Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 52242, USA.
Department of Experimental Psychology and The Alan Turing Institute, University College London, London WC1H 0AP, United Kingdom.
Learn Mem. 2019 Feb 15;26(3):84-92. doi: 10.1101/lm.048942.118. Print 2019 Mar.
A prominent theory of category learning, COVIS, posits that new categories are learned with either a declarative or procedural system, depending on the task. The declarative system uses the prefrontal cortex (PFC) to learn rule-based (RB) category tasks in which there is one relevant sensory dimension that can be used to establish a rule for solving the task, whereas the procedural system uses corticostriatal circuits for information integration (II) tasks in which there are multiple relevant dimensions, precluding use of explicit rules. Previous studies have found faster learning of RB versus II tasks in humans and monkeys but not in pigeons. The absence of a learning rate difference in pigeons has been attributed to their lacking a PFC. A major gap in this comparative analysis, however, is the lack of data from a nonprimate mammalian species, such as rats, that have a PFC but a less differentiated PFC than primates. Here, we investigated RB and II category learning in rats. Similar to pigeons, RB and II tasks were learned at the same rate. After reaching a learning criterion, wider distributions of stimuli were presented to examine generalization. A second experiment found equivalent RB and II learning with wider category distributions. Computational modeling revealed that rats extract and selectively attend to category-relevant information but do not consistently use rules to solve the RB task. These findings suggest rats are on a continuum of PFC function between birds and primates, with selective attention but limited ability to utilize rules relative to primates.
类别学习的一个主要理论,即 COVIS,假定新类别是通过陈述性或程序性系统学习的,具体取决于任务。陈述性系统使用前额叶皮层 (PFC) 来学习基于规则 (RB) 的类别任务,其中存在一个相关的感觉维度,可以用来建立解决任务的规则,而程序性系统则使用皮质纹状体回路来进行信息整合 (II) 任务,其中存在多个相关维度,排除了使用显式规则的可能性。先前的研究发现,人类和猴子在 RB 任务中的学习速度比 II 任务快,但在鸽子中却没有发现。鸽子中没有学习率差异的原因被归因于它们缺乏 PFC。然而,在这种比较分析中存在一个主要差距,即缺乏来自非灵长类哺乳动物物种(如大鼠)的数据,这些物种具有 PFC,但与灵长类动物相比,其 PFC 分化程度较低。在这里,我们研究了大鼠的 RB 和 II 类别学习。与鸽子相似,RB 和 II 任务以相同的速度学习。达到学习标准后,会呈现更广泛的刺激分布,以检查泛化。第二项实验发现,更广泛的类别分布具有等效的 RB 和 II 学习。计算模型表明,大鼠提取并选择性地关注与类别相关的信息,但并不总是使用规则来解决 RB 任务。这些发现表明,大鼠在鸟类和灵长类动物的 PFC 功能之间存在连续性,具有选择性注意,但相对于灵长类动物而言,利用规则的能力有限。