In outcome-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT), stimuli that are predictive of specific outcomes prime instrumental responses that are associated with these outcomes. Previous human studies yielded mixed evidence in respect to whether the PIT effect is affected by a posttraining devaluation of an outcome, with the PIT effect being preserved after a devaluation of a primary reinforcer (food, drugs) but not following the devaluation of a secondary reinforcer (money). The present research examined whether outcome-selective transfer is eliminated when the devaluation of a primary (liquid) reinforcer is strong and aversive. Experiment 1 confirmed these expectations following a devaluation with bad tasting Tween 20. However, outcome-selective transfer was still observed when the earned (devalued) outcome was not consumed immediately after each test (Experiment 2). These results suggest that the capacity of a Pavlovian cue to motivate a specific response is affected by the incentive value of the shared outcome only when the devaluation yields an aversive outcome that is consumed immediately.
AinslieG., & HaslamN. (1992). Hyperbolic discounting. In LoewensteinG. & ElsterJ. (Eds.), Choice over time (pp. 57–92). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
2.
AllmanM. J., DeLeonI. G., CataldoM. F., HollandP. C., & JohnsonA. W. (2010). Learning processes affecting human decision making: An assessment of reinforcer-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer following reinforcer devaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36, 402–408.
3.
BaeyensF., CrombezG., HendrickxH., & EelenP. (1995). Parameters of human evaluative flavor-flavor conditioning. Learning and Motivation, 26, 141–160. doi:10.1016/0023-9690(95)90002-0
4.
BalleineB. W., & OstlundS. B. (2007). Still at the choice-point: Action selection and initiation in instrumental conditioning. In BalleineB. W., DoyaK., O'DohertyJ., & SakagamiM. (Eds.), Reward and decision making in corticobasal ganglia networks. (pp. 147–171). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
5.
BrayS., RangelA., ShimojoS., BalleineB., & O'DohertyJ. P. (2008). The neural mechanisms underlying the influence of Pavlovian cues on human decision making. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 5861–5866.
6.
ColagiuriB., & LovibondP. F. (2015). How food cues can enhance and inhibit motivation to obtain and consume food. Appetite, 84, 79–87. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.09.023
7.
ColwillR. M., & RescorlaR. A. (1990). Effect of reinforcer devaluation on discriminative control of instrumental behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 40–47.
8.
CorbitL. H., & BalleineB. W. (2005). Double dissociation of basolateral and central amygdala lesions on the general and outcome-specific forms of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer. The Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 962–970.
9.
CrosbieJ. (1998). Negative reinforcement and punishment. In LattalK. A. & PeroneM. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior (pp. 163–189). New York: Plenum Press.
10.
De HouwerJ. (2009). The propositional approach to associative learning as an alternative for association formation models. Learning & Behavior, 37, 1–20.
11.
De WitS., NiryD., WariyarR., AitkenM. R. F., & DickinsonA. (2007). Stimulus-outcome interactions during instrumental discrimination learning by rats and humans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33, 1–11.
12.
EverittB. J., & RobbinsT. W. (2005). Neural systems of reinforcement for drug addiction: From actions to habits to compulsion. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1481–1489. doi:10.1038/nn1579
13.
GreveW. (2001). Traps and gaps in action explanation: Theoretical problems of a psychology of human action. Psychological Review, 108, 435–451.
14.
HogarthL., BalleineB. W., CorbitL. H., & KillcrossS. (2013). Associative learning mechanisms underpinning the transition from recreational drug use to addiction. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1282, 12–24. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2012.06768.x
15.
HogarthL., & ChaseH. W. (2011). Parallel goal-directed and habitual control of human drug-seeking: Implications for dependence vulnerability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 37, 261–276.
16.
HogarthL., DickinsonA., & DukaT. (2010). The associative basis of cue-elicited drug taking in humans. Psychopharmacology, 208, 337–351. doi:10.1007/s00213-009-1735-9
17.
HogarthL., DickinsonA., WrightA., KouvarakiM., & DukaT. (2007). The role of drug expectancy in the control of human drug seeking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33, 484–496.
18.
HollandP. C. (2004). Relations between Pavlovian-instrumental transfer and reinforcer devaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 30, 104–117.
19.
HolmesN. M., MarchandA. R., & CoutureauE. (2010). Pavlovian to instrumental transfer: A neurobehavioural perspective. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 34, 1277–1295. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.03.007
20.
KlossekU. M. H., RussellJ., & DickinsonA. (2008). The control of instrumental action following outcome devaluation in young children aged between 1 and 4 years. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 39–51.
21.
LeBlancK. H., OstlundS. B., & MaidmentN. T. (2012). Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in cocaine seeking rats. Behavioral Neuroscience, 126, 681–689. doi:10.1037/a0029534
22.
LovibondP. F., & ColagiuriB. (2013). Facilitation of voluntary goal-directed action by reward cues. Psychological Science, 24, 2030–2037. doi:10.1177/0956797613484043
23.
MillerN. E. (1944). Experimental studies of conflict. In HuntJ. M. (Ed.), Personality and the behavior disorders. (pp. 431–465). Oxford, England: Ronald Press.
24.
OstlundS. B., & BalleineB. W. (2008). On habits and addiction: An associative analysis of compulsive drug seeking. Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models, 5, 235–245. doi:10.1016/j.ddmod.2009.07.004
25.
RescorlaR. A. (1994). Transfer of instrumental control mediated by a devalued outcome. Animal Learning & Behavior, 22, 27–33.
26.
RoseJ. E., BehmF. M., MurugesanT., & McClernonF. J. (2010). Silver acetate interactions with nicotine and non-nicotine smoke components. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 18, 462–469. doi:10.1037/a0021966
27.
SchwabeL., & WolfO. T. (2009). Stress prompts habit behavior in humans. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 7191–7198. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0979-09.2009
28.
TalmiD., SeymourB., DayanP., & DolanR. J. (2008). Human Pavlovian-instrumental transfer. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28(2), 360–368.
29.
TricomiE., BalleineB. W., & O'DohertyJ. P. (2009). A specific role for posterior dorsolateral striatum in human habit learning. European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 2225–2232. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06796.x
30.
UrcuioliP. J. (2005). Behavioral and associative effects of differential outcomes in discrimination learning. Learning & Behavior, 33, 1–21.
31.
ValentinV. V., DickinsonA., & O'DohertyJ. P. (2007). Determining the neural substrates of goal-directed learning in the human brain. The Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 4019–4026. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0564-07.2007
32.
WatsonP., WiersR. W., HommelB., & de WitS. (2014). Working for food you don't desire. Cues interfere with goal-directed food-seeking. Appetite, 79, 139–148. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.04.005
33.
WeingartenH. P. (1983). Conditioned cues elicit feeding in sated rats: A role for learning in meal initiation. Science, 220(4595), 431–433. doi:10.1126/science.6836286
