Dual-process theory[edit]

The Groves and Thompson dual-process theory of habituation posits that two separate processes
exist in the central nervous system that interacts to produce habituation. The two distinct processes
are a habituation process and a sensitization process. The dual-process theory argues that all
noticeable stimuli will elicit both of these processes and that the behavioral output will reflect a
summation of both processes. The habituation process is decremental, whereas the sensitization
process is incremental enhancing the tendency to respond. Thus when the habituation process
exceeds the sensitization process behavior shows habituation, but if the sensitization process
exceeds the habituation process, behavior shows sensitization. Groves and Thompson hypothesize
the existence of two neural pathways: an "S-R pathway" involved with the habituation process, and a
"state pathway" involved with sensitization. The state system is seen as equivalent to a general state
of arousal.[27]

Examples of the habituation process in animals and

humans[edit]
Habituation has been observed in an enormously wide range of species from motile single-celled
organisms such as the amoeba[29] and Stentor coeruleus[15] to sea slugs[30] to humans.[31][citation
needed]
 Habituation processes are adaptive, allowing animals to adjust their innate behaviors to
changes in their natural world. A natural animal instinct, for example, is to protect themselves and
their territory from any danger and potential predators. An animal needs to respond quickly to the
sudden appearance of a predator. What may be less obvious is the importance of defensive
responses to the sudden appearance of any new, unfamiliar stimulus, whether it is dangerous or not.
An initial defensive response to a new stimulus is important because if an animal fails to respond to
a potentially dangerous unknown stimulus, the results could be deadly. Despite this initial, innate
defensive response to an unfamiliar stimulus, the response becomes habituated if the stimulus
repeatedly occurs but causes no harm. An example of this is the prairie dog habituating to humans.
Prairie dogs give alarm calls when they detect a potentially dangerous stimulus. This defensive call
occurs when any mammal, snake, or large bird approaches them. However, they habituate to
noises, such as human footsteps, that occur repeatedly but result in no harm to them. If prairie dogs
never habituate to nonthreatening stimuli, they would be constantly sending out alarm calls and
wasting their time and energy.[32] However, the habituation process in prairie dogs may depend on
several factors including the particular defensive response. In one study that measured several
different responses to the repeated presence of humans, the alarm calls of prairie dogs showed
habituation whereas the behavior of escaping into their burrows showed sensitization. [33]
Another example of the importance of habituation in the animal world is provided by a study with
harbor seals. In one study researchers measured the responses of harbor seals to underwater calls
of different types of killer whales.[34] The seals showed a strong response when they heard the calls
of mammal-eating killer whales. However, they did not respond strongly when hearing familiar calls
of the local fish-eating population. The seals, therefore, are capable of habituating to the calls of
harmless predators, in this case harmless killer whales. While some researchers prefer to simply
describe the adaptive value of observable habituated behavior, others find it useful to infer
psychological processes from the observed behavior change. For example, habituation of
aggressive responses in male bullfrogs has been explained as "an attentional or learning process
that allows animals to form enduring mental representations of the physical properties of a repeated
stimulus and to shift their focus of attention away from sources of irrelevant or unimportant
stimulation".[35]
Habituation of innate defensive behaviors is also adaptive in humans, such as habituation of a startle
response to a sudden loud noise. But habituation is much more ubiquitous even in humans. An
example of habituation that is an essential element of everyone's life is the changing response to
food as it is repeatedly experienced during a meal. When people eat the same food during a meal,
they begin to respond less to the food as they become habituated to the motivating properties of the
food and decrease their consumption. Eating less during a meal is usually interpreted as reaching
satiety or "getting full", but experiments suggest that habituation also plays an important role. Many
experiments with animals and humans have shown that providing variety in a meal increases the
amount that is consumed in a meal, most likely because habituation is stimulus specific and because
variety may introduce dishabituation effects.[36] Food variety also slows the rate of habituation in
children and may be an important contributing factor to the recent increases in obesity. [37]
We also find that habituation is found in our emotional responses, called the opponent-process
theory, proposed by researchers Richard Solomon and John Corbit (1974). It is known that
responses by the subject tends to change by repetitively presenting certain stimuli. But concerning
the opponent-process theory, some emotional reactions to the stimuli weaken (decrease) while
others' reactions are strengthened (increase). Take, for example, that it is the end of the semester at
your university. You have been worried about your grade for the entire semester and you need a
grade of "A" on the final in order to pass the course. You study efficiently for the test and after taking
it, you feel that you will receive a very high grade. But once you check the gradebook, you see that
you did not get an "A" on your exam. Instead you received a "C+". Now you are distraught and know
that there is no other way to pass the course for the semester. After a few minutes you begin to calm
down and by the next hour you are back to your normal emotional state. This is an example of an
emotional response explained by the opponent-process theory. It begins with an outside stimulus
provoking an emotional reaction that increases rapidly until it is at its most intense (presumably after
you learned that you did not receive a high letter grade). Gradually, your emotional state declines to
a level lower than normal and eventually returns to neutral. This pattern coincides with two internal
processes referred to as the a-process and b-process. The a-process, or "affective" response to a
stimulus, is the initial emotional response one has and can be pleasant or unpleasant. The b-
process is the after reaction and has a lower intensity than the a-process. The a-process is very fast-
acting and ends as soon as the stimulus ends or is removed. Unlike the a-process, b-process is
much slower in returning to baseline. Concerning the definition of the opponent process theory—
repeated presentations present habituation—the a-process does not necessarily change. It is the b-
process that is strengthened instead and rises more quickly to reach the highest intensity, and much
slower in attempting to return to baseline after the stimulus is removed. To sum it all up, with the
opponent-process theory, repeated presentations of the same stimulus will result in habituation,
where subjects show little to no reaction. It is the after-reaction that is much larger and prolonged,
than if an initial reaction to a stimulus occurred.[38]

Relevance to neuropsychiatry[edit]
Habituation abnormalities have been repeatedly observed in a variety of neuropsychiatric conditions
including autism spectrum disorder (ASD), fragile X syndrome, schizophrenia, Parkinson's
disease (PD), Huntington's disease (HD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Tourette's
syndrome (TS), and migraine.[5] In human clinical studies, habituation is most often studied using the
acoustic startle reflex; acoustic tones are delivered to participants through headphones and the
subsequent eye-blink response is recorded directly by observation or by electromyography (EMG).
Depending on the disorder, habituation phenomena have been implicated as a cause, symptom, or
therapy.[5] Reduced habituation is the most common habituation phenotype reported across
neuropsychiatric disorders although enhanced habituation has been observed in HD and ADHD. [5] It
also appears that abnormal habituation is often predictive of symptom severity in several
neuropsychiatric disorders, including ASD,[39] PD,[40] and HD.[41][42] Moreover, there are instances where
treatments that normalise the habituation-deficit also improve other associated symptoms. [43] As a
therapy, habituation processes have been hypothesized to underlie the efficacy of behavioural
therapies (i.e. habit reversal training, exposure therapy) for TS and PTSD,[44] although extinction
processes may be operating instead.
Uses and challenges of the habituation procedure[edit]
Habituation procedures are used by researchers for many reasons. For example, in a study on
aggression in female chimpanzees from a group known as the "Kasakela Chimpanzee Community",
researchers habituated the chimpanzees by repeatedly exposing them to the presence of human
beings.[45] Their efforts to habituate the chimpanzees before the field researchers studied the animal's
behavior was necessary in order for them to eventually be able to note the natural behavior of the
chimpanzees, instead of simply noting chimpanzee behavior as a response to the presence of the
researchers. In another study, Mitumba chimpanzees in the Gombe National Park were habituated
for at least four years before the introduction of systematic data collection. [46]
Researchers also use habituation and dishabituation procedures in the laboratory to study the
perceptual and cognitive capabilities of human infants. The presentation of a visual stimulus to an
infant elicits looking behavior that habituates with repeated presentations of the stimulus. When
changes to the habituated stimulus are made (or a new stimulus is introduced), the looking behavior
returns (dishabituates). A recent fMRI study revealed that the presentation of a dishabituating
stimulus has an observable, physical effect upon the brain. [47] In one study the mental spatial
representations of infants were assessed using the phenomenon of dishabituation. [48] Infants were
presented repeatedly with an object in the same position on a table. Once the infants habituated to
the object (i.e., spent less time looking at it) either the object was spatially moved while the infant
remained at the same place near the table or the object was left in the same place but the infant was
moved to the opposite side of the table. In both cases, the spatial relationship between the object
and the infant had changed, but only in the former case did the object itself move. Would the infants
know the difference? Or would they treat both cases as if the object itself moved? The results
revealed a return of looking behavior (dishabituation) when the object's position was changed, but
not when the infant's position was changed. Dishabituation indicates that infants perceived a
significant change in the stimulus. Therefore, the infants understood when the object itself moved
and when it did not. Only when the object itself moved were they interested in it again
(dishabituation). When the object remained in the same position as before it was perceived as the
same old boring thing (habituation). In general, habituation/dishabituation procedures help
researchers determine the way infants perceive their environments.