Search

Humans and animals use information about future access to rewards to influence their behaviour in the present, however the evidence for this is largely anecdotal. Here we use the nicotine intravenous self-administration paradigm to ask whether rats can use an auditory stimulus signalling a long (450 s) signalled time-out on the next trial to influence their nicotine intake in the present. Rats were trained to choose between low (15 µg/kg/infusion), medium (30 µg/kg/infusion) or high (60 µg/kg/infusion) doses of nicotine on any given trial. Trials either had a 'light' trial with no tone and a standard 20 s post-infusion time-out, a 'short-tone' trial where a tone was presented but the time-out remained at 20 s, or a 'long-tone' trial where a second tone played and was accompanied by a long 450 s time-out period. During training rats clearly showed that dose selection was based on both the dose on the previous trial and the latency between infusions. When tones were presented, rats shifted their preference from the low dose to the high dose when the long-delay tone was presented, and this choice was particularly pronounced when the rat had previously selected a low dose. Together these findings are the first evidence that rats can regulate their nicotine intake in the present in anticipation of a future non-drug period. This result is discussed with respect to theories of negative reinforcement., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

How is new information organized in memory? According to latent state theories, this is determined by the level of surprise, or prediction error, generated by the new information: a small prediction error leads to the updating of existing memory, large prediction error leads to encoding of a new memory. We tested this idea using a protocol in which rats were first conditioned to fear a stimulus paired with shock. The stimulus was then gradually extinguished by progressively reducing the shock intensity until the stimulus was presented alone. Consistent with latent state theories, this gradual extinction protocol (small prediction errors) was better than standard extinction (large prediction errors) in producing long-term suppression of fear responses, and the benefit of gradual extinction was due to updating of the conditioning memory with information about extinction. Thus, prediction error determines how new information is organized in memory, and latent state theories adequately describe the ways in which this occurs., Competing Interests: NK, JL, SK, RW, NH No competing interests declared, (© 2024, Kennedy et al.)

Pavlovian conditioning is widely used to study the substrates of learning and memory in the mammalian brain. In a standard protocol, subjects are exposed to pairings of a conditioned stimulus (CS; e.g., a tone) with an unconditioned stimulus (US; e.g., an electric shock). Subsequent presentations of the CS elicit a range of behaviors that relate to the US (e.g., freezing) showing that animals learned the CS-US relation. However, it is still unclear how neuronal activity pertaining to the CS comes to excite a representation of the US, and thereby, conditioned responses. The current analysis of this problem, based on neurophysiological evidence, views Pavlovian conditioning as a process of facilitating the disinhibition, rather than the excitation, of neuronal responses representing the US. Conversely, Pavlovian extinction is viewed as a process of relearning to inhibit neuronal responses representing the US. We propose a mathematical equation that confirms the predictions made by this novel perspective on Pavlovian conditioning when applied to conditioning phenomena that fall beyond classic associative learning theories. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Rescorla (2000, 2001) interpreted his compound test results to show that both common and individual error terms regulate associative change such that the element of a conditioned compound with the greater prediction error undergoes greater associative change than the one with the smaller prediction error. However, it has recently been suggested that uncertainty, not prediction error, is the primary determinant of associative change in people (Spicer et al., 2020, 2022). The current experiments use the compound test in a continuous outcome allergist task to assess the role of uncertainty in associative change, using two different manipulations of uncertainty: outcome uncertainty (where participants are uncertain of the level of the outcome on a particular trial) and causal uncertainty (where participants are uncertain of the contribution of the cue to the level of the outcome). We replicate Rescorla's compound test results in the case of both associative gains (Experiment 1) and associative losses (Experiment 3) and then provide evidence for greater change to more uncertain cues in the case of associative gains (Experiments 2 and 4), but not associative losses (Experiments 3 and 5). We discuss the findings in terms of the notion of theory protection advanced by Spicer et al., and other ways of thinking about the compound test procedure, such as that proposed by Holmes et al. (2019). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

It is widely accepted that fear memories are consolidated through protein synthesis-dependent changes in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA). However, recent studies show that protein synthesis is not required to consolidate the memory of a new dangerous experience when it is similar to a prior experience. Here, we examined whether the protein synthesis requirement for consolidating the new experience varies with its spatial and temporal distance from the prior experience. Female and male rats were conditioned to fear a stimulus (S1, e.g., light) paired with shock in stage 1 and a second stimulus (S2, e.g., tone) that preceded additional S1-shock pairings (S2-S1-shock) in stage 2. The latter stage was followed by a BLA infusion of a protein synthesis inhibitor, cycloheximide, or vehicle. Subsequent testing with S2 revealed that protein synthesis in the BLA was not required to consolidate fear to S2 when the training stages occurred 48 h apart in the same context; was required when they were separated by 14 d or occurred in different contexts; but was again not required if S1 was re-presented after the delay or in the different context. Similarly, protein synthesis in the BLA was not required to re consolidate fear to S2 when the training stages occurred 48 h apart but was required when they occurred 14 d apart. Thus, the protein synthesis requirement for consolidating/reconsolidating fear memories in the BLA is determined by similarity between present and past experiences, the time and place in which they occur, and reminders of the past experiences., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests., (Copyright © 2024 the authors.)

Activity in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA) is needed to encode fears acquired through contact with both innate sources of danger (i.e., things that are painful) and learned sources of danger (e.g., being threatened with a gun). However, within the BLA, the molecular processes required to consolidate the two types of fear are not the same: protein synthesis is needed to consolidate the first type of fear (so-called first-order fear) but not the latter (so-called second-order fear). The present study examined why first- and second-order fears differ in this respect. Specifically, it used a range of conditioning protocols in male and female rats, and assessed the effects of a BLA infusion of the protein synthesis inhibitor, cycloheximide, on first- and second-order conditioned fear. The results revealed that the differential protein synthesis requirements for consolidation of first- and second-order fears reflect differences in what is learned in each case. Protein synthesis in the BLA is needed to consolidate fears that result from encoding of relations between stimuli in the environment (stimulus-stimulus associations, typical for first-order fear) but is not needed to consolidate fears that form when environmental stimuli associate directly with fear responses emitted by the animal (stimulus-response associations, typical for second-order fear). Thus, the substrates of Pavlovian fear conditioning in the BLA depend on the way that the environment impinges upon the animal. This is discussed with respect to theories of amygdala function in Pavlovian fear conditioning, and ways in which stimulus-response associations might be consolidated in the brain., (Copyright © 2024 the authors.)

This series of experiments examined the effects of extinction and an explicitly unpaired treatment on the ability of a conditioned stimulus (CS) to function as a reinforcer. Rats were trained to lever press for food, exposed to pairings of a noise CS and food, and, finally, tested for their willingness to lever press for the CS in the absence of the food. Experiment 1 provided a demonstration of conditioned reinforcement (using controls that were only exposed to unpaired presentations of the CS and food) and showed that it was equivalent after one or four sessions of CS-food pairings. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that, after one session of CS-food pairings, repeated presentations of the CS alone reduced its reinforcing properties; but after four sessions of CS-food pairings, repeated presentations of the CS alone had no effect on these properties. Experiment 4 showed that, after four sessions of CS-food pairings, explicitly unpaired presentations of the CS and food completely undermined conditioned reinforcement. Finally, Experiment 5 provided within-experiment evidence that, after four sessions of CS-food pairings, the reinforcing properties of the CS were disrupted by explicitly unpaired presentations of the CS and food but spared by repeated presentations of the CS alone. Together, these findings indicate that the effectiveness of extinction in undermining the reinforcing properties of a CS depends on its level of conditioning; and that, where extinction fails to disrupt these properties, they are successfully undermined by an explicitly unpaired treatment. They are discussed with respect to findings in the literature on Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer; and the Rescorla-Wagner model, which anticipates that an explicitly unpaired treatment will be more effective than extinction in reversing the effects of conditioning., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

It is widely accepted that Pavlovian fear conditioning requires activation of NMDA receptors (NMDARs) in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA). However, it was recently shown that activation of NMDAR in the BLA is only required for fear conditioning when danger occurs unexpectedly; it is not required for fear conditioning when danger occurs as expected. This study tested the hypothesis that NMDARs in the BLA are engaged for Pavlovian fear conditioning when an animal's predictions regarding danger are in error. In each experiment, rats (females in Experiment 1 and males in Experiments 2-5) were conditioned to fear one stimulus, S1, when it was paired with foot-shock (S1→shock), and 48 h later, a second stimulus, S2, when it was presented in sequence with the already-conditioned S1 and foot-shock (S2→S1→shock). Conditioning to S2 occurred under a BLA infusion of the NMDAR antagonist, D-AP5 or vehicle. The subsequent tests of freezing to S2 alone and S1 alone revealed that the antagonist had no effect on conditioning to S2 when the shock occurred exactly as predicted by the S1, but disrupted this conditioning when the shock occurred earlier/later than predicted by S1, or at a stronger/weaker intensity. These results imply that errors in the timing or intensity of a predicted foot-shock engage NMDARs in the BLA for Pavlovian fear conditioning. They are discussed in relation to theories which propose a role for prediction error in determining how experiences are organized in memory and how activation of NMDAR in the BLA might contribute to this organization. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT This study is significant in showing that prediction error determines how a new experience is encoded with respect to a past experience and, thereby, whether NMDA receptors (NMDARs) in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA) encode the new experience. When prediction error is small (e.g., danger occurs as and when expected), the new experience is encoded together with a past experience as part of the same "mental model," and NMDAR activation in the BLA is not needed for this encoding. By contrast, when prediction error is large (e.g., danger occurs at an unexpected intensity or time), the new experience is encoded separately from the past experience as part of a new mental model, and NMDAR activation in the BLA is needed for this encoding., (Copyright © 2023 the authors.)

This study examined the effect of danger on consolidation of neutral information in two regions of the rat (male and female) medial temporal lobe: the perirhinal cortex (PRh) and basolateral amygdala complex (BLA). The neutral information was the association that forms between an auditory stimulus and a visual stimulus (labeled S2 and S1) across their pairings in sensory preconditioning. We show that, when the sensory preconditioning session is followed by a shocked context exposure, the danger shifts consolidation of the S2-S1 association from the PRh to the BLA; and does so by interacting with processes involved in encoding of the S2-S1 pairings. Specifically, we show that the initial S2-S1 pairing in sensory preconditioning is encoded in the BLA and not the PRh; whereas the later S2-S1 pairings are encoded in the PRh and not the BLA. When the sensory preconditioning session is followed by a context alone exposure, the BLA-dependent trace of the early S2-S1 pairings decays and the PRh-dependent trace of the later S2-S1 pairings is consolidated in memory. However, when the sensory preconditioning session is followed by a shocked context exposure, the PRh-dependent trace of the later S2-S1 pairings is suppressed and the BLA-dependent trace of the initial S2-S1 pairing is consolidated in memory. These findings are discussed with respect to mutually inhibitory interactions between the PRh and BLA, and the way that these regions support memory in other protocols, including recognition memory in people. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The perirhinal cortex (PRh) and basolateral amygdala complex (BLA) process the pairings of neutral auditory and visual stimuli in sensory preconditioning. The involvement of each region in this processing is determined by the novelty/familiarity of the stimuli as well as events that occur immediately after the preconditioning session. Novel stimuli are represented in the BLA; however, as these stimuli are repeatedly presented without consequence, they come to be represented in the PRh. Whether the BLA- or PRh-dependent representation is consolidated in memory depends on what happens next. When nothing of significance occurs, the PRh-dependent representation is consolidated and the BLA-dependent representation decays; but when danger is encountered, the PRh-dependent representation is inhibited and the BLA-dependent representation is selected for consolidation., (Copyright © 2023 the authors.)

How do animals process experiences that provide contradictory information? The present study addressed this question using second-order fear conditioning in rats. In second-order conditioning, rats are conditioned to fear a stimulus, S1, through its pairings with foot-shock (stage 1); and some days later, a second stimulus, S2, through its pairings with the already-conditioned S1 (stage 2). However, as foot-shock is never presented during conditioning to S2, we hypothesized that S2 simultaneously encodes 2 contradictory associations: one that drives fear to S2 (S2-danger) and another that reflects the absence of the expected unconditioned stimulus and partially masks that fear (e.g. S2-safety). We tested this hypothesis by manipulating the substrates of danger and safety learning in the brain (using a chemogenetic approach) and assessing the consequences for second-order fear to S2. Critically, silencing activity in the basolateral amygdala (important for danger learning) reduced fear to S2, whereas silencing activity in the infralimbic cortex (important for safety learning) enhanced fear to S2. These bidirectional changes are consistent with our hypothesis that second-order fear conditioning involves the formation of competing S2-danger and S2-safety associations. More generally, they show that a single set of experiences can produce contradictory associations and that the brain resolves the contradiction by encoding these associations in distinct brain regions., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permission@oup.com.)

In standard (first-order) Pavlovian conditioning protocols, pairings of an initially neutral conditioned stimulus (CS) and a biologically significant unconditioned stimulus (US) result in the formation of a CS-US association. The strength of this association is theoretically regulated by prediction error: specifically, the difference between the total level of conditioning supported by the US and the degree to which it is predicted by all stimuli present (i.e., a common error term). In higher-order conditioning protocols (e.g., sensory preconditioning and second-order conditioning), a Pavlovian CS is used to condition responses to other stimuli with which it is paired. At present, it is unknown whether error-correction processes regulate associative learning in higher-order conditioning and, if so, whether these processes are the same as those that regulate formation of a CS-US association in first-order conditioning. Here we review studies that have provided findings relevant to this question: specifically, studies that have examined blocking and/or inhibitory learning in sensory preconditioning and second-order conditioning. These studies show that: (1) animals can form inhibitory associations between relatively neutral sensory stimuli; (2) the learning that occurs in sensory preconditioning and second-order conditioning can be blocked; and, finally, (3) a first-order CS can block conditioning to a second-order CS, and vice versa. The findings are taken to imply that a common error term regulates associative learning in higher-order conditioning, just as it regulates associative learning in first-order conditioning. They are discussed with respect to the nature of the error signal that underlies conditioning and future work that is needed to advance our understanding of the rules that govern different types of learning., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Todd and Holmes.)

Sensory preconditioned and second-order conditioned responding are each well-documented. The former occurs in subjects (typically rats) exposed to pairings of two relatively neutral stimuli, S2 and S1, and then to pairings of S1 and a motivationally significant event [an unconditioned stimulus (US)]; the latter occurs when the order of these experiences is reversed with rats being exposed to S1-US pairings and then to S2-S1 pairings. In both cases, rats respond when tested with S2 in a manner appropriate to the affective nature of the US, e.g., approach when the US is appetitive and withdrawal when it is aversive. This paper reviews the neural substrates of sensory preconditioning and second-order conditioning. It identifies commonalities and differences in the substrates of these so-called higher-order conditioning protocols and discusses these commonalities/differences in relation to what is learned. In so doing, the review highlights ways in which these types of conditioning enhance our understanding of how the brain encodes and retrieves different types of information to generate appropriate behavior., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

It is widely accepted that activation of NMDA receptors (NMDAR) is necessary for the formation of fear memories in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA). This acceptance is based on findings that blockade of NMDAR in the BLA disrupts Pavlovian fear conditioning in rodents when initially innocuous stimuli are paired with aversive and unexpected events (surprising foot shock). The present study challenges this acceptance by showing that the involvement of NMDAR in Pavlovian fear conditioning is determined by prediction errors in relation to aversive events. In the initial experiments, male rats received a BLA infusion of the NMDAR antagonist, D-AP5 and were then exposed to pairings of a novel target stimulus and foot shock. This infusion disrupted acquisition of fear to the target when the shock was surprising (experiments 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b) but spared fear to the target when the shock was expected based on the context, time and other stimuli that were present (experiments 1a and 1b). Under the latter circumstances, fear to the target required activation of calcium-permeable AMPAR (CP-AMPA; experiments 4a, 4b, and 4c), which, using electrophysiology, were shown to regulate the activity of interneurons in the BLA (experiment 5). Thus, NMDAR activation is not required for fear conditioning when danger occurs as expected given the context, time and stimuli present, but is required for fear conditioning when danger occurs unexpectedly. These findings are related to current theories of NMDAR function and ways that prediction errors might influence the substrates of fear memory formation in the BLA. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT It is widely accepted that NMDA receptors (NMDAR) in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA) are activated by pairings of a conditioned stimulus (CS) and an aversive unconditioned (US) stimulus, leading to the synaptic changes that underlie formation of a CS-US association. The present findings are significant in showing that this theory is incomplete. When the aversive US is unexpected, animals encode all features of the situation (context, time and stimuli present) as a new fear/threat memory, which is regulated by NMDAR in the BLA. However, when the US is expected based on the context, time and stimuli present, the new fear memory is assimilated into networks that represent those features, which occurs independently of NMDAR activation in the BLA., (Copyright © 2022 the authors.)

Sensory preconditioning protocols can be used to assess how the brain integrates memories that share common features. In these protocols, animals are first exposed to pairings of two relatively innocuous stimuli, S2 and S1 (stage 1), and then to pairings of one of these stimuli, S1, with an event of motivational significance (stage 2). Following this training, test presentations of S2 elicit responses appropriate to the motivationally significant event, and these responses are taken to indicate formation of distinct S2-S1 and S1-event memories that are integrated in some way to generate that responding. This paper reviews studies of sensory preconditioning in rats, mice, rabbits and people to determine whether S2-S1 and S1-event memories are integrated through a chaining process at the time of their retrieval (i.e., test presentations of S2 trigger retrieval of S1, and thereby, responses appropriate to the event); or "online" at the time of memory formation (i.e., in stage 2, S1 activates a representation of S2 such that both stimuli associate with the motivationally significant event). It finds that the type of integration is determined by the manner in which stimuli are presented in preconditioning as well as their familiarity. When the stimuli in preconditioning are presented repeatedly and/or serially (i.e., one after the other), the S2-S1 and S1-event memories are chained at the time of retrieval/testing. In contrast, when the stimuli in preconditioning are relatively novel and/or presented simultaneously, the S2-S1 and S1-event memories are integrated online. These statements are related to prior claims regarding the circumstances that promote different types of memory integration and, more generally, mechanisms of information processing in the mammalian brain., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The opioid receptor antagonist naloxone enhances Pavlovian fear conditioning when rats are exposed to pairings of an initially neutral stimulus, such as a tone, and a painful foot shock unconditioned stimulus (US; so-called first-order fear conditioning; Pavlov, 1927). The present series of experiments examined whether naloxone has the same effect when conditioning occurs in the absence of US exposure. In Experiments 1a and 1b, rats were exposed to tone-shock pairings in stage 1 (one trial per day for 4 days) and then to pairings of an initially neutral light with the already conditioned tone in stage 2 (one trial per day for 4 days). Experiment 1a confirmed that this training results in second-order fear of the light; and Experiment 1b showed that naloxone enhances this conditioning: rats injected with naloxone in stage 2 froze more than vehicle-injected controls when tested with the light alone (drug-free). In Experiments 2a and 2b, rats were exposed to light-tone pairings in stage 1 (one trial per day for 4 days) and then to tone-shock pairings in stage 2 (one trial per day for 2 days). Experiment 2a confirmed that this training results in sensory preconditioned fear of the light; and Experiment 2b showed that naloxone enhances sensory preconditioning when injected prior to each of the light-tone pairings: rats injected with naloxone in stage 1 froze more than vehicle-injected controls when tested with the light alone (drug-free). These results were taken to mean that naloxone enhances fear conditioning independently of its effect on US processing; and more generally, that opioids regulate the error-correction mechanisms that underlie associative formation., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Michalscheck, Leidl, Westbrook and Holmes.)

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm is widely used to study false memory in the laboratory. It tests memory for lists of semantically related words (correct list item memories) and their non-presented associates (false lure memories). Evidence suggests that early items in DRM lists could make an especially significant contribution to false memories of lures, as they may critically influence the underlying associative activation and/or gist extraction processes. The present study tested this suggestion by using two manipulations that were intended to affect processing of early DRM list items. The first was interpolation of a semantically unrelated distractor item among the list items (Experiments 1 and 2). The second was arranging for these items to be either the strongest or weakest associates of the lure (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, a distractor item reduced both list item and lure recall when presented early in a DRM list, but selectively disrupted list item recall when presented late in the list. In Experiment 2, arranging for the early list items to be the weakest associates of the lure reduced false recall of the lure but had no effect on list item recall. The findings are discussed with respect to theories that explain false memory in the DRM protocol, including fuzzy trace theory (FTT) and activation-monitoring theory (AMT). They are also discussed with respect to general theories of memory and the potential role of category/context information in generating false memories.

Background: In November 2011, the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care released guidelines for screening women at average breast cancer risk. Weak recommendations (framed using GRADE methodology) were made for screening women aged 50 to 74 years every two to three years, and for not screening women aged 40 to 49 years. Methods: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using administrative data to examine bilateral mammography use before and after a national guideline dissemination strategy targeting primary care physicians. Women aged 40 to 74 years living in Ontario or Alberta from 30 th November 2008 to 30 th November 2014 were included. Strata included age, region of residence, neighbourhood income quintile, immigration status, and education level. Results: In both provinces, mammography use rates were lower in the post-intervention period (527 vs. 556 and 428 vs. 465/1000 participant-months - the monthly screening rate/1000 - in Ontario and Alberta, respectively). In Ontario, mammography trends decreased following guideline release to align with recommendations for women aged 40 to 74 (decrease of 2.21/1000 women, SE 0.26/1000, p<0.0001). In Alberta, mammography trends decreased for women aged 40 to 49 years (3/1000 women, SE 0.32, p<0.001) and 50 to 69 (2.9/1000 women, SE 0.79, p<0.001), but did not change for women aged 70 to 74 (0.7/1000 women, SE 1.23, p=0.553). In both provinces, trends in mammography use rates were sustained for up to three years after guideline release. Conclusions: The guideline dissemination strategy appeared to increase uptake of guideline-concordant screening practice in women aged 40 to 49 years in Ontario and Alberta and for women aged 50 to 74 years in Ontario. Further work is required to understand these findings and whether shared decision making about mammography between women and providers increased among women considering mammography., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Drs. Tonelli, Brauer, Bell, and Shaw were members of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care., (Copyright: © 2021 Fahim C et al.)

Second-order fear conditioning has been demonstrated in protocols using discrete and simple stimuli, and much is now known about its behavioral and neural characteristics. In contrast, the mechanisms of second-order conditioning to more complex stimuli, such as contexts, are unknown. To address this gap in our knowledge, we conducted a series of experiments to investigate the neural and behavioral characteristics of second-order context fear conditioning in rats. We found that rats acquire fear to a context in which a first-order conditioned stimulus is presented (Experiment 1); neuronal activity in the basolateral amygdala (BLA) is required for the acquisition (Experiment 2) and extinction (Experiment 3) of second-order context fear; second-order context fear can be reduced by extinction of its first-order conditioned stimulus associate (Experiment 4); and that second-order fear reduced in this way is restored when fear of the first-order conditioned stimulus spontaneously recovers or is reconditioned (Experiment 5). Thus, second-order context fear requires neuronal activity in the BLA, and once established, tracks the level of fear to its first-order conditioned stimulus-associate. These results are discussed with respect to the substrates of second-order fear conditioning in other protocols, and the role of the amygdala in different forms of conditioning., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Inhibitory control training effects on behaviour (e.g. 'healthier' food choices) can be driven by changes in affective evaluations of trained stimuli, and theoretical models indicate that changes in action tendencies may be a complementary mechanism. In this preregistered study, we investigated the effects of food-specific go/no-go training on action tendencies, liking and impulsive choices in healthy participants. In the training task, energy-dense foods were assigned to one of three conditions: 100% inhibition (no-go), 0% inhibition (go) or 50% inhibition (control). Automatic action tendencies and liking were measured pre- and post-training for each condition. We found that training did not lead to changes in approach bias towards trained foods (go and no-go relative to control), but we warrant caution in interpreting this finding as there are important limitations to consider for the employed approach-avoidance task. There was only anecdotal evidence for an effect on food liking, but there was evidence for contingency learning during training, and participants were on average less likely to choose a no-go food compared to a control food after training. We discuss these findings from both a methodological and theoretical standpoint and propose that the mechanisms of action behind training effects be investigated further., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Rescorla (2001) used the compound test procedure to compare associative changes to cues located at different points on a performance scale. He found that associative changes to cues conditioned in compound are not necessarily equal, as predicted by common error term theories like Rescorla and Wagner (1972), but instead are larger for the poorer predictor of a trial outcome. Hence, Rescorla proposed a modification to the Rescorla-Wagner model whereby associative change is calculated as the product of 2 error terms: a common error term, as in the original model, and a unique error term for each cue present, which accounts for his findings that the poorer predictor of a trial outcome undergoes more associative change. In a recent study, Spicer, Mitchell, Wills, and Jones (2020) reported findings that appear to be inconsistent with Rescorla's proposal. These authors compared associative changes to cues that differed in associative strength as well as the certainty with which they predicted a trial outcome: One cue had greater strength than did the other, but its prediction of the trial outcome was less certain. Spicer et al. found that the cue that evoked a larger prediction error (the more certain cue) underwent less (not more) associative change and, thereby, concluded that associative change in people is not primarily determined by prediction error. Instead, they argued that cues that predict certain outcomes are somewhat protected from further associative change (theory protection), resulting in greater change to cues that predict uncertain outcomes. In this article, we offer an alternative explanation for the Spicer et al. findings using an approach described by Holmes, Chan, and Westbrook (2019). We show that if the learning-to-performance mapping function is a double sigmoid across the full range of associative strength, the Rescorla-Wagner model accommodates Rescorla's compound test results, as well as those reported by Spicer et al. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The Hall-Rodriguez (Hall & Rodriguez, 2010) theory predicts that latent inhibition can be facilitated when a target stimulus is preexposed in compound with a second, nontarget stimulus: specifically, latent inhibition will be facilitated when the target coterminates with the second stimulus in preexposure, but facilitation will fail to occur when the two stimuli do not coterminate. The present study tested these predictions. In each experiment, rats were preexposed to a 30 s target stimulus alone or in compound with a second stimulus across its final 10 s, or they were preexposed to the context. All rats were then exposed to pairings of the target stimulus and foot shock, and finally, tested for freezing to the target. Experiment 1 demonstrated standard latent inhibition. Experiment 2 provided evidence that preexposure to a 30 s auditory target stimulus, in compound with a visual stimulus across its final 10 s, produced facilitated latent inhibition. Experiment 3 demonstrated that the latent inhibition was also facilitated when each 30 s presentation of a target visual stimulus was compounded with an auditory stimulus across its final 10 s. Experiment 4 showed that facilitation did not occur when each 30 s presentation of the target was compounded with a second stimulus across its initial 10 s, while Experiment 5 found that latent inhibition of the target was impaired when each of its 30 s presentations terminated in the onset of a second (10 s) stimulus. These findings are consistent with the predictions of the Hall-Rodriguez theory. They confirm that the facilitation of latent inhibition depends on coterminations of target and nontarget stimuli in preexposure and, more generally, that the impact of a second stimulus on latent inhibition to a target depends on their temporal relation in preexposure. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Four experiments examined the effects of a dangerous context and a systemic epinephrine injection on sensory preconditioning in rats. In each experiment, rats were exposed to presentations of a tone and light in stage 1, light-shock pairings in stage 2, and test presentations of the tone alone and light alone in stage 3. Presentations of the tone and light in stage 1 occurred in either a safe or a previously shocked context, and/or under a systemic injection of epinephrine. Experiment 1 showed that a trace interval of 20 sec between presentations of the tone and light produced sensory preconditioning of the tone in a previously shocked context but not in a safe context, while experiment 2 provided evidence that this trace preconditioning was associative, due to the formation of a tone-light association. Experiment 3 showed that, in a safe context, exposure to the trace protocol under the influence of an epinephrine injection also produced sensory preconditioning of the tone, while experiment 4 provided evidence that a shocked context and an epinephrine injection have additive effects on trace preconditioning. These findings are discussed in relation to theories of trace conditioning. They suggest that the release of epinephrine by danger enhances attention and/or working memory processes, and thereby associative formation across a trace interval., (© 2021 Kikas et al.; Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.)

The present study used simulations to examine whether Wagner's Standard Operating Procedures or Sometimes Opponent Processes (SOP) model explains various extinction phenomena. These included the so-called signature characteristics of extinction-renewal, reinstatement, and spontaneous recovery-as well as the effects on extinction of manipulations such as preexposure, the interval between extinction trials, the rate at which reinforcement ceases, and the presence of other stimuli. The simulations showed that SOP accounts for the effects of each of these manipulations. It does so for 2 reasons. First, the form of stimulus representation and rules for generating associative change mean that SOP can explain conditioning phenomena by appeal to changes in processing of both conditioned (CS) and unconditioned (US) stimuli, in contrast to other theories which confine changes in processing to either the CS (e.g., attentional theories) or the US (e.g., the Rescorla-Wagner model). Second, the processes that generate associative change in SOP are at least partially independent of those that generate performance. Hence, stimuli that differ in associative strength can extinguish at the same rate, and stimuli with equal associative strength can undergo different amounts of renewal, reinstatement or recovery. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Phytoestrogens are plant-derived compounds that can modulate estrogen activity in the brain and periphery. Laboratory rodent diets are typically high in soy-based phytoestrogens and therefore may influence neurophysiological and behavioural measures that are sensitive to estrogen signaling. Here we assessed such measures in rats (males and females) fed Australian made diets that varied in their soy levels. We found that a low-soy diet promoted greater weight, and lower levels of plasma estradiol, particularly in male rats. It also produced sex-specific effects on estrogen receptor gene expression in the brain, increasing ESR2 expression in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex in female rats, and decreasing dopamine D1 receptor gene expression in the striatum of both male and female rats. We also found a dietary effect on short-term place recognition memory, but this was independent of soy levels in the diet. These results demonstrate that the choice of rodent laboratory diet can influence physiology, neurobiology and behavior, particularly on measures related to estrogen signaling., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Oxytocin (OT) is a neuroactive peptide that influences the processing of fearful stimuli in the amygdala. In the central nucleus of the amygdala, the activation of OT receptors alters neural activity and ultimately suppresses the behavioral response to a fear conditioned stimulus. Receptors for OT are also found in the lateral amygdala (LA), and infusion of OT into the basolateral amygdala complex affects the formation and consolidation of fear memories. Yet, how OT receptor activation alters neurons and neural networks in the LA is unknown. In this study we used whole cell electrophysiological recordings to determine how OT-receptor activation changes synaptic transmission and synaptic plasticity in the LA of Sprague-Dawley rats. Our results demonstrate that OT-receptor activation results in a 200% increase in spontaneous inhibitory transmission in the LA that leads to the activation of presynaptic GABA B receptors. The activation of these receptors inhibits excitatory transmission in the LA, blocking long-term potentiation of cortical inputs onto LA neurons. Hence, this study provides the first demonstration that OT influences synaptic transmission and plasticity in the LA, revealing a mechanism that could explain how OT regulates the formation and consolidation of conditioned fear memories in the amygdala. NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study investigates modulation of synaptic transmission by oxytocin (OT) in the lateral amygdala (LA). We demonstrate that OT induces transient increases in spontaneous GABAergic transmission by activating interneurons in the basolateral amygdala. The resultant increase in GABA release in the LA activates presynaptic GABA B receptors on both inhibitory and excitatory inputs onto LA neurons, reducing release probability at these synapses. We subsequently demonstrate that OT modulates synaptic plasticity at cortical inputs to the LA.

Consolidation of conditioned fear to a stimulus (S1) paired with shock requires de novo protein synthesis in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA), whereas consolidation of conditioned fear to a stimulus (S2) paired with the fear-eliciting S1 requires DNA methylation but not de novo protein synthesis in the BLA. The present experiments merged these protocols by exposing rats to pairings of a serial S2-S1 compound and shock to examine if/when protein synthesis in the BLA is required to consolidate fear to S2. Rats received a BLA infusion of the protein synthesis inhibitor, cycloheximide, immediately after the S2-S1-shock session and were subsequently tested with S2. The infusion disrupted consolidation of fear to S2 when there had been no prior training of S1 (Experiment 1), the prior training had consisted of unpaired presentations of S1 and shock (Experiment 4), or in pairings of S1 and sucrose (Experiment 5). Consolidation of fear to S2 was unaffected by the infusion of cycloheximide but was disrupted by the DNA methyltransferase inhibitor, 5-AZA, when S1 had been previously fear-conditioned (Experiments 2a, 2b, and 3). These findings imply that what has already been learned about S1 determines the BLA processes that consolidate fear to S2. The already-fear-conditioned S1 blocks the S2-shock association that otherwise forms (and whose consolidation requires de novo protein synthesis in the BLA) while simultaneously acting as a learned source of danger for its S2 associate (whose consolidation requires DNA methylation but not de novo protein synthesis in the BLA). SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Protein synthesis is widely thought to be crucial for consolidating new learning into stable memories, including the consolidation of conditioned fear memories in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA). However, our data provide clear evidence that the requirement for protein synthesis to consolidate conditioned fear in the BLA depends on an animal's previous training history, and the type of learning that is consolidated. Further, within the BLA, our data show that DNA methylation, and not protein synthesis, is necessary to consolidate higher-order conditioned fear, indicating that epigenetic mechanisms may provide a more fundamental mnemonic substrate., (Copyright © 2019 the authors.)

Restricting when and where smoking can occur is a major focus of public health policies in Western countries. In conjunction with increased taxation, these approaches have contributed to a reduction in smoking uptake among adolescents, yet the consequences for established smokers are less clear. In order to further explore this relationship, we developed a novel animal model of restricted nicotine self-administration. Rats were trained to choose between three doses of nicotine (15, 30 and 60 μg/kg/infusion) under conditions where nicotine was (1) freely available at a low cost (20-second post-infusion time-out, fixed-ratio 1 [FR1]), (2) available under restricted access at a low cost (300-second post-infusion time-out, FR1), or (3) freely available at a high cost (20-second post-infusion time-out, FR5). We demonstrate that as access to nicotine is restricted or when cost increases, rats compensate for these changes by increasing their intake of the highest dose of nicotine available. This preference was impervious to treatment with the smoking cessation medication varenicline, but was reduced when the cost of the highest dose only was increased, or when nicotine was again made freely available at a low cost. These results provide the first evidence in rats that nicotine availability and cost influence nicotine choice independently of variations in nicotine and context exposure. They imply that established smokers may compensate for changes in the availability and cost of tobacco by increasing their rate of smoking when they are free to do so., (© 2018 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

How does a stimulus never associated with danger become frightening? The present study addressed this question using a sensory preconditioning task with rats. In this task, rats integrate a sound-light memory formed in stage 1 with a light-danger memory formed in stage 2, as they show fear when tested with the sound in stage 3. Here we show that this integration occurs 'online' during stage 2: when activity in the region that consolidated the sound-light memory (perirhinal cortex) was inhibited during formation of the light-danger memory, rats no longer showed fear when tested with the sound but continued to fear the light. Thus, fear that accrues to a stimulus paired with danger simultaneously spreads to its past associates, thereby roping those associates into a fear memory network., Competing Interests: FW, RW, NH No competing interests declared, (© 2019, Wong et al.)

Rescorla (2000) devised the compound test procedure as a means of comparing changes in associative strength when cues with different training histories are conditioned in compound. It was specifically intended to dissociate changes in learning from changes in performance, and thereby, permit inferences about learning independently of assumptions regarding how learning translates into performance. In an elegant series of studies, Rescorla (2000, 2001) used this procedure to show that cues conditioned in compound undergo unequal associative change such that the poorer predictor of the outcome undergoes greater change rather than the equal change predicted by theories (e.g., Rescorla & Wagner, 1972) that rely on a common error term. Rescorla explained the data from the compound test procedure by proposing that associative change is calculated using a combination of two error terms, a common error term that carries the predictions of all cues present on a trial and an individual term that carries the prediction of any cue in isolation. This article is in two parts. The first used simulations to show that a theory, such as Rescorla-Wagner, which just relies on a common error term, can explain the compound test data if the function that translates learning into performance is double-sigmoidal across the full range of associative strength (i.e., from inhibition through to excitation). The second part likewise used simulations to show that a theory, such as the comparator theory (Miller & Matzel, 1988), which does not invoke a common error term, can also explain the compound test data. Thus, a common error term is sufficient to explain the compound test data, but it is not necessary. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The basolateral amygdala complex (BLA) and infralimbic region of the prefrontal cortex (IL) play distinct roles in the extinction of Pavlovian conditioned fear in laboratory rodents. In the past decade, research in our laboratory has examined the roles of these brain regions in the re-extinction of conditioned fear: i.e., extinction of fear that is restored through re-conditioning of the conditioned stimulus (CS) or changes in the physical and temporal context of extinction training (i.e., extinction of renewed or spontaneously recovered fear). This paper reviews this research. It has revealed two major findings. First, in contrast to the acquisition of fear extinction, which usually requires neuronal activity in the BLA but not IL, the acquisition of fear re-extinction requires neuronal activity in the IL but can occur independently of neuronal activity in the BLA. Second, the role of the IL in fear extinction is determined by the training history of the CS: i.e., if the CS was novel prior to its fear conditioning (i.e., it had not been trained), the acquisition of fear extinction does not require the IL; if, however, the prior training of the CS included a series of CS-alone exposures (e.g., if the CS had been pre-exposed), the acquisition of fear extinction was facilitated by pharmacological stimulation of the IL. Together, these results were taken to imply that a memory of CS-alone exposures is stored in the IL, survives fear conditioning of the CS, and can be retrieved and strengthened during extinction or re-extinction of that CS (regardless of whether the extinction is first- or second-learned). Hence, under these circumstances, the initial extinction of fear to the CS can be facilitated by pharmacological stimulation of the IL, and re-extinction of fear to the CS can occur in the absence of a functioning BLA.

It is widely recognized that across the development of drug addiction, cues associated with drug use come to exert increasing control over drug seeking and taking behaviors. However, there remain gaps in our knowledge regarding how the different types of drug related cues affect drug seeking and taking behaviors, and how the emergence of cue control over these behaviors relates to the onset of drug seeking compulsions. This paper reviews the literature on drug self-administration in animals to address these gaps. It first identifies the different types of cues that acquire control over reward seeking behavior generally, and examines whether the same types of cues acquire control over drug seeking behavior specifically. It then examines how the role of drug related cues in motivating and reinforcing drug seeking behavior changes across an extended drug-taking history, with a particular focus on the case of nicotine. The evidence reviewed shows that, after an extended history of drug taking, drug seeking behaviors are controlled by contextual cues associated with the development of drug seeking habits, response contingent cues that accompany delivery of the drug, as well as internal states that correlate with levels of drug intake. These multiple sources of control over drug seeking are discussed in relation to the generation of an addicted phenotype in animal models and the hypothesized progression from internal control over drug use to compulsive drug seeking., (Crown Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

People and animals sometimes associate events that never occurred together. These false memories can have disastrous consequences, yet little is known about the conditions under which they form. In four experiments, we investigated how rats learn to fear a context in which they have never experienced danger (i.e., how they form a false context fear memory). In each experiment, rats were pre-exposed to a context on day 1, shocked in a similar-but-different context on day 2, and tested in the pre-exposed or explicitly-conditioned context on day 3. The results revealed that: (1) the true memory of the explicitly-conditioned context and false memory of the pre-exposed context develop simultaneously and independently; and (2) the conditions of pre-exposure on day 1 and time of shock exposure on day 2 interact to determine the strength of the false memory. These findings are anticipated by a recent computational model, the Bayesian Context Fear Algorithm/Automaton (BACON; Krasne, Cushman, & Fanselow, 2015). They are discussed in relation to this model and more general theories of context learning., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The present series of experiments pursued our recent findings that consolidation of a second-order fear memory requires neuronal activity, but not de novo protein synthesis, in the basolateral amygdala complex (BLA). It used a modified second-order conditioning protocol in which rats were exposed to S1-shock pairings in stage 1 and pairings of the serial S2-S1 compound and shock in stage 2. Experiment 1 showed that responding (freezing) to S2 in this protocol is conditional on its compounding with S1 in stage 2 (Experiment 1), and therefore, the result of associative formation. The remaining experiments then showed that the protein synthesis requirement for consolidation of new learning about S2 varied with the training afforded S1. When S1 was trained in stage 1 and present in stage 2, consolidation of the new S2 fear memory was unaffected by pre- or post-stage 2 infusions of the protein synthesis inhibitor, cycloheximide, into the BLA (Experiments 2 and 5). This result was observed independently of the number of S1-shock pairings in stage 1 (even a single pairing produced the result), and alongside demonstrations that cycloheximide infusions disrupt consolidation of a first-order fear memory (Experiments 2 and 5). However, when S1 was not conditioned in stage 1 (Experiment 3) or was omitted from conditioning in stage 2 (Experiment 4), consolidation of the new S2 fear memory was disrupted by post-stage 2 cycloheximide infusions into the BLA. These results were taken to imply that the consolidation of a higher-order fear memory exploits molecular events associated with consolidation of a reactivated first-order fear memory; hence it occurs independently of de novo protein synthesis in the BLA. Alternatively, the nature of the association formed in higher-order conditioning may be such as to not require de novo protein synthesis for its consolidation., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The two main sub-divisions of the Central amygdala (CeA), the lateral-capsular (CeA-LC) and the medial (CeA-M), contain extensive networks of inhibitory interneurons. We have previously shown that activation of GABA B -receptors reduces excitatory transmission between axons of the pontine parabrachial nucleus and neurons of the CeA-LC by inhibiting glutamate release from presynaptic terminals 13 . Here we have characterised GABA B -receptor activation on other excitatory and inhibitory projections within the CeA. Using whole-cell, patch-clamp recordings, we found that the GABA B -receptor agonist baclofen significantly reduced excitatory and inhibitory transmission from all tested inputs into the CeA-LC and CeA-M. In all but one of the inputs, reductions in transmission were accompanied by an increase in paired pulse ratio, indicating that presynaptic GABA B -receptors acted to reduce the release probability of synaptic vesicles. To examine the impact of GABA B -receptors in the CeA on contextual fear-conditioning, we infused baclofen into the CeA immediately prior to training. Compared to vehicle-infused rats, baclofen-infused rats displayed significantly less freezing both during the final stages of the training period and at test 24 hours later. The results of this study demonstrate that, by suppressing excitatory and inhibitory transmission, activation of presynaptic GABA B -receptors in the CeA inhibits the development of context conditioned fear.

Evidence indicates that the infralimbic cortex (IL) encodes and retrieves the inhibitory memory produced by fear extinction. Recently, we have shown that the IL is also involved in the inhibitory memory generated by stimulus pre-exposure that causes latent inhibition. These results are surprising because a stimulus undergoing fear extinction carries aversive motivational value, whereas a pre-exposed stimulus is neutral. The present experiments tested the hypothesis that the IL encodes inhibition irrespective of the motivational information about the stimulus. Using rats, we first confirmed that IL activity during stimulus pre-exposure is required for latent inhibition. Then, we found that pharmacological stimulation of the IL facilitated aversive extinction to a stimulus that had been trained and extinguished as an appetitive stimulus. This facilitation was stimulus specific and required appetitive extinction. The same facilitation was found when appetitive extinction was replaced with random presentations of the stimulus and an appetitive outcome. Together, these findings indicate that non-reinforced stimulus presentations establish an inhibitory memory that is reactivated and strengthened in the IL during subsequent aversive extinction. This is consistent with the view that the IL encodes inhibition irrespective of motivational value, suggesting that this brain region plays a general role in inhibitory learning., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Consolidation of newly formed fear memories requires a series of molecular events within the basolateral complex of the amygdala (BLA). Once consolidated, new information can be assimilated into these established associative networks to form higher-order associations. Much is known about the molecular events involved in consolidating newly acquired fear memories but little is known about the events that consolidate a secondary fear memory. Here, we show that, within the male rat BLA, DNA methylation and gene transcription are crucial for consolidating both the primary and secondary fear memories. We also show that consolidation of the primary, but not the secondary, fear memory requires de novo protein synthesis in the BLA. These findings show that consolidation of a fear memory and its updating to incorporate new information recruit distinct processes in the BLA, and suggest that DNA methylation in the BLA is fundamental to consolidation of both types of conditioned fear. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Our data provide clear evidence that a different set of mechanisms mediate consolidation of learning about cues that signal learned sources of danger (i.e., second-order conditioned fear) compared with those involved in consolidation of learning about cues that signal innate sources of danger (i.e., first-order conditioned fear). These findings carry important implications because second-order learning could underlie aberrant fear-related behaviors (e.g., in anxiety disorders) as a consequence of neutral secondary cues being integrated into associative fear networks established through first-order pairings, and thereby becoming potent conditioned reinforcers and predictors of fear. Therefore, our data suggest that targeting such second-order conditioned triggers of fear may require pharmacological intervention different to that typically used for first-order conditioned cues., (Copyright © 2018 the authors 0270-6474/18/381926-16$15.00/0.)

The amygdala is a critical substrate for learning about cues that signal danger. Less is known about its role in processing innocuous or background information. The present study addressed this question using a sensory preconditioning protocol in male rats. In each experiment, rats were exposed to pairings of two innocuous stimuli in stage 1, S2 and S1, and then to pairings of S1 and shock in stage 2. As a consequence of this training, control rats displayed defensive reactions (freezing) when tested with both S2 and S1. The freezing to S2 is a product of two associations formed in training: an S2-S1 association in stage 1 and an S1-shock association in stage 2. We examined the roles of two medial temporal lobe (MTL) structures in consolidation of the S2-S1 association: the perirhinal cortex (PRh) and basolateral complex of the amygdala (BLA). When the S2-S1 association formed in a safe context, its consolidation required neuronal activity in the PRh (but not BLA), including activation of AMPA receptors and MAPK signaling. In contrast, when the S2-S1 association formed in a dangerous context, or when the context was rendered dangerous immediately after the association had formed, its consolidation required neuronal activity in the BLA (but not PRh), including activation of AMPA receptors and MAPK signaling. These roles of the PRh and BLA show that danger changes the way the mammalian brain stores information about innocuous events. They are discussed with respect to danger-induced changes in stimulus processing.

The central amygdala is critical for the acquisition and expression of fear memories. This region receives a dense innervation from brainstem noradrenergic cell groups and has a high level of α 2 -adrenoceptor expression. Using whole-cell electrophysiological recordings from rat brain slices, we characterise the role of pre-synaptic α 2 -adrenoceptor in modulating discrete inhibitory and excitatory connections within both the lateral and medial division of the central amygdala. The selective α 2 -adrenoceptor agonist clonidine blocked the excitatory input from the pontine parabrachial neurons onto neurons of the lateral central amygdala. In addition, clonidine blocked inhibitory connections from the medial paracapsular intercalated cell mass onto both lateral and medial central amygdala neurons. To examine the behavioural consequence of α 2 -adrenoceptor-mediated inhibition of these inputs, we infused clonidine into the central amygdala prior to contextual fear-conditioning. In contrast to vehicle-infused rats, clonidine-infused animals displayed reduced levels of freezing 24 hours after training, despite showing no difference in freezing during the training session. These results reveal a role for α 2 -adrenoceptors within the central amygdala in the modulation of synaptic transmission and the formation of fear-memories. In addition, they provide further evidence for a role of the central amygdala in fear-memory formation.

Four experiments used a sensory preconditioning protocol to examine how a dangerous context influences learning about innocuous events. In Experiments 1, 2, and 3, rats were exposed to presentations of a tone followed immediately or 20-sec later by presentations of a light. These tone-light pairings occurred in a context that was either familiar and safe, or equally familiar but dangerous, that is, it was a context in which rats had been exposed to footshock. Rats were next exposed to parings of the light and shock and then tested with the tone (and light). The experiments showed that a dangerous context permits formation of a tone-light association under circumstances that preclude formation of that same association in a safe context (Experiments 1 and 2), and that this facilitative effect on associative formation depends on the content being currently dangerous rather than having been dangerous in the past (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 examined whether a dangerous context facilitates discrimination between two innocuous events. In a safe or dangerous context, rats were exposed to a tone that signaled the light and then to a white noise presented alone. Subsequent to conditioning of the light, the tests revealed that rats that had been exposed to these tone-light and white noise alone presentations in a dangerous context froze to the tone but not to the noise, whereas those exposed in a safe context froze to both the tone and the white noise. The results were related to previous evidence that the amygdala is critical for processing information about innocuous stimuli in a dangerous but not a safe context. They were attributed to an amygdala-based enhancement of arousal and/or attention in a dangerous context, hence the facilitation of associative formation and enhanced discriminability in this context., (© 2017 Holmes and Westbrook; Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.)

This series of experiments used rats to examine changes in behavioral control when stimuli with different associative histories are conditioned in compound. The initial experiments used blocking designs. Experiment 1 provided a within-subject demonstration of blocking, and Experiment 2 used the compound test procedure to show that, when a novel stimulus, X, is conditioned in compound with an already conditioned stimulus (CS), A, these audiovisual compound stimulus (AX)+ conditioning trials produce a greater increase in behavioral control for X than A. Experiment 3 showed that, when the blocked X is subject to further conditioning in compound with the blocking A (achieved by increasing the shock intensity on AX-shock trials), the compound trials again produce a greater increase in behavioral control for X than A. Finally, Experiment 4 showed that the unequal change in behavioral control for X and A was because of the difference in their training histories and not the test procedure. The overall pattern of results is consistent with the proposal (Rescorla, 2001) that associative change is regulated by the product of common and individual error terms rather than by common (Pearce & Hall, 1980; Rescorla & Wagner, 1972) or individual (Mackintosh, 1975) error terms. The pattern is also consistent with comparator theory (e.g., Miller & Matzel, 1988), which holds that the level of responding to a target is regulated by the strength of its comparator stimuli established in training. (PsycINFO Database Record, ((c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

An array of pharmacological and environmental factors influence the development and maintenance of tobacco addiction. The nature of these influences likely changes across the course of an extended smoking history, during which time drug seeking can become involuntary and uncontrolled. The present study used an animal model to examine the factors that drive nicotine-seeking behavior after either brief (10 days) or extended (40 days) self-administration training. In Experiment 1, extended training increased rats' sensitivity to nicotine, indicated by a leftward shift in the dose-response curve, and their motivation to work for nicotine, indicated by an increase in the break point achieved under a progressive ratio schedule. In Experiment 2, extended training imbued the nicotine-paired cue with the capacity to maintain responding to the same high level as nicotine itself. However, Experiment 3 showed that the mechanisms involved in responding for nicotine or a nicotine-paired cue are dissociable, as treatment with the partial nicotine receptor agonist, varenicline, suppressed responding for nicotine but potentiated responding for the nicotine-paired cue. Hence, across extended nicotine self-administration, pharmacological and environmental influences over nicotine seeking increase such that nicotine seeking is controlled by multiple sources, and therefore highly resistant to change., (© 2015 Society for the Study of Addiction.)