Display options
Share it on

Front Behav Neurosci. 2021 Sep 28;15:730113. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2021.730113. eCollection 2021.

Conditional Control of Instrumental Avoidance by Context Following Extinction.

Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience

Vincent D Campese, Lauren A Brannigan, Joseph E LeDoux

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Evansville, Evansville, IN, United States.
  2. Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, NY, United States.
  3. Emotional Brain Institute, Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, Orangeburg, NY, United States.

PMID: 34650411 PMCID: PMC8505733 DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2021.730113

Abstract

Using rodents, three training arrangements (i.e., ABB vs. ABA, AAA vs. AAB and ABB vs. ABC) explored whether extinction influences the expression of avoidance in a manner controlled by context. Retention testing following extinction showed that more avoidance responding (i.e., renewal) was observed when extinguished cues were tested outside of the context where they had undergone extinction. In contrast, response rates were significantly lower when stimuli were tested within the context where extinction learning had occurred. These findings add to the emerging literature assessing the role of Pavlovian extinction processes in the development of instrumental avoidance responding by demonstrating conditional control over extinguished responding by context. This study was conducted using a within-subjects approach that minimized the potential for context-outcome associations to bias responding, and thus, reflects hierarchical control over behavior based on the specific associative status of each tested cue in each training context.

Copyright © 2021 Campese, Brannigan and LeDoux.

Keywords: avoidance; context; extinction; instrumental; renewal

Conflict of interest statement

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.

References

  1. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2021 Sep;183:107458 - PubMed
  2. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008;61(12):1785-92 - PubMed
  3. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008;61(12):1793-802 - PubMed
  4. Front Behav Neurosci. 2017 Sep 25;11:179 - PubMed
  5. Front Psychol. 2013 May 28;4:298 - PubMed
  6. Behav Brain Res. 2013 Jul 1;248:62-73 - PubMed
  7. Behav Neurosci. 1995 Aug;109(4):681-8 - PubMed
  8. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jun 9;106(23):9525-9 - PubMed
  9. Learn Behav. 2009 May;37(2):179-87 - PubMed
  10. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2019 Apr;26:9-17 - PubMed
  11. Learn Mem. 2010 Feb 26;17(3):139-47 - PubMed
  12. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2016 Jan;41(1):58-79 - PubMed
  13. Behav Neurosci. 2019 Apr;133(2):145-175 - PubMed
  14. J Neurosci. 2013 Feb 27;33(9):3815-23 - PubMed
  15. Mol Psychiatry. 2017 Jan;22(1):24-36 - PubMed
  16. J Neurosci. 2000 Aug 15;20(16):6225-31 - PubMed
  17. Nature. 2017 Feb 2;542(7639):96-100 - PubMed
  18. Behav Brain Res. 2021 Aug 27;412:113431 - PubMed
  19. Behav Res Ther. 2005 Nov;43(11):1391-424 - PubMed
  20. Learn Mem. 2005 May-Jun;12(3):270-6 - PubMed
  21. Learn Mem. 2004 Sep-Oct;11(5):485-94 - PubMed
  22. Behav Processes. 2017 Apr;137:64-72 - PubMed
  23. J Exp Anal Behav. 2020 Jan;113(1):153-171 - PubMed
  24. Physiol Rev. 2021 Apr 1;101(2):611-681 - PubMed
  25. Elife. 2018 May 31;7: - PubMed

Publication Types