ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition2022
Reinforcement rate and the balance between excitatory and inhibitory learning: Insights from deletion of the GluA1 AMPA receptor subunit.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging Computation and Representation in Associative Learning.Computational brain & behavior · 2025Article
- Probability and rate of reinforcement in negative prediction error learning.Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Conditioned responding is sensitive to reinforcement rate. This rate-sensitivity is impaired in genetically modified mice that lack the GluA1 subunit of the AMPA receptor. A time-dependent application of the Rescorla-Wagner learning rule can be used to derive an account of rate-sensitivity by reflecting the balance of excitatory and inhibitory associative strength over time. By applying this analysis, the impairment in GluA1 knockout mice may be explained by reduced sensitivity to negative prediction error and thus, impaired inhibitory learning, such that excitatory associative strength is not reduced during the nonreinforced periods of a conditioned stimulus. The article describes a test of the role of GluA1 in inhibitory learning that requires summing of the associative strengths of cues presented in compound. Mice were trained on a feature negative discrimination of the form A+/AX-. GluA1 knockout mice acquired the discrimination to a similar extent as controls. The inhibitory properties of cue X were verified in a summation test that included a control for nonassociative, external inhibition. The performance of GluA1 knockout mice was similar to that of controls. However, in line with previous findings, GluA1 deletion impaired the precision of timing of conditioned responding. These results provide further evidence that impaired sensitivity to reinforcement rate is not a consequence of impaired inhibitory learning. The results may more readily fit with accounts of rate sensitivity that propose that it reflects encoding of temporal and numeric information rather than being a consequence of changes in associative strength over time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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.