Comparing visual and auditory cued eyeblink conditioning in humans

Delay eyeblink conditioning is widely used to study cerebellar function and has been considered a biomarker of cerebellar dysfunction in neurological and psychiatric disorders. A major challenge for repeated testing is transfer of learning across sessions. We tested whether using conditioned stimuli (CSs) from different modalities reduces transfer in humans, whether participants can be stratified into Fast and Slow learners, and whether pupillometry-based blink detection can serve as an alternative to electromyography (EMG). In Experiment 1 (N = 32), participants completed a short screening and two task sessions with auditory and visual CSs paired with an air puff as unconditioned stimulus, followed by extinction training. Learning occurred in both sessions with no difference in overall conditioned response incidences (CRIs) between sessions. However, auditory CSs led to stronger conditioning than visual CSs. In Experiment 2 (N = 16), no screening session was performed, and both task sessions used visual CSs. Here, specific transfer was evident, with high CRIs from the first block of session 2 and a significant session effect. Similarly, transfer occurred from screening to task sessions in Experiment 1 when CSs matched in modality. Across experiments, participants could be stratified into Fast and Slow learners based on median CRIs in the second acquisition training block during screening (Experiment 1) or first task (Experiment 2) sessions. CRIs derived from EMG and pupillometry were highly correlated, confirming pupillometry-based blink detection as a valid MRI-compatible alternative. In sum, transfer is substantial with same-modality CSs, whereas cross-modal designs reduce transfer and enable repeated testing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Brain Research
Published
2026-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2026.150521
Primary Topic
Vestibular and auditory disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparing visual and auditory cued eyeblink conditioning in humans

Frederik Schlitt, Dagmar Timmann, Giorgi Batsikadze, Thomas Ernst et al.
Brain Research
Vestibular and auditory disorders
article

Comparing visual and auditory cued eyeblink conditioning in humans

Frederik Schlitt, Dagmar Timmann, Giorgi Batsikadze, Thomas Ernst, Milan Rieger
article en

Abstract

Delay eyeblink conditioning is widely used to study cerebellar function and has been considered a biomarker of cerebellar dysfunction in neurological and psychiatric disorders. A major challenge for repeated testing is transfer of learning across sessions. We tested whether using conditioned stimuli (CSs) from different modalities reduces transfer in humans, whether participants can be stratified into Fast and Slow learners, and whether pupillometry-based blink detection can serve as an alternative to electromyography (EMG). In Experiment 1 (N = 32), participants completed a short screening and two task sessions with auditory and visual CSs paired with an air puff as unconditioned stimulus, followed by extinction training. Learning occurred in both sessions with no difference in overall conditioned response incidences (CRIs) between sessions. However, auditory CSs led to stronger conditioning than visual CSs. In Experiment 2 (N = 16), no screening session was performed, and both task sessions used visual CSs. Here, specific transfer was evident, with high CRIs from the first block of session 2 and a significant session effect. Similarly, transfer occurred from screening to task sessions in Experiment 1 when CSs matched in modality. Across experiments, participants could be stratified into Fast and Slow learners based on median CRIs in the second acquisition training block during screening (Experiment 1) or first task (Experiment 2) sessions. CRIs derived from EMG and pupillometry were highly correlated, confirming pupillometry-based blink detection as a valid MRI-compatible alternative. In sum, transfer is substantial with same-modality CSs, whereas cross-modal designs reduce transfer and enable repeated testing.

Brain ResearchVol. 1891
Essen University Hospital (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Mercator Research Center Ruhr, Stiftung Mercator
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Vestibular and auditory disorders
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.