Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Oct 22.
Published in final edited form as: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2009 Oct;35(4):498–508. doi: 10.1037/a0014627

Table 2.

Design of Experiment 2

Group Phase 11 Inhibition training Phase 22 Preexposure Phase 31 Extinction Phase 42 Conditioning Test X1 Prediction
LI-ExtA 48 A+ / 84 AB- / 48 C+ 48 BX- 200 A- 3 X+ cr
LI-ExtC 48 A+ / 84 AB- / 48 C+ 48 BX- 200 C- 3 X+ CR
NoLI-ExtA 48 A+ / 84 AB- / 48 C+ 48 B- 200 A- 3 X+ CR
NoLI-ExtC 48 A+ / 84 AB- / 48 C+ 48 B- 200 C- 3 X+ CR

Note: A and C were a flashing light and a high frequency tone, counterbalanced; B was a white noise; X was a click train. “+” denotes footshock reinforcement, “-” denotes nonreinforcement. Superscripts indicate different contexts. Predictions are based on the extended comparator hypothesis (Denniston et al., 2001) with uppercase denoting stronger responding than lowercase (i.e., cr < Cr < CR).