Smith et al. (2005)

Acquisition of Differential Delay Eyeblink Classical Conditioning Is Independent of Awareness.

Behavioral Neuroscience, 119(1), 78-86

Find It

DOI

Abstract

There has been debate about whether differential delay eyeblink conditioning can be acquired without awareness of the stimulus contingencies. In 4 experiments, the authors reexamined this question. Older participants were tested with a tone and white noise (Experiment 1) or with 2 tones (Experiment 2). In addition, younger participants were tested with 2 tones (Experiment 3) or with 2 tones plus the parameters from an earlier study that had reported a relationship between conditioning and awareness (Experiment 4). Participants who were designated aware of the stimulus contingencies and participants who were designated unaware exhibited equivalent levels of differential eyeblink conditioning. Awareness of stimulus contingencies is not required for differential delay eyeblink conditioning when simple conditioned stimuli are used. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Reference

Smith, C. N., Clark, R. E., Manns, J. R., & Squire, L. R. (2005). Acquisition of Differential Delay Eyeblink Classical Conditioning Is Independent of Awareness. Behavioral Neuroscience, 119(1), 78-86. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7044.119.1.78

What Rests on This

1 mechanism cites this source. Each finding below is quoted as it appears on that mechanism's own page.

Classical Conditioning Memory Systems

Measured in humans

Across four replications of differential delay eyeblink conditioning (12 to 25 adults each, 120 trials), group means ranged from about 3 to 25 percentage points more conditioned responses to the CS+ than the CS−, with aware and unaware participants conditioning equally