Solomon P R, Graves C A
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1985;444:486-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1985.tb37619.x.
There was no difference between old and young animals in acquisition of the conditioned response in the delay conditioning paradigm, nor were there any age-related differences in generalization to the tone CS or in sensitivity to the tone CS or eye shock UCS. In the trace conditioning paradigm, however, old animals acquired the conditioned response significantly slower than young animals. Because the same stimulus parameters and the same responses were used in both paradigms, it is unlikely that the age-related differences in trace conditioning were due to differences in stimulus sensitivity, motor deficits, motivation, or fatigue. Rather, the differences appear due to associative factors. The increased demands of the trace paradigm, which includes a within trial memory component, may be a critical factor in the age related disruption. Moreover, recent data suggest that trace and delay conditioning may involve different neuronal systems (e.g., hippocampus appears necessary for trace but not delay conditioning) and these systems may be differentially effected by the aging process.
在延迟条件作用范式中，老年动物和幼年动物在获得条件反应方面没有差异，在对音调条件刺激的泛化、对音调条件刺激或眼部电击非条件刺激的敏感性方面也没有与年龄相关的差异。然而，在痕迹条件作用范式中，老年动物获得条件反应的速度明显比幼年动物慢。由于在两种范式中使用了相同的刺激参数和相同的反应，痕迹条件作用中与年龄相关的差异不太可能是由于刺激敏感性、运动缺陷、动机或疲劳的差异造成的。相反，这些差异似乎是由联想因素导致的。痕迹范式增加的要求，其中包括试验中的记忆成分，可能是与年龄相关的干扰的一个关键因素。此外，最近的数据表明，痕迹条件作用和延迟条件作用可能涉及不同的神经元系统（例如，海马体对于痕迹条件作用似乎是必需的，但对于延迟条件作用则不是），并且这些系统可能受到衰老过程的不同影响。
