Retardation of acquisition after conditioned inhibition and latent inhibition training in human causal learning.

Abstract

Inhibitory stimuli are slow to acquire excitatory properties when paired with the outcome in a retardation test. However, this pattern is also seen after simple nonreinforced exposure: latent inhibition. It is commonly assumed that retardation would be stronger for a conditioned inhibitor than for a latent inhibitor, but there is surprisingly little empirical evidence comparing the two in either animals or humans. Thus, retardation after inhibitory training could in principle be attributable entirely to latent inhibition. We directly compared the speed of excitatory acquisition after conditioned inhibition and matched latent inhibition training in human causal learning. Conditioned inhibition training produced stronger transfer in a summation test, but the two conditions did not differ substantially in a retardation test. We offer two explanations for this dissociation. One is that learned predictiveness attenuated the latent inhibition that otherwise would have occurred during conditioned inhibition training, so that retardation in that condition was primarily due to inhibition. The second explanation is that inhibitory learning in these experiments was hierarchical in nature, similar to negative occasion-setting. By this account, the conditioned inhibitor was able to negatively modulate the test excitor in a summation test, but was no more retarded than a latent inhibitor in its ability to form a direct association with the outcome. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).