兔子眨眼条件反射中的阻塞不是由于习得性注意力不集中:间接支持阻塞的错误纠正机制。

M Todd Allen, Yahaira Padilla, Mark A Gluck
{"title":"兔子眨眼条件反射中的阻塞不是由于习得性注意力不集中:间接支持阻塞的错误纠正机制。","authors":"M Todd Allen,&nbsp;Yahaira Padilla,&nbsp;Mark A Gluck","doi":"10.1007/BF02734248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Blocking is a classical conditioning task in which prior training to one cue such as a tone reduces learning about a second cue such as a light, when subsequently trained as a tone-light compound. Blocking has been theorized to come about through a US-modulated error correction mechanism by Rescorla & Wagner (1972) as well as through a mechanism of learned inattention as theorized by Mackintosh (1973). In the case of eyeblink conditioning, an error correction mechanism has been hypothesized to take place in the cerebellum while some form of inattention has been hypothesized to take place in the hippocampal region. The hypothesis we are testing is whether the mechanism of learned inattention is involved in blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning. If blocking in eyeblink conditioning is produced by a mechanism of learned inattention, then training to a previously blocked cue should be slower than training to that cue in a naïve animal. Rabbits that had received tone training followed by tone-light training exhibited blocking. Rabbits that had been previously blocked to the light acquired conditioned responses to the light at the same rate as naive rabbits. This finding failed to support the hypothesis that blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning is due to learned inattention, but does support the Rescorla-Wagner mechanism of error correction. The present finding along with previous work on error correction mechanism in the cerebellar-brainstem circuit (Kim et al., 1998) lend support to the theory that blocking, at least in rabbit eyeblink conditioning, seems to be due to an error correction mechanism rather than a learned inattention mechanism.</p>","PeriodicalId":73397,"journal":{"name":"Integrative physiological and behavioral science : the official journal of the Pavlovian Society","volume":"37 4","pages":"254-64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/BF02734248","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning is not due to learned inattention: indirect support for an error correction mechanism of blocking.\",\"authors\":\"M Todd Allen,&nbsp;Yahaira Padilla,&nbsp;Mark A Gluck\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/BF02734248\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Blocking is a classical conditioning task in which prior training to one cue such as a tone reduces learning about a second cue such as a light, when subsequently trained as a tone-light compound. Blocking has been theorized to come about through a US-modulated error correction mechanism by Rescorla & Wagner (1972) as well as through a mechanism of learned inattention as theorized by Mackintosh (1973). In the case of eyeblink conditioning, an error correction mechanism has been hypothesized to take place in the cerebellum while some form of inattention has been hypothesized to take place in the hippocampal region. The hypothesis we are testing is whether the mechanism of learned inattention is involved in blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning. If blocking in eyeblink conditioning is produced by a mechanism of learned inattention, then training to a previously blocked cue should be slower than training to that cue in a naïve animal. Rabbits that had received tone training followed by tone-light training exhibited blocking. Rabbits that had been previously blocked to the light acquired conditioned responses to the light at the same rate as naive rabbits. This finding failed to support the hypothesis that blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning is due to learned inattention, but does support the Rescorla-Wagner mechanism of error correction. The present finding along with previous work on error correction mechanism in the cerebellar-brainstem circuit (Kim et al., 1998) lend support to the theory that blocking, at least in rabbit eyeblink conditioning, seems to be due to an error correction mechanism rather than a learned inattention mechanism.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrative physiological and behavioral science : the official journal of the Pavlovian Society\",\"volume\":\"37 4\",\"pages\":\"254-64\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/BF02734248\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrative physiological and behavioral science : the official journal of the Pavlovian Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02734248\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative physiological and behavioral science : the official journal of the Pavlovian Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02734248","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

阻断是一种经典的条件反射任务,其中先前对一个线索(如音调)的训练减少了对第二个线索(如光线)的学习,随后将其训练为声光复合。据Rescorla & Wagner(1972)和Mackintosh(1973)的理论,阻滞是通过美国调制的纠错机制以及习得性注意力不集中机制产生的。在眨眼条件反射的情况下,一种错误纠正机制被假设发生在小脑中,而某种形式的注意力不集中被假设发生在海马区。我们正在测试的假设是,习得性注意力不集中的机制是否与兔子眨眼条件反射中的阻塞有关。如果眨眼条件反射中的阻塞是由一种习得性注意力不集中机制产生的,那么训练先前被阻塞的线索应该比训练naïve动物的线索要慢。先接受音调训练后再接受音调光训练的兔子表现出阻滞。先前被遮挡在光线下的兔子获得对光的条件反应的速度与未接触过的兔子相同。这一发现未能支持兔子眨眼条件反射的阻塞是由于习得性注意力不集中的假设,但确实支持Rescorla-Wagner错误纠正机制。目前的发现以及之前关于小脑-脑干回路中的纠错机制的研究(Kim et al., 1998)支持了这样一种理论,即至少在兔子的眨眼条件反射中,阻滞似乎是由于纠错机制,而不是由于习得的注意力不集中机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning is not due to learned inattention: indirect support for an error correction mechanism of blocking.

Blocking is a classical conditioning task in which prior training to one cue such as a tone reduces learning about a second cue such as a light, when subsequently trained as a tone-light compound. Blocking has been theorized to come about through a US-modulated error correction mechanism by Rescorla & Wagner (1972) as well as through a mechanism of learned inattention as theorized by Mackintosh (1973). In the case of eyeblink conditioning, an error correction mechanism has been hypothesized to take place in the cerebellum while some form of inattention has been hypothesized to take place in the hippocampal region. The hypothesis we are testing is whether the mechanism of learned inattention is involved in blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning. If blocking in eyeblink conditioning is produced by a mechanism of learned inattention, then training to a previously blocked cue should be slower than training to that cue in a naïve animal. Rabbits that had received tone training followed by tone-light training exhibited blocking. Rabbits that had been previously blocked to the light acquired conditioned responses to the light at the same rate as naive rabbits. This finding failed to support the hypothesis that blocking in rabbit eyeblink conditioning is due to learned inattention, but does support the Rescorla-Wagner mechanism of error correction. The present finding along with previous work on error correction mechanism in the cerebellar-brainstem circuit (Kim et al., 1998) lend support to the theory that blocking, at least in rabbit eyeblink conditioning, seems to be due to an error correction mechanism rather than a learned inattention mechanism.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editor’s note Editorial comment Editorial comment Editorial commentary Culture-brain interactions.
×
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