The evolutionary significance of habituation and sensitization across phylogeny: A behavioral homeostasis model

The phenomenon of habituation may be interpreted as a process that has evolved for filtering out iterative stimuli of little present relevance. That habituation is seen in aneural as well as neural organisms throughout phylogeny with remarkably similar characteristics suggests that its role is an important one in animal survival. If habituation is to be viewed as a process to filter out iterative stimuli that have no significant consequences, then how is sensitization to be viewed? One way of viewing these two behavioral changes, i.e. habituation and sensitization, is that they are homeostatic processes which optimize an organism’s likelihood of detecting and assessing the significance of a stimulus in a new iterative series or a change in it. If one views the level of initial responsiveness to a new stimulus as a function of an organism’s threshold just prior to stimulus occurrence, then “high responders” (i.e. those who initially react more strongly) are assumed to have a lower threshold for detecting and assessing the significance of this stimulus than are the “low responders” (i.e. those who initially react more weakly). Thus, high-responders would initially receive more sensory input and progressively decrease their responsiveness to a non-threatening stimulus (habituation). Likewise, initial low-responders would receive less sensory input followed by a decreased threshold and an increased response to the next stimulus occurrence (sensitization). The level of responsiveness achieved in both habituaters and sensitizers, as an asymptote is approached, is a balance between being too sensitive to an unimportant stimulus (and possibly missing other significant stimuli) and being too insensitive, and missing a change in the relevance of the present stimulus. These response changes can be taken as indices of the organism’s mechanisms for achieving an appropriate threshold level to an iterative stimulus in order to accurately assess its present significance and then eventually to asymptote at an optimal stable response level. This approach toward an asymptote is a behavioral homeostatic process that reflects the accumulated significance of the iterative stimulus at each occurrence. The purpose of adding “behavioral” to the term “homeostasis” is to extend the usual meaning of the concept from primarily internal processes to also include (a) iterative external stimulation, (b) the organism’s initial threshold to the initial stimulus as well as (c) the behavior which results from it. Since we are discussing organisms that range from intact, single-celled protozoa to intact mammals, as well as surgically simplified preparations, the termsstimulus, response andbehavior will be used broadly. While other investigators have focused on specific cellular mechanisms underlying habituation and sensitization in a given organism, this paper focuses on the adaptive significance of these two behavioral processes viewed across phylogeny.

[1]  E. Kandel Cellular basis of behavior: An introduction to behavioral neurobiology. , 1976 .

[2]  C. Leuba Toward Some Integration of Learning Theories: The Concept of Optimal Stimulation , 1955 .

[3]  F. T. Gardner,et al.  SECTION OF MICROBIOLOGY: PHYSIOLOGY OF HABITUATION LEARNING IN A PROTOZOAN* , 1969 .

[4]  Philip M. Groves,et al.  Effects of stimulus frequency and intensity on habituation and sensitization in acute spinal cat , 1969 .

[5]  E R Kandel,et al.  Relationships between dishabituation, sensitization, and inhibition of the gill- and siphon-withdrawal reflex in Aplysia californica: effects of response measure, test time, and training stimulus. , 1998, Behavioral neuroscience.

[6]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Habituation: a model phenomenon for the study of neuronal substrates of behavior. , 1966, Psychological review.

[7]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  Handbook of experimental psychology , 1951 .

[8]  T. Carew,et al.  Behavioral dissociation of dishabituation, sensitization, and inhibition in Aplysia. , 1988, Science.

[9]  D. Kennedy,et al.  Habituation: Occurrence at a Neuromuscular Junction , 1970, Science.

[10]  E. Eisenstein,et al.  Comparative Aspects of Habituation in Invertebrates , 1973 .

[11]  D. C. Wood,et al.  Parametric studies of the response decrement produced by mechanical stimuli in the protozoan, Stentor coeruleus. , 1969, Journal of neurobiology.

[12]  Philip M. Groves,et al.  A Dual-Process Theory of Habituation: Neural Mechanisms , 1973 .

[13]  Philip M. Groves,et al.  Chapter 7 – A Dual-Process Theory of Habituation: Theory and Behavior1 , 1973 .

[14]  E. Eisenstein,et al.  Behavior Modification in Protozoa , 1973 .

[15]  E. Eisenstein,et al.  Habituation and sensitization in an aneural cell: Some comparative and theoretical considerations , 1982, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[16]  E. Sokolov,et al.  Habituation in Gastropoda: Behavioral, Interneuronal, and Endoneuronal Aspects , 1973 .

[17]  D. R. Davies,et al.  SKIN-CONDUCTANCE, ALPHA-ACTIVITY, AND VIGILANCE. , 1965, The American journal of psychology.

[18]  F. Graham Chapter 5 – Habituation and Dishabituation of Responses1 Innervated by the Autonomic Nervous System , 1973 .

[19]  W. Thorpe Learning and instinct in animals , 1956 .

[20]  E. Eisenstein,et al.  Initial habituation or sensitization of the GSR depends on magnitude of first response , 1991, Physiology & Behavior.

[21]  The effects of vibratory and electrical stimulation on habituation in the ciliated protozoan, Spirostomum ambiguum. , 1973, Behavioral biology.

[22]  E. Kandel,et al.  The Contribution of Facilitation of Monosynaptic PSPs to Dishabituation and Sensitization of the Aplysia Siphon Withdrawal Reflex , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[23]  W. Boucsein,et al.  Dependence of skin conductance reactions and skin resistance reactions upon previous level. , 1984, Psychophysiology.

[24]  T. Hamilton,et al.  Behavioral Plasticity in Protozoans , 1975 .

[25]  Wolfram Boucsein,et al.  A direct comparison of the skin conductance and skin resistance methods. , 1979, Psychophysiology.

[26]  Quantitative analysis of ciliary and contractile responses during habituation training in Spirostomum ambiguum. , 1974, Behavioral biology.

[27]  M. J. Herz,et al.  Chapter 1 – Behavioral Habituation in Invertebrates , 1973 .

[28]  E. Kandel,et al.  A Simplified Preparation for Relating Cellular Events to Behavior: Mechanisms Contributing to Habituation, Dishabituation, and Sensitization of the Aplysia Gill-Withdrawal Reflex , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[29]  J. Overmier,et al.  Pavlovian Conditioning and the Mediation of behavior1 , 1979 .