对基于奔跑的条件性味道厌恶有减弱作用。这种 "退化的条件反射效应 "在通过另一种味道线索发出奔跑信号时保持不变:发出信号的大鼠对目标味道的偏好与未发出信号的大鼠相当。第二种味道没有对目标厌恶产生任何影响,这表明这里所展示的退化或然效应更适合用习惯或比较机制来解释,而不是用线索竞争来解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Learning and Motivation features original experimental research devoted to the analysis of basic phenomena and mechanisms of learning, memory, and motivation. These studies, involving either animal or human subjects, examine behavioral, biological, and evolutionary influences on the learning and motivation processes, and often report on an integrated series of experiments that advance knowledge in this field. Theoretical papers and shorter reports are also considered.
期刊最新文献
Degraded contingency effect on running-based flavor aversion in rats: Testing the associative cue-competition account with flavors of minimal similarity Examining the role of classroom climate and teacher-student relationships in EFL students’ perceived learning outcomes: A self-determination theory perspective Effect of Raha syrup on the motivational effects of morphine and CSF serotonin levels in rats The mediating role of self-efficacy between high school students’ perceived teacher support and mathematics feedback literacy Metacognitive training for algebra teaching to high school students: An action research study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1