Abstract

Rats were given Pavlovian aversive (Av) conditioning in which a weak (0.5-sec, 0.7-mA) or a strong (0.5-sec, 1.4-mA) footshock unconditioned stimulus (US) was presented alone or in a positive, zero, or negative correlation with a flashing-light conditioned stimulus (AvCS+, AvCSo, or AvCS−, respectively). Thereafter, the subjects received Pavlovian appetitive (Ap) conditioning in which the flashing-light CS was positively correlated in a forward order with the delivery of a food US. As anticipated, for subjects that had been trained with the strong shock US, the AvCS+ retarded and the AvCS− facilitated Ap conditioning relative to both the AvCSo and the novel-CS treatments, which did not differ in effect. However, the exact opposite prevailed for the AvCS+ and AvCS− subjects that had been trained with the weak shock US. On the basis of these and other data, we propose an “ABC” model of transfer that stresses the importance of affective, behavioral, and cognitive factors in accounting for the divergent results that are obtained in both Av-to-Ap and Ap-to-Av transfer paradigms.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call