Craddock Paul, Wasserman Jessica S, Polack Cody W, Kosinski Thierry, Renaux Charlotte, Miller Ralph R
Université de Lille, Lille, France.
Université de Lille, Nord de France, Domaine universitaire du "Pont de Bois", rue du Barreau, BP 60149, 59653, Villeneuve d'Ascq Cedex, France.
Learn Behav. 2018 Jun;46(2):171-181. doi: 10.3758/s13420-017-0299-5.
Second-order conditioning (SOC; i.e., conditioned responding to S2 as a result of S1-US pairings followed by S2-S1 pairings) is generally explained by either a direct S2→US association or by an associative chain (i.e., S2→S1→US). Previous research found that differences in responses to S2 after S1 was extinguished often depended on the nature of the S2-S1 pairings (i.e., sequential or simultaneous). In two experiments with human participants, we examined the possibility that such differences result from S1 evoking S2 during extinction of S1 following simultaneous but not sequential S2-S1 pairings. This evocation of S2 by S1 following simultaneous pairings may have paired the evoked representation of S2 with absence of the outcome, thereby facilitating mediated extinction of S2. Using sequential S2-S1 pairings, both Experiments 1 and 2 failed to support this account of how extinction of S1 reduced responding to S2. Experiment 1 found that extinguishing S1 reduced responding to S2, while extinguishing S2 had little effect on responses to S1, although forward evocation of S1 during extinction of S2 paired the evoked representation of S1 with absence of the outcome. In Experiment 2, evocation of S2 during S1 nonreinforced trials was prevented because S2-S1 pairings followed (rather than proceeded) S1-alone exposures. Nevertheless, responding to S2 at test mimicked S1 responding. Responding to S2 was high in the context in which S1 had been reinforced and low in the context in which S1 had been nonreinforced. Collectively, these experiments provide additional support for the associative-chain account of SOC.
二级条件作用(SOC;即由于S1-US配对后接着S2-S1配对而对S2产生条件反应)通常通过直接的S2→US关联或关联链(即S2→S1→US)来解释。先前的研究发现,在S1消退后对S2反应的差异通常取决于S2-S1配对的性质(即相继的或同时的)。在两项针对人类参与者的实验中,我们检验了这样一种可能性,即这种差异是由于在同时但非相继的S2-S1配对后S1消退期间S1唤起了S2。同时配对后S1对S2的这种唤起可能使唤起的S2表征与结果缺失配对,从而促进了S2的中介消退。使用相继的S2-S1配对,实验1和实验2均未能支持关于S1消退如何减少对S2反应的这一解释。实验1发现,消退S1会减少对S2的反应,而消退S2对S1的反应影响很小,尽管在S2消退期间S1的正向唤起使唤起的S1表征与结果缺失配对。在实验2中,由于S2-S1配对在单独呈现S1之后(而非之前)进行,因此在S1无强化试验期间S2的唤起被阻止。然而,测试时对S2的反应模仿了对S1的反应。在S1得到强化的情境中对S2的反应较高,而在S1未得到强化的情境中对S2的反应较低。总体而言,这些实验为二级条件作用的关联链解释提供了更多支持。