- Alexandra Thanellou: Department of Psychology, University of Vermont, 2 Colchester Avenue, Burlington, VT 05405-0134, USA.
Reinstatement--the return of an extinguished conditioned response (CR) after reexposure to the unconditioned stimulus (US)--and spontaneous recovery--the return of an extinguished CR with the passage of time--are 2 of 4 well-established phenomena that demonstrate that extinction does not erase the conditioned stimulus (CS)-US association. However, reinstatement of extinguished eyeblink CRs has never been demonstrated, and spontaneous recovery of extinguished eyeblink CRs has not been systematically demonstrated in rodent eyeblink conditioning. In Experiment 1, US reexposure was administered 24 hr prior to a reinstatement test. In Experiment 2, US reexposure was administered 5 min prior to a reinstatement test. In Experiment 3, a long, discrete cue (a houselight), present in all phases of training and testing, served as a context within which each trial occurred to maximize context processing, which in other preparations has been shown to be required for reinstatement. In Experiment 4, an additional group was included that received footshock exposure, rather than US reexposure, between extinction and test, and contextual freezing was measured prior to test. Spontaneous recovery was robust in Experiments 3 and 4. In Experiment 4, context freezing was strong in a group given footshock exposure but not in a group given eye shock US reexposure. There was no reinstatement observed in any experiment. With stimulus conditions that produce eyeblink conditioning and research designs that produce reinstatement in other forms of classical conditioning, we observed spontaneous recovery but not reinstatement of extinguished eyeblink CRs. This suggests that reinstatement, but not spontaneous recovery, is a preparation- or substrate-dependent phenomenon.