. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Dec 22.

Published in final edited form as: Behav Brain Res. 2008 Sep 18;195(2):260–270. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.09.009

Table 2.

Design of Experiment 3

	PHASE
GROUP	Training	Novel CS Test	Ambig Training	Ambig CS Test
NIC		NIC: A		NIC: A
	NIC: A+	NIC: B	SAL: B+	NIC: B
	SAL: A−	-------------	SAL: B−	----------
		^*SAL: A		^*SAL: A

AMP		AMP: A		AMP: A
	AMP: A+	AMP: B	SAL: B+	AMP: B
	SAL: A−	-------------	SAL: B−	-------------
		^*SAL: A		^*SAL: A

CDP		CDP: A		CDP: A
	CDP: A+	CDP: B	SAL: B+	CDP: B
	SAL: A−	-------------	SAL: B−	-----------
		^*SAL:A		^*SAL: A

Procedures and nomenclatures are similar to Experiments 1 & 2; “A” represents the originally trained CS (light or noise) and “B” represents the novel or ambiguous CS. The Novel CS Tests evaluated whether drug features set the occasion for responding to an unfamiliar CS (B). During the Ambig Training phase, the novel CSs were familiarized but explicit excitatory or inhibitory associations with the US were avoided by pairing the CS and sucrose on only half of the sessions (i.e., making CS B ambiguous). Subsequent Ambig CS Tests evaluated whether drug features set the occasion for responding to a familiar CS that had not participated in an occasion setting discrimination.

Baseline SAL: A data were taken from the first trial of the last SAL: A- session in the Training phase.