The influence of contingency awareness on appetitive conditioning processes

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Conditioning processes are assumed to be an important model for the development and maintenance of psychiatric disorders. In a differential conditioning paradigm, a neutral stimulus (CS+) is repeatedly paired with a salient stimulus (UCS), while a second neutral stimulus predicts the absence of the UCS. After a few trials, the CS+ compared to the CS- elicits conditioned responses (e.g. increased skin conductance responses). While fear conditioning has been investigated very well, the investigation of appetitive conditioning has mostly been neglected. Contingency awareness (i.e., the explicit knowledge of the CS/UCS-association) is discussed controversially in the context of conditioning processes. Current models (two-process models) assume a dissociation of different fear systems: It has been hypothesized that contingency awareness is not required for certain conditioned responses like amygdala activity or startle-amplitude, while it seems crucial for other conditioned responses (e.g. subjective ratings). These findings are discussed in the context of automatic and implicit learning processes and models as well as in a clinical context. Since appetitive conditioning processes might be important mechanisms for the development and maintenance of addiction, the question about the modulation of conditioned responses und the influence of contingency awareness might be of clinical relevance. However, the influence of contingency awareness in appetitive conditioning processes has not been investigated yet. The aim of the present DFG-project is to investigate the influence of contingency awareness on conditioned responses in a differential appetitive conditioning paradigm. Thereby, the conditioned responses of three different groups ought to be compared. Participants will be classified (with established questionnaires) as (1) contingency-unaware or as (2) contingency-aware during a differential appetitive conditioning paradigm depending on whether they developed contingency awareness or not. In addition, a third group ((3) instructed-awareness) will be explicitly informed about the CS/UCS relationship before the experiment. This group will know the relationship and will thus not have to learn the CS/UCS association like the second group (contingency-aware). The submitted project will provide valuable missing information to the investigation of the influence of contingency awareness on learning processes on the one side and appetitive conditioning on the other side.