Conditioned inhibition training of the competing cue after compound conditioning does not reduce cue competition

In each of two experiments, we studied Pavlovian fear conditioning (as asse ssed by barpress conditioned suppression) in 32 albino rats. Following a tw o-stage cue-competition procedure (A+ then AX+), we subjected the competing cue (A) to conditioned inhibition training (B+, BA-) before testing the ta rget cue (X). Conditioned inhibition training was designed to weaken the pu tative A-unconditioned stimulus (US) association, perhaps changing it to an A-no-US association. Performance-deficit theories of cue competition, such as comparator theory and retrieval-interference theory, predict that such procedures should weaken cue competition, causing Conditioned Stimulus X (C S X) to evoke strong responding. The same prediction can be deduced from re cent acquisition-focused models (Dickinson & Burke, 1996; Van Hamme & Wasse rman, 1994). Ln opposition to this prediction, however, we found in both ex periments that conditioned inhibition training had no detectable effect on cue competition even though it successfully abolished conditioned respondin g to CS A In Experiment 2, moreover, we found evidence against the hypothes is that the weak response to CS X was dire to generalization decrement rath er than to cue competition. Results favor early learning-deficit theories o f cue competition over performance-deficit theories and over the recent acq uisition-focused models.