Holloway Jacqueline L, Trivedi Payal, Myers Catherine E, Servatius Richard J
Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey Newark, NJ, USA ; New Jersey Medical School, Stress and Motivated Behavior Institute, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey Newark, NJ, USA.
Front Behav Neurosci. 2012 Nov 16;6:76. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2012.00076. eCollection 2012.
In classical conditioning, proactive interference may arise from experience with the conditioned stimulus (CS), the unconditional stimulus (US), or both, prior to their paired presentations. Interest in the application of proactive interference has extended to clinical populations as either a risk factor for disorders or as a secondary sign. Although the current literature is dense with comparisons of stimulus pre-exposure effects in animals, such comparisons are lacking in human subjects. As such, interpretation of proactive interference over studies as well as its generalization and utility in clinical research is limited. The present study was designed to assess eyeblink response acquisition after equal numbers of CS, US, and explicitly unpaired CS and US pre-exposures, as well as to evaluate how anxiety vulnerability might modulate proactive interference. In the current study, anxiety vulnerability was assessed using the State/Trait Anxiety Inventories as well as the adult and retrospective measures of behavioral inhibition (AMBI and RMBI, respectively). Participants were exposed to 1 of 4 possible pre-exposure contingencies: 30 CS, 30 US, 30 CS, and 30 US explicitly unpaired pre-exposures, or Context pre-exposure, immediately prior to standard delay training. Robust proactive interference was evident in all pre-exposure groups relative to Context pre-exposure, independent of anxiety classification, with CR acquisition attenuated at similar rates. In addition, trait anxious individuals were found to have enhanced overall acquisition as well as greater proactive interference relative to non-vulnerable individuals. The findings suggest that anxiety vulnerable individuals learn implicit associations faster, an effect which persists after the introduction of new stimulus contingencies. This effect is not due to enhanced sensitivity to the US. Such differences would have implications for the development of anxiety psychopathology within a learning framework.
在经典条件反射中,前摄干扰可能源于在条件刺激(CS)、无条件刺激(US)或两者配对呈现之前对它们的体验。对前摄干扰应用的兴趣已扩展到临床人群,将其作为疾病的风险因素或次要症状。尽管当前文献充斥着对动物刺激预暴露效应的比较,但在人类受试者中缺乏此类比较。因此,对前摄干扰在研究中的解释及其在临床研究中的推广和效用是有限的。本研究旨在评估在等量的CS、US以及明确未配对的CS和US预暴露后眨眼反应的习得情况,并评估焦虑易感性如何调节前摄干扰。在当前研究中,使用状态/特质焦虑量表以及成人和回顾性行为抑制测量(分别为AMBI和RMBI)来评估焦虑易感性。在标准延迟训练之前,参与者被暴露于4种可能的预暴露情况之一:30次CS、30次US、30次CS和30次明确未配对的US预暴露,或情境预暴露。相对于情境预暴露,在所有预暴露组中均明显存在强烈的前摄干扰,与焦虑分类无关,条件反应(CR)的习得以相似的速率减弱。此外,发现特质焦虑个体相对于非易感性个体具有增强的总体习得以及更大的前摄干扰。研究结果表明,焦虑易感性个体学习内隐联想更快,这种效应在引入新的刺激条件后仍然存在。这种效应并非由于对US的敏感性增强。这些差异将对学习框架内焦虑心理病理学的发展产生影响。