Renewal and reinstatement of the conditioned but not the unconditioned response following habituation of the unconditioned stimulus

The Rescorla-Wagner model, prediction error, and fear learning

The Rescorla-Wagner model remains one of the most important and influential theoretical accounts of the conditions under which Pavlovian learning occurs. Moreover, the experimental approaches that inspired the model continue to provide powerful behavioral tools to advance mechanistic understanding of how we and other animals learn to fear and learn to reduce fear. Here we consider key features of the Rescorla-Wagner model as applied to study of fear learning. We review evidence for key insights of the model. First, learning to fear and learning to reduce fear are governed by a common, signed prediction error. Second, this error drives variations in effectiveness of the shock US that are causal to whether and how much fear is learned or lost during a conditioning trial. We also consider behavioral and neural findings inconsistent with the model and which will be essential to understand and advance understanding of fear learning.

Exercise therapy for chronic pain: How does exercise change the limbic brain function?

We are exposed to various external and internal threats which might hurt us. The role of taking flexible and appropriate actions against threats is played by "the limbic system" and at the heart of it there is the ventral tegmental area and nucleus accumbens (brain reward system). Pain-related fear causes excessive excitation of amygdala, which in turn causes the suppression of medial prefrontal cortex, leading to chronification of pain. Since the limbic system of chronic pain patients is functionally impaired, they are maladaptive to their situations, unable to take goal-directed behavior and are easily caught by fear-avoidance thinking. We describe the neural mechanisms how exercise activates the brain reward system and enables chronic pain patients to take goal-directed behavior and overcome fear-avoidance thinking. A key to getting out from chronic pain state is to take advantage of the behavioral switching function of the basal nucleus of amygdala. We show that exercise activates positive neurons in this nucleus which project to the nucleus accumbens and promote reward behavior. We also describe fear conditioning and extinction are affected by exercise. In chronic pain patients, the fear response to pain is enhanced and the extinction of fear memories is impaired, so it is difficult to get out of "fear-avoidance thinking". Prolonged avoidance of movement and physical inactivity exacerbate pain and have detrimental effects on the musculoskeletal and cardiovascular systems. Based on the recent findings on multiple bran networks, we propose a well-balanced exercise prescription considering the adherence and pacing of exercise practice. We conclude that therapies targeting the mesocortico-limbic system, such as exercise therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy, may become promising tools in the fight against chronic pain.

Habituation: It's not what you think it is

In this review, we take a critical look at the methods used to document habituation and the theoretical assumptions that have been made about it. We point out problems associated with measuring habituation merely as a change over the course of repeated presentations of a stimulus. We argue that a common test procedure is essential to assess the relative magnitudes of habituation learning especially when different training procedures are examined. We further suggest that this would be required in order to draw meaningful conclusions about the conditions for optimizing habituation. We also challenge the view that habituation is nonassociative and consider the implications of various associative learning perspectives not only for context-specific habituation but for encoding a representation of the stimulus. We conclude with our recommendations for future research on habituation and we highlight the need to integrate behavioral and neurobiological studies.

Associative processes in addiction relapse models: A review of their Pavlovian and instrumental mechanisms, history, and terminology

Animal models of relapse to drug-seeking have borrowed heavily from associative learning approaches. In studies of relapse-like behaviour, animals learn to self-administer drugs then receive a period of extinction during which they learn to inhibit the operant response. Several triggers can produce a recovery of responding which form the basis of a variety of models. These include the passage of time (spontaneous recovery), drug availability (rapid reacquisition), extinction of an alternative response (resurgence), context change (renewal), drug priming, stress, and cues (reinstatement). In most cases, the behavioural processes driving extinction and recovery in operant drug self-administration studies are similar to those in the Pavlovian and behavioural literature, such as context effects. However, reinstatement in addiction studies have several differences with Pavlovian reinstatement, which have emerged over several decades, in experimental procedures, associative mechanisms, and terminology. Interestingly, in cue-induced reinstatement, drug-paired cues that are present during acquisition are omitted during lever extinction. The unextinguished drug-paired cue may limit the model’s translational relevance to cue exposure therapy and renders its underlying associative mechanisms ambiguous. We review major behavioural theories that explain recovery phenomena, with a particular focus on cue-induced reinstatement because it is a widely used model in addiction. We argue that cue-induced reinstatement may be explained by a combination of behavioural processes, including reacquisition of conditioned reinforcement and Pavlovian to Instrumental Transfer. While there are important differences between addiction studies and the behavioural literature in terminology and procedures, it is clear that understanding associative learning processes is essential for studying relapse.

Turning negative memories around: Contingency versus devaluation techniques

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

It is assumed that fear responses can be altered by changing the contingency between a conditioned stimulus (CS) and an unconditioned stimulus (US), or by devaluing the present mental representation of the US. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of contingency- and devaluation-based intervention techniques on the diminishment in - and return of fear. We hypothesized that extinction (EXT, contingency-based) would outperform devaluation-based techniques regarding contingency measures, but that devaluation-based techniques would be most effective in reducing the mental representation of the US. Additionally, we expected that incorporations of the US during devaluation would result in less reinstatement of the US averseness.

METHODS

Healthy participants received a fear conditioning paradigm followed by one of three interventions: extinction (EXT, contingency-based), imagery rescripting (ImRs, devaluation-based) or eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR, devaluation-based). A reinstatement procedure and test followed the next day.

RESULTS

EXT was indeed most successful in diminishing contingency-based US expectancies and skin conductance responses (SCRs), but all interventions were equally successful in reducing the averseness of the mental US representation. After reinstatement EXT showed lowest expectancies and SCRs; no differences were observed between the conditions concerning the mental US representation.

LIMITATIONS

A partial reinforcement schedule was used, resulting in a vast amount of contingency unaware participants. Additionally, a non-clinical sample was used, which may limit the generalizability to clinical populations.

CONCLUSION

EXT is most effective in reducing conditioned fear responses.

Beyond Extinction: Prolonged Conditioning and Repeated Threat Exposure Abolish Contextual Renewal of Fear-Potentiated Startle Discrimination but Leave Expectancy Ratings Intact

Extinction treatments decrease fear via repeated exposures to the conditioned stimulus (CS) and are associated with a return of fear. Alternatively, fear can be reduced via reductions in the perceived intensity of the unconditioned stimulus (US), e.g., through repeated exposures to the US. Promisingly, the few available studies show that repeated US exposures outperform standard extinction. US exposure treatments can decrease fear via two routes: (1) by weakening the CS-US association (extinction-like mechanism), and/or (2) by weakening the subjective US aversiveness (habituation-like mechanism). The current study further investigated the conditions under which US exposure treatment may reduce renewal, by adding a group in which CS-US pairings continued following fear acquisition. During acquisition, participants learned that one of two visual stimuli (CS+/CS-) predicted the occurrence of an aversive electrocutaneous stimulus (US). Next, the background context changed and participants received one of three interventions: repeated CS exposures, (2) repeated US exposures, or (3) continued CS-US pairings. Following repeated CS exposures, test presentations of the CSs in the original conditioning context revealed intact CS+/CS- differentiation in the fear-potentiated startle reflex, while the differentiation was abolished in the other two groups. Differential US expectancy ratings, on the other hand, were intact in all groups. Skin conductance data were inconclusive because standard context renewal following CS exposures did not occur. Unexpectedly, there was no evidence for a habituation-like process having taken place during US exposures or continued CS-US pairings. The results provide further evidence that US exposures outperform the standard extinction treatment and show that effects are similar when US exposures are part of CS-US pairings.

Disrupted Prediction Error Links Excessive Amygdala Activation to Excessive Fear

Basolateral amygdala (BLA) is critical for fear learning, and its heightened activation is widely thought to underpin a variety of anxiety disorders. Here we used chemogenetic techniques in rats to study the consequences of heightened BLA activation for fear learning and memory, and to specifically identify a mechanism linking increased activity of BLA glutamatergic neurons to aberrant fear. We expressed the excitatory hM3Dq DREADD in rat BLA glutamatergic neurons and showed that CNO acted selectively to increase their activity, depolarizing these neurons and increasing their firing rates. This chemogenetic excitation of BLA glutamatergic neurons had no effect on the acquisition of simple fear learning, regardless of whether this learning led to a weak or strong fear memory. However, in an associative blocking task, chemogenetic excitation of BLA glutamatergic neurons yielded significant learning to a blocked conditioned stimulus, which otherwise should not have been learned about. Moreover, in an overexpectation task, chemogenetic manipulation of BLA glutamatergic neurons prevented use of negative prediction error to reduce fear learning, leading to significant impairments in fear inhibition. These effects were not attributable to the chemogenetic manipulation enhancing arousal, increasing asymptotic levels of fear learning or fear memory consolidation. Instead, chemogenetic excitation of BLA glutamatergic neurons disrupted use of prediction error to regulate fear learning.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

Several neuropsychiatric disorders are characterized by heightened activation of the amygdala. This heightened activation has been hypothesized to underlie increased emotional reactivity, fear over generalization, and deficits in fear inhibition. Yet the mechanisms linking heightened amygdala activation to heightened emotional learning are elusive. Here we combined chemogenetic excitation of rat basolateral amygdala glutamatergic neurons with a variety of behavioral approaches to show that, although simple fear learning is unaffected, the use of prediction error to regulate this learning is profoundly disrupted, leading to formation of inappropriate fear associations and impaired fear inhibition.

Novelty-facilitated extinction: providing a novel outcome in place of an expected threat diminishes recovery of defensive responses

BACKGROUND

Experimental extinction serves as a model for psychiatric treatments based on associative learning. However, the effects of extinction are often transient, as evidenced by postextinction return of defensive behaviors. From a therapeutic perspective, an inherent problem with extinction may be that mere omission of threat is not sufficient to reduce future threat uncertainty. The current study tested an augmented form of extinction that replaced, rather than merely omitted, expected threat outcomes with novel nonthreat outcomes, with the goal of reducing postextinction return of defensive behaviors.

METHODS

Thirty-two healthy male Sprague-Dawley rats and 47 human adults underwent threat conditioning to a conditioned stimulus paired with an electrical shock. Subjects then underwent a standard extinction protocol with shock omitted or an augmented extinction protocol wherein the shock was replaced by a surprising tone. Tests of postextinction recovery occurred 24 hours later in the absence of the tone.

RESULTS

Replacing the shock with a novel nonthreat outcome, as compared with shock omission, reduced postextinction recovery (freezing in rats and anticipatory skin conductance responses in humans) when tested 24 hours later. Self-reported intolerance of uncertainty was positively correlated with recovery following standard extinction in humans, providing new evidence that postextinction recovery is related to sensitivity to future threat uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide cross-species evidence of a novel strategy to enhance extinction that may have broad implications for how to override associative learning that has become maladaptive and offer a simple technique that could be straightforwardly adapted and implemented in clinical situations.

Countering fear renewal: changes in the UCS representation generalize across contexts

After treatment of anxiety disorders, fear often returns. Analogue studies show that outside the extinction context the conditional stimulus (CS) activates the acquisition memory (CS predicts unconditional stimulus; UCS), rather than the extinction memory (CS does not predict UCS). Conditioning theory postulates that fear also diminishes after a reduction in the subjective cost of the UCS, which can occur in absence of any changes in the CS-UCS association. We hypothesized that fear reduction via "UCS deflation" generalizes across context. Healthy students underwent acquisition in context A with neutral CSs and 100dB white noise as UCS. One group received post-conditioning UCS exposure, in which UCS intensity decreased over time ("ABAdefl"). Another group received UCS presentations at equal intensity ("ABActrl"). Two groups did a filler task ("ABB"; "ABA"). Then, all groups underwent extinction in context B and were retested in context A (ABA-groups) or B (ABB-group). During each CS participants rated UCS expectancy and UCS cost. Results showed the typical increase in UCS expectancy following the context switch from extinction to test phase. In contrast, UCS deflation caused a reduction in cost ratings that was maintained after the context change. Findings suggest that UCS deflation techniques may reduce fear renewal.

D-cycloserine does not facilitate fear extinction by reducing conditioned stimulus processing or promoting conditioned inhibition to contextual cues

The NMDA receptor partial agonist d-cycloserine (DCS) enhances the extinction of learned fear in rats and exposure therapy in humans with anxiety disorders. Despite these benefits, little is known about the mechanisms by which DCS promotes the loss of fear. The present study examined whether DCS augments extinction retention (1) through reductions in conditioned stimulus (CS) processing or (2) by promoting the development of conditioned inhibition to contextual cues. Rats administered DCS prior to extinction showed enhanced long-term extinction retention (Experiments 3 and 4). The same nonreinforced CS procedure used in extinction also reduced freezing at test when presented as pre-exposure before conditioning, demonstrating latent inhibition (Experiment 1). DCS administered shortly prior to pre-exposure had no effect on latent inhibition using parameters which produced weak (Experiment 2) or strong (Experiment 3) expression of latent inhibition. Therefore, DCS facilitated learning involving CS-alone exposures, but only when these exposures occurred after (extinction) and not before (latent inhibition) conditioning. We also used a retardation test procedure to examine whether the extinction context gained inhibitory properties for rats given DCS prior to extinction. With three different footshock intensities, there was no evidence that DCS promoted accrual of associative inhibition to the extinction context (Experiment 4). The present findings demonstrate that DCS does not facilitate extinction by reducing CS processing or causing the extinction context to become a conditioned inhibitor. Investigations into the mechanisms underlying the augmentation of extinction by DCS are valuable for understanding how fear can be inhibited.