The role of test context in latent inhibition of conditioned inhibition: Part of a search for general principles of associative interference

Conditioned inhibition of fear and reward in male and female rats

Stimuli in our environment are not always associated with an outcome. Some of these stimuli, depending on how they are presented, may gain inhibitory value or simply be ignored. If experienced in the presence of other cues predictive of appetitive or aversive outcomes, they typically gain inhibitory value and become predictive cues indicating the absence of appetitive or aversive outcomes. In this case, these cues are referred to as conditioned inhibitors. Here, male and female Long Evans rats underwent cue discrimination training where a reward cue was paired with sucrose, a fear cue with footshock, and an inhibitor cue resulted in neither sucrose or footshock. During a subsequent summation test for conditioned inhibition of fear and reward, the inhibitor cue was presented concurrently with the reward and fear cues without any outcome, intermixed with trials of reinforced reward and fear trials. Males showed significant conditioned inhibition of freezing, while females did not, which was not dependent on estrous. Both males and females showed significant conditioned inhibition of reward. During a retardation of fear acquisition test, the inhibitor was paired with footshock and both males and females showed delayed acquisition of fear. During a retardation of reward acquisition test, the inhibitor was paired with sucrose, and females showed delayed acquisition of reward, while males did not. In summary, males and females showed significant reward-fear-inhibitor cue discrimination, conditioned inhibition of reward, and retardation of fear acquisition. The main sex difference, which was not estrous-dependent, was the lack of conditioned inhibition of freezing in females. These data imply that while the inhibitor cue gained some inhibitory value in the females, the strength of this inhibitory value may not have been great enough to effectively downregulate freezing elicited by the fear cue.

Behavioral and neural mechanisms of latent inhibition

Fear is an adaptive emotion that serves to protect an organism against potential dangers. It is often studied using classical conditioning paradigms where a conditioned stimulus is paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus to induce a threat response. Less commonly studied is a phenomenon that is related to this form of conditioning, known as latent inhibition. Latent inhibition (LI) is a paradigm in which a neutral cue is repeatedly presented in the absence of any aversive associations. Subsequent pairing of this pre-exposed cue with an aversive stimulus typically leads to reduced expression of a conditioned fear/threat response. In this article, we review some of the theoretical basis for LI and its behavioral and neural mechanisms. We compare and contrast LI and fear/threat extinction-a process in which a previously conditioned cue is repeatedly presented in the absence of aversive outcomes. We end with highlighting the potential clinical utility of LI. Particularly, we focus on how LI application could be useful for enhancing resilience, especially for individuals who are more prone to continuous exposure to trauma and stressful environments, such as healthcare workers and first responders. The knowledge to be gained from advancing our understanding of neural mechanisms in latent inhibition could be applicable across psychiatric disorders characterized by exaggerated fear responses and impaired emotion regulation.

Proactive interference by cues presented without outcomes: Differences in context specificity of latent inhibition and conditioned inhibition

This report is part of a larger project examining associative interference as a function of the nature of the interfering and target associations. Lick suppression experiments with rats assessed the effects of context shifts on proactive outcome interference by latent inhibition (LI) and Pavlovian conditioned inhibition (CI) treatments on subsequently trained Pavlovian conditioned excitation treatment. LI and CI were trained in Context A during Phase 1, and then excitation treatment was administered in Context B during Phase 2, followed by tests for conditioned excitation in Contexts A, B, or C. Experiment 1 preliminarily established our LI and CI treatments and resulted in equally retarded acquisition of behavioral control when the target cue was subsequently trained as a conditioned excitor and tested in Context A. However, only CI treatment caused the target to pass a summation test for inhibition. Centrally, Experiment 2 consisted of LI and CI treatments in Context A followed by excitatory training in Context B. Testing found low excitatory control by both LI and CI cues in Context A relative to strong excitatory control in Context B, but CI treatment transferred to Context C more strongly than LI treatment. Experiment 3 determined that LI treatment failed to transfer to Context C even when the number of LI trials was greatly increased. Thus, first-learned LI appears to be relatively context specific, whereas first-learned CI generalizes to a neutral context. These observations add to existing evidence that LI and CI treatments result in different types of learning that diverge sharply in transfer to a novel test context.

Stepping back from 'persistence and relapse' to see the forest: Associative interference

Historically, there has been considerable interest in a large variety of forms of associative interference. However, various factors including interest in clinical application and perhaps recent funding priorities have resulted in a narrowed focus on one particular instance of interference, extinction, with relative neglect of other types of interference. We have been using the existing literature and conducting new experiments to determine whether there is a consistent set of rules governing the occurrence and persistence of two-phase associative interference across (a) proactive and retroactive interference, (b) cue and outcome interference, (c) the type of training in phase 1 (excitatory, inhibitory, or simple nonreinforcement), and (d) the type of training in phase 2 (excitatory, inhibitory, or simple nonreinforcement). Our hope is that a return to more general questions concerning associative interference might reveal broad truths concerning the nature of forgetting. Identifying global principles of associative interference may also help us better appreciate the nature of extinction, including how it can be enhanced and made more enduring, as well as how it can be minimized and made more fleeting.

Changes in Cue Configuration Reduce the Impact of Interfering Information in a Predictive Learning Task

Decades of research in extinction and interference show that contexts can play a critical role at disambiguating the meaning of cues that have been paired with different outcomes at different times. For instance, if a cue x is followed by outcome 1 in the first phase of an experiment and by outcome 2 in a second phase, responses to cue x tend to be consistent with outcome 2 when tested in a context similar to that of the second phase of the experiment. However, if participants are taken back to the original context of the first phase (i.e., ABA renewal) or to a completely new context (i.e., ABC or AAB renewal), their responses to x tend to be more consistent with outcome 1. Although the role of physical and temporal contexts has been well studied, other factors that can also modulate the selective retrieval of information after interference have received less attention. The present series of experiments shows how changes in cue configuration can modulate responding in a similar manner. Across five experiments using a human predictive learning task, we found that adding, removing or replacing elements from a compound cue that had undergone an interference treatment gave rise to a recovery of responding akin to that observed after context changes in AAB renewal. These results are consistent with those of previous studies exploring the effect of changes of cue configuration on interference. Taken together, these studies suggest that a change in cue configuration can have the functional properties of a context change, a finding with important implications for formal models of configural learning and for classical accounts of interference and information retrieval.