spatial lec Flashcards
as rat walks to gt food what is it learning?
distinction between goal-directed behaviour and the stimulus-response type behaviour.
- 1 camp - S-R animal merely learns a response - turn right
- like a habit
- 2nd camp - Tolman (purposive behaviourism) - animal can learn purpose of their behaviour
- so animal turns right because it knows there’s food there
how can you study whether the animal is learning via SR or the goal-directed learning
- train them with one, then test with the other
- e.g., always starts from south and turns left to get food
- then test starting from diff point where they should turn right to get food
- if they can then they learned via the response strategy - they will still turn right, if learned where the gfood was it can turn right
- so the animals will do different things depending on the learning strategy used
response vs place strategy
which strategy do animals choose?
depends on various factors
- how obvious the spatial cues are
- how obvious the turn is - maybe a 160 degree
- how much training they have
- how stressed they are
morris et al., (1982)
water maze study with hippocampal lesioned rats
- trian rats with hippocampal lesiosn to locate platform in water maze
- trained rats to locate platform in one quadrant
- if platform was visible (above water level) rats with leisons could find it
- if it was invisible, they couldn’t find it - search equally each 4 quadrant of the pool
- controls: who underwent a process of surgery but didn’t acc get any damage; cortical lesion - receive damage in diff area - both showed preference for the correct pool quadrant. only hippocampal lesion n searched all 4 quadrants the same
hartley et al., 2007
four mountains task
virtual version of piagets 3 mountains task. looks at perspective-taking, recognising the same scene of an environment from different angles
two versions
- version 1: spatial memory test
- version 2: non spatial memory test
results
- non spatial verison = no difference between n with hippocampal damage an controls
- spatial version = hippocampal lesion n = perform much worse than controls
Tolman’s response vs place learning - which is H importnat for?
also there we found the hippocampus was important for place learning
Packard and McGaugh (1996)
- surgery - cannula placed in either the hippocampus or dorsolateral striatum
- trained them to always run from. thesouth arm and turn right to get food
- end of training they rotate arena - let them start probe trial from opposite side
- then do reversible inactivation - infuse into cannula an anesthetic lidocaine
- so half animals in the H and half n in the DS group they inject the anesthetic and other half they inject sailine
- anesthetic shuts down neurons. inthe local area you putt he lidocaine. in- temporarily stop animal from using either H or DS
- reason they do this reversible activation on the probe trial after 8 days of training then again after 16 days
- want to leave the H and DS intact the entire rest of its time
after 8 days training - PREFERENCE FOR PLACE
- most animals in Saline group follow the place and not the response
- normal animals with normal function brain predominantly show palce learning after 8 days training
- when inactivating DS - no effect on place learning
- when inactivating H - animal has equal preference for place vs response learning. this could be due to them having an equal preference OR them having no preference
- if normal animals do place learning, and at test if shutting down the hippocampus impairs that ability to use this strategy it shows that they learned initially via place learning and cant use it now
after 16 days of training - PREFERENCE NOW FOR RESPONSE STRATEGY
- learning response happens with additional training (like habit)
- when inactivating H - has no effect on that response strategy
- when inactivating DS - has massive effect, animal doesn’t just not know what to do here but completely flip to place learning
- not that the animal doesnt know where to go - it has a memory for the place and youve reinstated its memory for place by shutting down the response learning strategy
interpretations
- short term training -place learning,
- long term learning - response learning
- place learning handles by H
- response learning handled by DS
hippocampus is involved in which type of learning strategy
place learning (learning to go to a specific place, knowing food is located there)
dorsal striatum is involved in which type of learning
Response learning (remembering the specific responses only, e.g., I went left then right then left)
place and response learning are argued to rely on different kinds of associations.
how do we know that place learning is actually reflecting goal-directed behaviour?
Kosaki et al., (2018)
- trained rats to go somewhere for chocolate pellet
- after this - initiated postconditioning outcome devaluation - did this using flavor specific satiety
- one day give them loads of chocolate pellets (in their home cages)
- another day give them loads of their maintenance diet (again in their home cage not the study
- NOW did the study and if the animal goes to the food side of the T shape - shows they did response learning
- if they however go to the food-free side it shows they did place learning becasue they KNOW the food is there but are so full of the food they dont wanna go
results
- animals that werent stuffed with the food showed equal preference of both response and place learning
- when stuffed with. thefood - they stopped visiting the arm associated witht he food annd went to the opposite arm
- means they deliberately going to the ofod location shows they did goal-directed learning and associated that arm witht he chocoolate pellets
so devaluing the outcome had an effect on place learning, but how can we make sure it DIDNT have an effect on response learning
maybe it had an effect on both strategies and place learning is the one they were predominantly interested in doing. devaluing just knocked down place learning and inadvertently pushed up response learning.
force the animals into doing response strategy learning (done by lesioning the hippocampus)
then repeat Kosaki et al., (2018) study
experiment 2
- previous experiment - no preference of either strategy in the non-devalued condition
- with devaluation, animals with no lesion - they still go to the food pellet bit (response straegy) but once they get to the choicepoint they are slower going there almost like ugh food there, full of food, but I dont know where else to go
- while rats with hippocmapal lesion show the initial rapid response learning - go straight to the food even though they are full of chocolate pellets
what do we learn from Kosaki et al (2018) study
outcome devaluation has no effect for the response strategy but does effect the place learning strategy
how does outcome devaluation affect habit learning/lever pressing in rats
lever pressing in rats
- if you train them a small amount in leaver pressing then do outcome devaluation then they don’t wanna press the lever anymore
- if you train them a lot then they continue pressing the lever despite outcome develuation
fits nicely twith Packard finding of rats after short time learn place elarning strategy but then after long time (16 days) they learn response learning strategy. so overall ealy on n are represetning the outcome hen with continued training stop focussing so much on the outcome as the response strategy is too strong.
So we see a sort of flip from them caring about the outcome to not caring about the outcome
how do we know place learning is handled byt he hippocampus
- morris water study
- four mountains H lesion task
- t maze - place learning impaired with inactivation of the hippocmapus
Why dont we have so much studies on dorsal striatum damage from humans compared to
difficult to see in humans
- difficult to see damage in the basal ganglia
- easy to see damage to the hippocmapus as its close to the blood brain barrier - particularly sensitive to trauma
- BG doesnt seem to be the same
place learning - what association are they actually learning
learning about the relationship between cues in the environment and the location they need to get
Learn how to move towards goal
response learning - what association are. theyactually learning about
only cares about turning left. can just close your eyes and do it
its all based on the muscle memory
Dorsal striatum is involved in other thngs not just remembering to turn left
- packard showed DS was important for stimulus-response learning strategy in a T maze
- devon and white - showed it was important
Devan and White study (1999)
- did irreversible lesions: DLS, DMS, Fornix lesion
- trained rats to find paltform indicated by the cue
- animal trained to find platform with beacon attached
- test trials - moved the beacon to the opposite side of the pool.
- so can dissociate the place where the platform has been throughout training form the cue - indicated where the platform was
- released the rats into the pool and divided them up into groups of “cue responders” and “place responders”
results
- sham animals equally visited the cue furst just as much as they visited the place first
- hippocmapal lesioned n were all cue responders (place learning has been disrupted by the lesion to the hip)
- DS lesioned animals - visited the place first then eventually go to the cue second
interesting, so they do go to where the cue is but they all go tot the place first. as if lesioning the DLS has decreased the salience of the cue.. dont learn so much about hte cue as they learned by the place.
learning about the cue is impaired by the DLS lesion
what can we infer from devon and white study
cue learning/beacon learning and response learning - share the same part of the brain (DLS)
pearce, robers and Good (1998)
How did they show the DLS is involved in spatial strategies
- attached landmark (ballcock) to a rod
- per each session animal undertook 4 trials
- for each trial they learned the location of a platform and it was in a fixe dlocation form the landmark (E.g., every trial is is south of the landmark. the landmark had the fixed relationship with. theplatform for 4 trials a day
- but then the next day the ballcock is moved ot a new location
- so each day the platform has a fixed relationship to distal cues outside the pool and a fixed relationship to the local cues (ballcock)
- sham animals from trial 1-2 got better at learning the location of the platform with each trial
- hippocampal lesioned rats diddnt get quicker from trial 1-2
- interestingli H lesioned rats were quicker finding the platform on the 1st trial - had an advantage
why
werent set back by the memory of where the platform was the day before. sham animals must have located in in accordance with distal cues (are these weighted heavier than local cues? check that study)
these animals were just using the landmark-platform association
how did pearce et al test that the hippocampal lesioned animals were faster locating the platform in trial 1 BECAUSE they were using only the internal landmark to guide movment
- moved the landmark to a new location that they never tested them at before
- 1 trial put the platform on the right side of the landmark (20cm south) then another trial put the platform 20cm north
results
- found both hippocampal lesion and shams were quick to find the platform when it was on the right side and slower when it was on incorrect side
- hippocampal lesion didnt show any imparment in this the implication of thisis that rats with hippocampal lesion can learn limitted spatial memory based on a simple landmark-goal vector as opposed to learning a map of the environment based on cues around the pool
paper dissociated landmark learning from cognitive mapping
How did pearce study dissociate landmark learning from cognitive mapping
because they found the hippocmapal lesioned n were fine learning about a platform location using landmark cues however struggled learning the location using a wider cogntiive map of the environment
Kosaki et al., (2015)
design
- 4 trials one day with the same platform-landmark association and external cues
- next day different location
- lesioned both hippocmapus and DLS
results
- took the platform awar and measured how long rat searched the correct vs incorrect side of where the platform was relative to landmark
- sham and hippocampal lesion n spent mor time searching the correct side - shows the internal landmark goal vector is not impaired by a hippocmpaal
- DLS lesion n - cant learn the association between landmark and platform