Bekinschtein Tristan A, Peeters Moos, Shalom Diego, Sigman Mariano
Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, Medical Research Council Cambridge, UK.
Front Psychol. 2011 Dec 6;2:337. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00337. eCollection 2011.
Classical (trace) conditioning is a specific variant of associative learning in which a neutral stimulus leads to the subsequent prediction of an emotionally charged or noxious stimulus after a temporal gap. When conditioning is concurrent with a distraction task, only participants who can report the relationship (the contingency) between stimuli explicitly show associative learning. This suggests that consciousness is a prerequisite for trace conditioning. We review and question three main controversies concerning this view. Firstly, virtually all animals, even invertebrate sea slugs, show this type of learning; secondly, unconsciously perceived stimuli may elicit trace conditioning; and thirdly, some vegetative state patients show trace learning. We discuss and analyze these seemingly contradictory arguments to find the theoretical boundaries of consciousness in classical conditioning. We conclude that trace conditioning remains one of the best measures to test conscious processing in the absence of explicit reports.
经典(痕迹)条件作用是联想学习的一种特定变体,其中中性刺激在经过一段时间间隔后会导致对情绪激动或有害刺激的后续预测。当条件作用与分心任务同时进行时,只有那些能够明确报告刺激之间关系(关联性)的参与者才会表现出联想学习。这表明意识是痕迹条件作用的先决条件。我们回顾并质疑了关于这一观点的三个主要争议。首先,几乎所有动物,甚至无脊椎动物海蛞蝓,都表现出这种类型的学习;其次,无意识感知的刺激可能引发痕迹条件作用;第三,一些植物人患者表现出痕迹学习。我们讨论并分析这些看似矛盾的论点,以找出经典条件作用中意识的理论界限。我们得出结论,在没有明确报告的情况下,痕迹条件作用仍然是测试意识加工的最佳方法之一。