ArticleLearning & behavior2019
Associative structure of conditioned inhibition produced by inhibitory perceptual learning treatment.
Article in Learning & behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Exposure to a set of complex stimuli yields an enhanced ability to discriminate between these stimuli. In previous experimental studies, two distinguishable stimuli, X and A, were each repeatedly paired with a common Stimulus B to create compound Stimuli XB and AB. Prior evidence suggests that unique Features X and A form mutually inhibitory associations. This was evidenced by pairing Feature A with a biologically relevant stimulus (i.e., an unconditioned stimulus [US]) and observing that Stimulus X alone later serves to inhibit anticipatory behaviors for that US. These observations may reflect the mutually inhibitory nature of the two Features X and A. However, by assessing the influence of X on behavior that anticipates the US rather than Feature A, these experiments tested inhibition only indirectly. In the present experiments, a more direct measure of inhibition is proposed and tested with rats. We found evidence of retardation and negative summation of associations between unique Features X and A in their capacity to serve as competing cues during overshadowing treatments. Stimulus X was less susceptible to overshadowing by A (which is indicative of retardation of the establishment of an X-A within-compound association) and was able to suppress overshadowing by A of another stimulus (Y) when X was presented with Y at test (which is indicative of negative summation of the representation of A by X). Thus, XB/AB trials were seen to establish an inhibitory relationship between X and A.
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.