Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Awareness predicts the magnitude of single‐cue trace eyeblink conditioning

Awareness predicts the magnitude of single‐cue trace eyeblink conditioning Studies of differential eyeblink conditioning (CS+ and CS‐) have demonstrated that successful conditioning requires awareness of the stimulus contingencies and that delay conditioning does not. Two experiments were carried out to determine whether awareness is also important for single‐cue trace eyeblink conditioning. In experiment 1, participants who performed a secondary, attention‐demanding task emitted significantly fewer conditioned eyeblink responses than participants who watched a silent movie during the conditioning session. In experiment 2, participants who became aware of the stimulus contingencies early in the conditioning session emitted significantly more conditioned responses during the remainder of the session than participants who became aware later in the session or who never became aware. These results indicate that awareness is important for single‐cue trace eyeblink conditioning, just as it is for differential trace conditioning. The relationship between awareness and trace eyeblink conditioning is discussed in the light of these and other recent findings. Hippocampus 10:181–186, 2000 © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Hippocampus Wiley

Awareness predicts the magnitude of single‐cue trace eyeblink conditioning

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/awareness-predicts-the-magnitude-of-single-cue-trace-eyeblink-8lGoEkgC8F

References (28)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
ISSN
1050-9631
eISSN
1098-1063
DOI
10.1002/(SICI)1098-1063(2000)10:2<181::AID-HIPO7>3.0.CO;2-V
pmid
10791840
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Studies of differential eyeblink conditioning (CS+ and CS‐) have demonstrated that successful conditioning requires awareness of the stimulus contingencies and that delay conditioning does not. Two experiments were carried out to determine whether awareness is also important for single‐cue trace eyeblink conditioning. In experiment 1, participants who performed a secondary, attention‐demanding task emitted significantly fewer conditioned eyeblink responses than participants who watched a silent movie during the conditioning session. In experiment 2, participants who became aware of the stimulus contingencies early in the conditioning session emitted significantly more conditioned responses during the remainder of the session than participants who became aware later in the session or who never became aware. These results indicate that awareness is important for single‐cue trace eyeblink conditioning, just as it is for differential trace conditioning. The relationship between awareness and trace eyeblink conditioning is discussed in the light of these and other recent findings. Hippocampus 10:181–186, 2000 © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Journal

HippocampusWiley

Published: Jan 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.