scholarly journals Stress modulates the use of spatial versus stimulus-response learning strategies in humans

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 109-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Schwabe ◽  
M. S. Oitzl ◽  
C. Philippsen ◽  
S. Richter ◽  
A. Bohringer ◽  
...  
2004 ◽  
Vol 158 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Richter ◽  
K. Matthies ◽  
T. Ohde ◽  
A. Dimitrova ◽  
E. Gizewski ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Schwabe ◽  
Sergiu Dalm ◽  
Hartmut Schächinger ◽  
Melly S. Oitzl

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Schwabe ◽  
Melly S. Oitzl ◽  
Steffen Richter ◽  
Hartmut Schächinger

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nole M. Hiebert ◽  
Marc R. Lawrence ◽  
Hooman Ganjavi ◽  
Mark Watling ◽  
Adrian M. Owen ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (49) ◽  
pp. 31427-31437
Author(s):  
Jesse P. Geerts ◽  
Fabian Chersi ◽  
Kimberly L. Stachenfeld ◽  
Neil Burgess

Humans and other animals use multiple strategies for making decisions. Reinforcement-learning theory distinguishes between stimulus–response (model-free; MF) learning and deliberative (model-based; MB) planning. The spatial-navigation literature presents a parallel dichotomy between navigation strategies. In “response learning,” associated with the dorsolateral striatum (DLS), decisions are anchored to an egocentric reference frame. In “place learning,” associated with the hippocampus, decisions are anchored to an allocentric reference frame. Emerging evidence suggests that the contribution of hippocampus to place learning may also underlie its contribution to MB learning by representing relational structure in a cognitive map. Here, we introduce a computational model in which hippocampus subserves place and MB learning by learning a “successor representation” of relational structure between states; DLS implements model-free response learning by learning associations between actions and egocentric representations of landmarks; and action values from either system are weighted by the reliability of its predictions. We show that this model reproduces a range of seemingly disparate behavioral findings in spatial and nonspatial decision tasks and explains the effects of lesions to DLS and hippocampus on these tasks. Furthermore, modeling place cells as driven by boundaries explains the observation that, unlike navigation guided by landmarks, navigation guided by boundaries is robust to “blocking” by prior state–reward associations due to learned associations between place cells. Our model, originally shaped by detailed constraints in the spatial literature, successfully characterizes the hippocampal–striatal system as a general system for decision making via adaptive combination of stimulus–response learning and the use of a cognitive map.


2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. 1362-1372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Schwabe ◽  
Hartmut Schächinger ◽  
E. Ron de Kloet ◽  
Melly S. Oitzl

Stress and corticosteroid hormones are known to affect learning and memory processes. In this study, we examined whether stress and corticosteroids are capable of facilitating the switch between multiple memory systems in mice. For this purpose, we designed a task that allowed measurement of nucleus caudate-based stimulus–response and hippocampus-based spatial learning strategies. Naive mice used spatial strategies to locate an exit hole on a circular hole board at a fixed location flagged by a proximal stimulus. When the mice were either stressed or administered corticosterone before the task, 30–50% of the mice switched to a stimulus–response strategy. This switch between learning strategies was accompanied by a rescue of performance, whereas performance declined in the stressed mice that kept using the spatial strategy. Pretreatment with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist prevented the switch toward the stimulus–response strategy but led to deterioration of hippocampus-dependent performance. These findings (i) show that corticosteroids promote the transition from spatial to stimulus–response memory systems, (ii) provide evidence that the mineralocorticoid receptor underlies this corticosteroid-mediated switch, and (iii) suggest that a stress-induced switch from hippocampus-based to nucleus caudate-based memory systems can rescue performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document