ArticleNeurobiology of learning and memory2017
Grouping subjects based on conditioning criteria reveals differences in acquisition rates and in strength of conditioning-specific reflex modification.
Article in Neurobiology of learning and memory, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disruption of rat deep cerebellar perineuronal net alters eyeblink conditioning and neuronal electrophysiology.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2021Article
- Inactivation of the interpositus nucleus during unpaired extinction does not prevent extinction of conditioned eyeblink responses or conditioning-specific reflex modification.Behavioral neuroscience · 2019Article
- Inactivation of the interpositus nucleus blocks the acquisition of conditioned responses and timing changes in conditioning-specific reflex modification of the rabbit eyeblink response.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2018Article
- Propranolol produces short-term facilitation of extinction in a rabbit model of post-traumatic stress disorder.Neuropharmacology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Averaging behavioral data such as the nictitating membrane response (NMR) across subjects can conceal important individual and group differences. Analyses were conducted of NMR data from rabbits that were grouped based on the point during NMR conditioning when subjects produced 8 conditioned responses (CR) in a set of 10 trials. This resulted in five groups (Early Day 1, Late Day 1, Early Day 2, Late Day 2, Early Day 3) in which group differences in CR acquisition rates were found. Percent (%) CRs were not found to increase monotonically and between-session differences in % CR were found. Conditioning-specific reflex modification (CRM) of the NMR is a type of enhanced reflexive responding of the NMR that is detected when the unconditioned stimulus (US) is presented in the absence of the conditioned stimulus (CS) following paired classical conditioning. CRM occurred in some subjects in all five groups. Subjects from both the group that was fastest and the group that was slowest to reach the learning criterion had unconditioned response (UR) topographies following NMR conditioning that strongly resembled the CR-UR response sequence elicited during NMR conditioning. This finding was most pronounced when the US duration used to assess CRM was equivalent to that used during NMR conditioning, further evidence to support the hypothesis that CRM is a CR that has generalized from the CS to the US. While grouping data based on conditioning criteria did not facilitate identifying individuals more predisposed to exhibiting CRM, strong CRM only occurred in the groups that reached the conditioning criterion the fastest.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.