1. Factors Influencing Conditioning Intensity Attention Contiguity (aka “when”) Relevance Surprise Contingency (aka “whether”) Next

2. CS Intensity Affects Rate but not Asymptote of Conditioning cs US CS US Weak CS Strong CS

3. Suppression and CS Intensity

4. Another CS Intensity Effect Overshadowing – the more salient CS wins if two CS are trained in compound GroupTreatmentTest x OvershadowAx  US cr ControlAx  US CR

5. US Intensity Affects Rate and Asymptote of Conditioning CS us CS US Weak US Strong US

6. Suppression and US Intensity Back

7. CS Preexposure Experiment (Latent Inhibition or LI) GroupPhase 1Phase 2Test CS Experimental CSCS  US cr Control ----CS  US CR Because the CS is a benign stimulus it will lose the capacity to command attention if preexposed Relation to schizophrenia Back

8. CS US Delay CS US Trace US Explicitly Unpaired Weaker conditioned responding Temporal Contiguity CS US Simultaneous Back

9. Is forward contiguity sufficient [enough]?

10. CS-US Relevance From Garcia & Koelling, 1966 Back

11. Blocking and Surprise GroupStage 1Stage 2Test Result Blocking A  USAB  US B? cr Control AB  US B? CR Back

12. A Contingency Experiment Positively Correlated CS US Chance of US per CS = 2/4 =.5 Chance of US outside CS =0/10 = 0

13. A Contingency Experiment Uncorrelated CS US Chance of US per CS = 2/4 =.5 Chance of US outside CS =5/10 =.5

14. 2/4 =.5 A Contingency Experiment Negatively Correlated CS US Chance of US per CS = Chance of US outside CS =5/10 =.5 0/4 =.0

15. It’s a little like… Animals are scientists, trying to make causal predictions. …trying to determine whether the US is contingent on the CS

17. Quantifying p(US|CS) = proportion of CS trials with a US p(US|no CS) = proportion of “background” only trials with a US  p = p(US|CS) - p(US|no CS)

18. Some Examples p(US|CS) 20/20 = 1.0 15/20 =.75 10/20 =.50 0/20 = 0 p(US|no CS) 0/60 = 0 6/60 =.10 30/60 =.5 45/60 =.75 60/60 = 1.0 1.0.65 0 -.25 p p 1 2 3 4 5

19. P(US/no CS) P(US/ CS) 0 1.0 Negative Positive 1 2 34 5 +1.0 +.65 -.25

20. Consequences for Controls Selection of appropriate control depends on your theory –explicitly unpaired (CS pairings) –uncorrelated/truly random control (contingency) –CS alone (sensitization) –US alone (sensitization caused by arousal)

21. Rats as Statisticians? US CS no US no CS P(US/CS) P(US/no CS)

22. Better Idea Background becomes associated with the US Background competes with CS for association with the US