scholarly journals Stress modulates the use of spatial versus stimulus-response learning strategies in humans

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 109-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Schwabe ◽  
M. S. Oitzl ◽  
C. Philippsen ◽  
S. Richter ◽  
A. Bohringer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Response Learning ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Versus Stimulus

Stimulus-response versus stimulus-stimulus-response learning in cerebellar patients

2004 ◽  
Vol 158 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Richter ◽  
K. Matthies ◽  
T. Ohde ◽  
A. Dimitrova ◽  
E. Gizewski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Response Learning ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Response Versus ◽  
Versus Stimulus

Chronic stress modulates the use of spatial and stimulus-response learning strategies in mice and man

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Schwabe ◽  
Sergiu Dalm ◽  
Hartmut Schächinger ◽  
Melly S. Oitzl
Keyword(s):  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Chronic Stress ◽  
Response Learning ◽  
Stimulus Response

Modulation of spatial and stimulus–response learning strategies by exogenous cortisol in healthy young women

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Schwabe ◽  
Melly S. Oitzl ◽  
Steffen Richter ◽  
Hartmut Schächinger
Keyword(s):  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Young Women ◽  
Response Learning ◽  
Stimulus Response

scholarly journals Striatum-Mediated Deficits in Stimulus-Response Learning and Decision-Making in OCD

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nole M. Hiebert ◽  
Marc R. Lawrence ◽  
Hooman Ganjavi ◽  
Mark Watling ◽  
Adrian M. Owen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Response Learning ◽  
Stimulus Response

scholarly journals A general model of hippocampal and dorsal striatal learning and decision making

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (49) ◽  
pp. 31427-31437
Author(s):  
Jesse P. Geerts ◽  
Fabian Chersi ◽  
Kimberly L. Stachenfeld ◽  
Neil Burgess
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Reference Frame ◽  
Place Cells ◽  
Cognitive Map ◽  
Relational Structure ◽  
Place Learning ◽  
Response Learning ◽  
Adaptive Combination ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Model Free

Humans and other animals use multiple strategies for making decisions. Reinforcement-learning theory distinguishes between stimulus–response (model-free; MF) learning and deliberative (model-based; MB) planning. The spatial-navigation literature presents a parallel dichotomy between navigation strategies. In “response learning,” associated with the dorsolateral striatum (DLS), decisions are anchored to an egocentric reference frame. In “place learning,” associated with the hippocampus, decisions are anchored to an allocentric reference frame. Emerging evidence suggests that the contribution of hippocampus to place learning may also underlie its contribution to MB learning by representing relational structure in a cognitive map. Here, we introduce a computational model in which hippocampus subserves place and MB learning by learning a “successor representation” of relational structure between states; DLS implements model-free response learning by learning associations between actions and egocentric representations of landmarks; and action values from either system are weighted by the reliability of its predictions. We show that this model reproduces a range of seemingly disparate behavioral findings in spatial and nonspatial decision tasks and explains the effects of lesions to DLS and hippocampus on these tasks. Furthermore, modeling place cells as driven by boundaries explains the observation that, unlike navigation guided by landmarks, navigation guided by boundaries is robust to “blocking” by prior state–reward associations due to learned associations between place cells. Our model, originally shaped by detailed constraints in the spatial literature, successfully characterizes the hippocampal–striatal system as a general system for decision making via adaptive combination of stimulus–response learning and the use of a cognitive map.

Corticosteroids Operate as a Switch between Memory Systems

2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. 1362-1372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Schwabe ◽  
Hartmut Schächinger ◽  
E. Ron de Kloet ◽  
Melly S. Oitzl
Keyword(s):  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Mineralocorticoid Receptor ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Response Strategy ◽  
Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Multiple Memory Systems ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Spatial Strategies ◽  
Corticosteroid Hormones ◽  
Proximal Stimulus

Stress and corticosteroid hormones are known to affect learning and memory processes. In this study, we examined whether stress and corticosteroids are capable of facilitating the switch between multiple memory systems in mice. For this purpose, we designed a task that allowed measurement of nucleus caudate-based stimulus–response and hippocampus-based spatial learning strategies. Naive mice used spatial strategies to locate an exit hole on a circular hole board at a fixed location flagged by a proximal stimulus. When the mice were either stressed or administered corticosterone before the task, 30–50% of the mice switched to a stimulus–response strategy. This switch between learning strategies was accompanied by a rescue of performance, whereas performance declined in the stressed mice that kept using the spatial strategy. Pretreatment with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist prevented the switch toward the stimulus–response strategy but led to deterioration of hippocampus-dependent performance. These findings (i) show that corticosteroids promote the transition from spatial to stimulus–response memory systems, (ii) provide evidence that the mineralocorticoid receptor underlies this corticosteroid-mediated switch, and (iii) suggest that a stress-induced switch from hippocampus-based to nucleus caudate-based memory systems can rescue performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document