scholarly journals Comparing the magnitudes of second-order conditioning and sensory preconditioning effects

1991 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Barnet ◽  
Nicholas J. Grahame ◽  
Ralph R. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Second Order ◽  
Sensory Preconditioning ◽  
Order Conditioning

scholarly journals Higher-Order Conditioning and Dopamine: Charting a Path Forward

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin M. Seitz ◽  
Aaron P. Blaisdell ◽  
Melissa J. Sharpe
Keyword(s):  
Causal Reasoning ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Dopamine Neurons ◽  
Sensory Preconditioning ◽  
Order Conditioning ◽  
Sports Team ◽  
Midbrain Dopamine ◽  
Complex Forms ◽  
Learning And Cognition

Higher-order conditioning involves learning causal links between multiple events, which then allows one to make novel inferences. For example, observing a correlation between two events (e.g., a neighbor wearing a particular sports jersey), later helps one make new predictions based on this knowledge (e.g., the neighbor’s wife’s favorite sports team). This type of learning is important because it allows one to benefit maximally from previous experiences and perform adaptively in complex environments where many things are ambiguous or uncertain. Two procedures in the lab are often used to probe this kind of learning, second-order conditioning (SOC) and sensory preconditioning (SPC). In second-order conditioning (SOC), we first teach subjects that there is a relationship between a stimulus and an outcome (e.g., a tone that predicts food). Then, an additional stimulus is taught to precede the predictive stimulus (e.g., a light leads to the food-predictive tone). In sensory preconditioning (SPC), this order of training is reversed. Specifically, the two neutral stimuli (i.e., light and tone) are first paired together and then the tone is paired separately with food. Interestingly, in both SPC and SOC, humans, rodents, and even insects, and other invertebrates will later predict that both the light and tone are likely to lead to food, even though they only experienced the tone directly paired with food. While these processes are procedurally similar, a wealth of research suggests they are associatively and neurobiologically distinct. However, midbrain dopamine, a neurotransmitter long thought to facilitate basic Pavlovian conditioning in a relatively simplistic manner, appears critical for both SOC and SPC. These findings suggest dopamine may contribute to learning in ways that transcend differences in associative and neurological structure. We discuss how research demonstrating that dopamine is critical to both SOC and SPC places it at the center of more complex forms of cognition (e.g., spatial navigation and causal reasoning). Further, we suggest that these more sophisticated learning procedures, coupled with recent advances in recording and manipulating dopamine neurons, represent a new path forward in understanding dopamine’s contribution to learning and cognition.

scholarly journals Temporal integration in second-order conditioning and sensory preconditioning

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Barnet ◽  
Robert P. Cole ◽  
Ralph R. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Integration ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Sensory Preconditioning ◽  
Order Conditioning

scholarly journals Cortical Contributions to Higher-Order Conditioning: A Review of Retrosplenial Cortex Function

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle I. Fournier ◽  
Han Yin Cheng ◽  
Siobhan Robinson ◽  
Travis P. Todd
Keyword(s):  
Brain Structures ◽  
Neutral Stimulus ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Retrosplenial Cortex ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Cortical Region ◽  
Sensory Preconditioning ◽  
Order Conditioning

In higher-order conditioning paradigms, such as sensory preconditioning or second-order conditioning, discrete (e.g., phasic) or contextual (e.g., static) stimuli can gain the ability to elicit learned responses despite never being directly paired with reinforcement. The purpose of this mini-review is to examine the neuroanatomical basis of high-order conditioning, by selectively reviewing research that has examined the role of the retrosplenial cortex (RSC) in sensory preconditioning and second-order conditioning. For both forms of higher-order conditioning, we first discuss the types of associations that may occur and then review findings from RSC lesion/inactivation experiments. These experiments demonstrate a role for the RSC in sensory preconditioning, suggesting that this cortical region might contribute to higher-order conditioning via the encoding of neutral stimulus-stimulus associations. In addition, we address knowledge gaps, avenues for future research, and consider the contribution of the RSC to higher-order conditioning in relation to related brain structures.

scholarly journals Excitatory second-order conditioning using a backward first-order conditioned stimulus: A challenge for prediction error reduction

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (6) ◽  
pp. 1453-1465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Prével ◽  
Vinca Rivière ◽  
Jean-Claude Darcheville ◽  
Gonzalo P Urcelay ◽  
Ralph R Miller
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Stimulus ◽  
Conditioned Reinforcement ◽  
Prediction Error ◽  
Conditioned Reinforcer ◽  
Error Reduction ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Temporal Coding ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Conditioning ◽  
Opponent Processes

Prével and colleagues reported excitatory learning with a backward conditioned stimulus (CS) in a conditioned reinforcement preparation. Their results add to existing evidence of backward CSs sometimes being excitatory and were viewed as challenging the view that learning is driven by prediction error reduction, which assumes that only predictive (i.e., forward) relationships are learned. The results instead were consistent with the assumptions of both Miller’s Temporal Coding Hypothesis and Wagner’s Sometimes Opponent Processes (SOP) model. The present experiment extended the conditioned reinforcement preparation developed by Prével et al. to a backward second-order conditioning preparation, with the aim of discriminating between these two accounts. We tested whether a second-order CS can serve as an effective conditioned reinforcer, even when the first-order CS with which it was paired is a backward CS that elicits no responding. Evidence of conditioned reinforcement was found, despite no conditioned response (CR) being elicited by the first-order backward CS. The evidence of second-order conditioning in the absence of excitatory conditioning to the first-order CS is interpreted as a challenge to SOP. In contrast, the present results are consistent with the Temporal Coding Hypothesis and constitute a conceptual replication in humans of previous reports of excitatory second-order conditioning in rodents with a backward CS. The proposal is made that learning is driven by “discrepancy” with prior experience as opposed to “ prediction error.”

A Computational Model of the Amygdala Nuclei’s Role in Second Order Conditioning

2008 ◽  
pp. 321-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Mannella ◽  
Stefano Zappacosta ◽  
Marco Mirolli ◽  
Gianluca Baldassarre
Keyword(s):  
Computational Model ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Order Conditioning
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document