Secondary extinction in Pavlovian fear conditioning

Pavlov (1927/1960) reported that following the conditioning of several stimuli, extinction of one conditioned stimulus (CS) attenuated responding to others that had not undergone direct extinction. However, this secondary extinction effect has not been widely replicated in the contemporary literature. In three conditioned suppression experiments with rats, we further explored the phenomenon. In Experiment 1, we asked whether secondary extinction is more likely to occur with target CSs that have themselves undergone some prior extinction. A robust secondary extinction effect was obtained with a nonextinguished target CS. Experiment 2 showed that extinction of one CS was sufficient to reduce renewal of a second CS when it was tested in a neutral (nonextinction) context. In Experiment 3, secondary extinction was observed in groups that initially received intermixed conditioning trials with the target and nontarget CSs, but not in groups that received conditioning of the two CSs in separate sessions. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that CSs must be associated with a common temporal context during conditioning for secondary extinction to occur.     

Renewal after the extinction of free operant behavior

Four experiments were performed to explore the role of context in operant extinction. In all experiments, leverpressing in rats was first reinforced with food pellets on a variable interval 30-s schedule, then extinguished, and finally tested in the same and a different physical context. The experiments demonstrated a clear ABA renewal effect, a recovery of extinguished responding when conditioning, extinction, and testing occurred in contexts A, B, and A, respectively. They also demonstrated ABC renewal (where conditioning extinction and testing occurred in contexts A, B, and C) and, for the first time in operant conditioning, AAB renewal (where conditioning, extinction, and testing occurred in contexts A, A, and B). The latter two phenomena indicate that tests outside the extinction context are sufficient to cause a recovery of extinguished operant behavior and, thus, that operant extinction, like Pavlovian extinction, is relatively specific to the context in which it is learned. AAB renewal was not weakened by tripling the amount of extinction training. ABA renewal was stronger than AAB, but not merely because of context A’s direct association with the reinforcer.