Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction

Abstract Temporal contiguity between conditioned (CS) and unconditioned stimuli (US) is a crucial factor in Pavlovian learning, yet little is known about its role in appetitive conditioning and extinction. In a within-subject design, 60 participants underwent both a delay (DC) and trace conditioning...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Johannes B. Finke, Anna M. Schippers, Tim Klucken
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Portfolio 2025-06-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-05350-0
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849686102788538368
author Johannes B. Finke
Anna M. Schippers
Tim Klucken
author_facet Johannes B. Finke
Anna M. Schippers
Tim Klucken
author_sort Johannes B. Finke
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Temporal contiguity between conditioned (CS) and unconditioned stimuli (US) is a crucial factor in Pavlovian learning, yet little is known about its role in appetitive conditioning and extinction. In a within-subject design, 60 participants underwent both a delay (DC) and trace conditioning (TC) session with partial reinforcement (75%) by monetary rewards (US) and varying interval between CS offset and US onset (DC: 0s; TC: 4s). In addition to self-report indices (reward expectancy, arousal, valence), psychophysiological markers (pupil dilation, heart-period and startle reflex modulation) were recorded during acquisition and extinction training. For most measures, significant differential conditioned responses emerged, irrespective of temporal contiguity, with no major differences observed between TC and DC during acquisition (except for potentially diminished startle attenuation in TC). Despite overall similar patterns in conditioned responding (with small to moderate effects on physiological measures), there was no intraindividual concordance between sessions, yet evidence for differential TC effects on extinction learning. Specifically, smaller reductions in differential reward expectancy, heart-period deceleration and startle modulation after extinction in TC suggested relatively diminished extinction learning. Conditioned pupil dilation (0–2 s after CS onset) remained comparatively stable. Taken together, our findings extend evidence of differences in underlying learning mechanisms between TC and DC to the context of reward learning.
format Article
id doaj-art-ab9a6c85a2b441f7b3dfd857470ddf28
institution DOAJ
issn 2045-2322
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Nature Portfolio
record_format Article
series Scientific Reports
spelling doaj-art-ab9a6c85a2b441f7b3dfd857470ddf282025-08-20T03:22:49ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222025-06-0115111410.1038/s41598-025-05350-0Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinctionJohannes B. Finke0Anna M. Schippers1Tim Klucken2Department of Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of SiegenDepartment of Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of SiegenDepartment of Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of SiegenAbstract Temporal contiguity between conditioned (CS) and unconditioned stimuli (US) is a crucial factor in Pavlovian learning, yet little is known about its role in appetitive conditioning and extinction. In a within-subject design, 60 participants underwent both a delay (DC) and trace conditioning (TC) session with partial reinforcement (75%) by monetary rewards (US) and varying interval between CS offset and US onset (DC: 0s; TC: 4s). In addition to self-report indices (reward expectancy, arousal, valence), psychophysiological markers (pupil dilation, heart-period and startle reflex modulation) were recorded during acquisition and extinction training. For most measures, significant differential conditioned responses emerged, irrespective of temporal contiguity, with no major differences observed between TC and DC during acquisition (except for potentially diminished startle attenuation in TC). Despite overall similar patterns in conditioned responding (with small to moderate effects on physiological measures), there was no intraindividual concordance between sessions, yet evidence for differential TC effects on extinction learning. Specifically, smaller reductions in differential reward expectancy, heart-period deceleration and startle modulation after extinction in TC suggested relatively diminished extinction learning. Conditioned pupil dilation (0–2 s after CS onset) remained comparatively stable. Taken together, our findings extend evidence of differences in underlying learning mechanisms between TC and DC to the context of reward learning.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-05350-0Appetitive conditioningTrace conditioningExtinction learningPupil dilationStartle modulationHeart-period modulation
spellingShingle Johannes B. Finke
Anna M. Schippers
Tim Klucken
Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction
Scientific Reports
Appetitive conditioning
Trace conditioning
Extinction learning
Pupil dilation
Startle modulation
Heart-period modulation
title Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction
title_full Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction
title_fullStr Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction
title_full_unstemmed Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction
title_short Intra-individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction
title_sort intra individual comparison of appetitive trace and delay conditioning in humans across acquisition and extinction
topic Appetitive conditioning
Trace conditioning
Extinction learning
Pupil dilation
Startle modulation
Heart-period modulation
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-05350-0
work_keys_str_mv AT johannesbfinke intraindividualcomparisonofappetitivetraceanddelayconditioninginhumansacrossacquisitionandextinction
AT annamschippers intraindividualcomparisonofappetitivetraceanddelayconditioninginhumansacrossacquisitionandextinction
AT timklucken intraindividualcomparisonofappetitivetraceanddelayconditioninginhumansacrossacquisitionandextinction