Menger N S, Kotchoubey B, Ohla K, Pavlov Y G
Institute of Medical Psychology and Behavioural Neurobiology, University of Tübingen, Germany.
Institute of Medical Psychology and Behavioural Neurobiology, University of Tübingen, Germany.
Int J Psychophysiol. 2025 Sep;215:113205. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2025.113205. Epub 2025 Jul 1.
The comparison of physiological mechanisms underlying appetitive and aversive conditioning is often challenging due to the involvement of stimuli from different modalities with potentially disparate effective mechanisms (e.g., pain stimuli versus monetary rewards). The olfactory system offers a unique opportunity to examine both types of conditioning in humans, as isointense odors can serve as comparably pleasant and unpleasant stimuli. To study physiological and behavioral responses during appetitive and aversive learning, we employed odors as unconditioned stimuli (US) in a within-subjects design, measuring various conditioned physiological responses including skin conductance, heart rate, pulse wave amplitude, respiration, fear-potentiated startle, postauricular reflex, facial electromyography, as well as event-related potentials and auditory steady-state responses (ASSR) derived from electroencephalography. We conducted four experiments with a total of 95 participants, presenting three neutral sounds paired with either a pleasant odor, an unpleasant odor, or odorless air. The first experiment involved uninstructed participants and frequency-modulated conditioned stimuli (CS) for ASSR analysis. In the second experiment, we omitted the frequency modulation and startle probe. The third experiment included pre-experiment instruction on CS-US contingencies, while the fourth employed a delay conditioning paradigm in contrast to the other three experiments. Our results revealed differences between CS+ and CS- only in the fear-potentiated startle response in Experiment 3. No other effects were found. The minimal or absent learning effects observed across multiple peripheral and neural physiological measures may be attributed to the extra-thalamic nature of olfactory pathways and the subsequent difficulty in forming associations with auditory stimuli.
由于来自不同感觉模态的刺激可能具有不同的有效机制(例如,疼痛刺激与金钱奖励),对食欲性和厌恶性条件反射背后的生理机制进行比较通常具有挑战性。嗅觉系统为研究人类的这两种类型的条件反射提供了独特的机会,因为等强度的气味可以作为同样令人愉悦和令人不快的刺激。为了研究食欲性和厌恶性学习过程中的生理和行为反应,我们在一项被试内设计中使用气味作为无条件刺激(US),测量各种条件性生理反应,包括皮肤电导、心率、脉搏波幅度、呼吸、恐惧增强惊吓、耳后反射、面部肌电图,以及从脑电图得出的事件相关电位和听觉稳态反应(ASSR)。我们对总共95名参与者进行了四项实验,呈现三种中性声音,分别与一种愉悦气味、一种不愉快气味或无味空气配对。第一个实验涉及未接受指导的参与者和用于ASSR分析的调频条件刺激(CS)。在第二个实验中,我们省略了调频和惊吓探测。第三个实验包括对CS-US意外情况的实验前指导,而第四个实验与其他三个实验相比采用了延迟条件反射范式。我们的结果显示,在实验3中,CS+和CS-之间仅在恐惧增强惊吓反应上存在差异。未发现其他影响。在多种外周和神经生理测量中观察到的最小或不存在的学习效应可能归因于嗅觉通路的丘脑外性质以及随后与听觉刺激形成关联的困难。