Pavlovian or associative sensitization and its biological significance

Pavlovian conditioning is typically distinguished from sensitization but a Pavlovian conditional stimulus (CS) also results in sensitization. A Pavlovian CS can sensitize responding to a probe stimulus that is related to the unconditional stimulus (US) or to the US itself. Pavlovian sensitization has been studied in the defensive, sexual, and feeding systems. In Pavlovian sensitization, the focus is not on a conditional response (CR) directly elicited by the CS but on the response mode that is activated by the CS. Activation of a response mode increases the probability of particular responses and also increases reactivity to various stimuli. Pavlovian sensitization reflects this increased stimulus reactivity. Pavlovian sensitization helps uncover successful learning in situations where a conventional CR does not occur. Pavlovian sensitization also encourages broadening our conceptions of Pavlovian conditioning to include changes in afferent processes. Implications for biological fitness and for basic and translational research are discussed.

Towards a three-level neo-Tinbergenian approach to object play: Structure, causes and consequences of a behavioral puzzle

My main goal in this paper is to propose a reformulation of foundational models in behavioral research, including Tinbergen's (1963) well-known four levels of analysis (namely, ontogenetic, mechanistic, functional, and evolutionary questions) and Mayr's (1961) dichotomy between proximate and ultimate causations. After critically evaluating these influential but problematic models, I present a three-level neo-Tinbergenian approach to behavior that considers the triadic integration of behavioral causes, structure, and consequences along a single temporal continuum. I then argue that object-directed play is a good candidate behavior to apply this new paradigm by presenting significant examples of the combined analysis of at least two of these three levels. Finally, I show how stone handling, a form of culturally-transmitted object play in macaques, is perfectly amenable to this unified three-level explanatory framework. My proposed approach fits recent theoretical and empirical advances in behavioral biology, has a heuristic value, and may provide numerous benefits to a range of behavioral scientists.

A computational formulation of the behavior systems account of the temporal organization of motivated behavior

The behavior systems framework suggests that motivated behavior-e.g., seeking food and mates, avoiding predators-consists of sequences of actions organized within nested behavioral states. This framework has bridged behavioral ecology and experimental psychology, providing key insights into critical behavioral processes. In particular, the behavior systems framework entails a particular organization of behavior over time. The present paper examines whether such organization emerges from a generic Markov process, where the current behavioral state determines the probability distribution of subsequent behavioral states. This proposition is developed as a systematic examination of increasingly complex Markov models, seeking a computational formulation that balances adherence to the behavior systems approach, parsimony, and conformity to data. As a result of this exercise, a nonstationary partially hidden Markov model is selected as a computational formulation of the predatory subsystem. It is noted that the temporal distribution of discrete responses may further unveil the structure and parameters of the model but, without proper mathematical modeling, these discrete responses may be misleading. Opportunities for further elaboration of the proposed computational formulation are identified, including developments in its architecture, extensions to defensive and reproductive subsystems, and methodological refinements.

Six clarifications for behaviour systems

The precursors of contemporary behaviour systems theory were hotly debated, and yet a similar critical fervour has not followed the second generation of behaviour systems research. I raise six items of potential or extant misunderstanding concerning behaviour systems perspectives, and attempt to set straight some of the assumptions and what motivated them, with attention to historical and theoretical context. The six challenges in focus are: 1) variety of conceptualisation of consummation; 2) potential misapprehensions about the role of general search; 3) ambiguity of predictions concerning response form; 4) ambiguity concerning what aspects are modelled as hierarchical; 5) assumptions of directedness; and 6) the relevance of spontaneous activity. For each of these six issues, some clarification is offered.