Variation in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement in generating different conditioned behaviors

Rat autoshaping procedures generate two readily measurable conditioned responses: During lever presentations that have previously signaled food, rats approach the food well (called goal-tracking) and interact with the lever itself (called sign-tracking). We investigated how reinforced and nonreinforced trials affect the overall and temporal distributions of these two responses across 10-second lever presentations. In two experiments, reinforced trials generated more goal-tracking than sign-tracking, and nonreinforced trials resulted in a larger reduction in goal-tracking than sign-tracking. The effect of reinforced trials was evident as an increase in goal-tracking and reduction in sign-tracking across the duration of the lever presentations, and nonreinforced trials resulted in this pattern transiently reversing and then becoming less evident with further training. These dissociations are consistent with a recent elaboration of the Rescorla-Wagner model, HeiDI (Honey, R.C., Dwyer, D.M., & Iliescu, A.F. (2020a). HeiDI: A model for Pavlovian learning and performance with reciprocal associations. Psychological Review, 127, 829-852.), a model in which responses related to the nature of the unconditioned stimulus (e.g., goal-tracking) have a different origin than those related to the nature of the conditioned stimulus (e.g., sign-tracking).

Conditioned stimuli's role in relapse: preclinical research on Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

Pavlovian learning is central to many theories of addiction. In these theories, stimuli paired with drug ingestion become conditioned stimuli (CS) and subsequently elicit drug-seeking and drug-taking. However, in most relevant studies, Pavlovian and instrumental learning are confounded. This confound may be avoided in Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer (PIT) procedures. In PIT, Pavlovian and instrumental learning are established separately and then combined. In order to better understand the role of CSs in addiction, we review the relevant studies using PIT.

FINDINGS

We identified seven articles examining PIT effects of ethanol- or cocaine-paired CSs. Under at least one condition, six of these articles reported CS-elicited increases in responding previously maintained by drug. However, the only study using the optimal control condition failed to find a CS-elicited increase. Two studies examining CS specificity found the CS also increased responding maintained by a different reinforcer. Two studies examined if CSs elicit increases in actual drug-taking. Both failed to find CS-elicited increases, i.e., no study shows CS-elicited increases in actual drug-taking. Further, CS-elicited increases in extinguished responding are short-lived.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings are not entirely consistent with Pavlovian learning playing a central role in addiction. However, design issues can explain most of these inconsistencies. Studies without these design issues are needed. Additionally, existing theories hypothesize drug-paired CSs increase drug-taking by increasing motivation, by eliciting conditioned responses that make drug-seeking more probable, or by a combination of these. Work distinguishing between these mechanisms would also be useful.