The Role of Context Conditioning in the Reinstatement of Responding to an Alcohol-Predictive Conditioned Stimulus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Re-exposure to an unconditioned stimulus (US) can reinstate extinguished conditioned responding elicited by a conditioned stimulus (CS). We tested the hypothesis that the reinstatement of responding to an appetitive CS is driven by an excitatory association formed between the US and the context that the US was ingested in during US re-exposure. Male, Long-Evans rats were acclimated to drinking alcohol (15%, v / v ) in the home-cage, then trained to associate an auditory CS with an alcohol-US that was delivered into a fluid port for oral intake. During subsequent extinction sessions, the CS was presented as before, but without alcohol. After extinction, rats were re-exposed to alcohol as in training, but without the CS (alcohol re-exposure). 24 h later at test, the CS was presented as in training, but without alcohol. First, we tested the effect of extinguishing the context-alcohol association, formed during alcohol re-exposure, on reinstatement. Conducting four context extinction sessions across four days (spaced extinction) after the alcohol re-exposure session did not impact reinstatement. However, four context extinction sessions conducted across two days (massed extinction) prevented reinstatement. Next, we conducted alcohol re-exposure in a context that either differed from, or was the same as, the test context. One alcohol re-exposure session in a different context did not affect reinstatement, however, three alcohol re-exposure sessions in a different context significantly reduced reinstatement during the first CS trial. These results partially support the view that a context-US association formed during US re-exposure drives the reinstatement of responding to an appetitive, alcohol-predictive CS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".