Shock intensity and warning signal effects on several measures of operant avoidance acquisition

Acquisition of both signaled and unsignaled operant avoidance learning was studied in 64 rats as a function of shock intensity, with three different warning signals used in the signaled procedure. In both signaled and unsignaled avoidance, overall response rate was a progressively increasing function of shock intensity. This was due to both an absolute and relative increase in the frequency of responses at shorter interresponse times with increasing shock intensity. Presence of an effective warning signal in the interval immediately preceding shock increased the probability of an avoidance response in this interval, decreased overall response rate, and reduced shock frequency. A buzzer signal proved most effective, followed by tone and light. However, once a warning signal occurred, the probability of an avoidance response to the signal was virtually independent of shock intensity. Also, an index of avoidance efficiency proved to be inversely related to shock intensity.     

Fear-motivated vicious-circle behavior maintained through secondary punishment

Two experiments attempted to establish vicious-circle behavior through fear motivation combined with secondary punishment. In Experiment 1, rats were trained with two CSs, a tone and a buzzer, paired with shock in different contexts. Secondary punishment based on delay and trace conditioning procedures facilitated running in fear-motivated rats, relative to four control groups. In Experiment 2, rats were given pairings of a tone CS with shock, and a buzzer CS with a drop into a water tank. Fear-motivated rats which received secondary punishment during either 33% or 100% of test trials exhibited self-punitive running relative to a nonpunished (0%) group and a backward-conditioning control group. Results indicate that “all secondary” vicious-circle behavior can be established through Pavlovian conditioning, thus supporting a conditioned fear interpretation.     

Classical conditioning of an “avoidance” response in goldfish using a linear presentation procedure

The present study examined the nature of the “avoidance” response in goldfish under the linear presentation procedure (Zerbolio, 1981). With this procedure, shuttling behavior occurring during the presentation of the trial stimulus produces either CS? or CS+, and further occurrence of shuttling within the trial interval (10 sec) changes the value of CS from negative to positive, or vice versa. If the fish remains in the compartment when the prevailing cue state is CS? at the end of the interval, shock can be avoided. With this procedure fish responded to the CS+ more than to the CS? and avoided shock. But fish in one of two control groups, in which responses had no effect in changing the cue state from CS+ to CS?, or vice versa, also showed a clear differentiation. The results were generally in line with the view that the “avoidance” response in fish is acquired through classical conditioning. The contribution of classical conditioning to the acquisition of avoidance response is discussed.     

Fear of the CS and of the context in two-way avoidance learning: Between- and within-subjects manipulations

The roles of CS fear and of context fear in signaled two-way avoidance learning were examined in two experiments in which shock intensity was manipulated either between or within subjects. For each subject, two discrete CSs, a light and a white noise, were used. For between-subjects comparisons, both CSs were paired with the same shock intensity, weak or strong. Under this condition, in which fear of the CSs and the context was greater with strong than with weak shock, avoidance performance varied inversely with shock intensity. For within-subjects comparisons, the light was paired with strong shock and the white noise with weak shock, or vice versa. In this case, context fear was constant during presentation of each CS, and avoidance performance varied directly with shock intensity. Additionally, intertrial responding was directly related to the amount of context fear. These results support effective reinforcement theory, an extension of two-factor theory, which acknowledges the contribution to avoidance learning both of CS fear and of context fear. The interchangeable effectiveness of visual and auditory stimuli as CSs is discussed with regard to stimulus specificity in avoidance learning.     

Postresponse exposure to warning signal in avoidance extinction

Delayed termination of the warning signal following extinction responses has been shown to facilitate extinction of discriminative avoidance. In order to determine the relative roles in extinction of delayed termination per se and postresponse exposure to the warning signal, which is necessarily confounded with delayed termination treatment, seven groups of rats were first trained on a one-way avoidance task in which a buzzer served as part of the warning-signal complex. Then, on nonshock extinction trials, the buzzer (a) terminated immediately with a response and was not reinstated in the postresponse interval, (b) terminated immediately with a response and was reinstated for a 5- or 10-sec period 5 or 15 sec following the response, or (c) terminated 5 or 10 sec following a response (delayed termination). Results indicated that exposure to the buzzer at postresponse intervals greater than 5 sec following responses was critically involved in reducing resistance to extinction. This finding supports a conditioned relief interpretation of the delayed warning signal termination effect and is consistent with the effect of response prevention techniques on extinction.     

Instrumental electrodermal conditioning in the monkey (Cebus albifrons): Acquisition and long-term retention

EightCebus albifrons monkeys received 25 sessions of discriminative operant conditioning of the skin conductance response (SCR), with colored lights as discriminative stimuli and with Sidman avoidance (SS-40 sec, RS-40 sec) scheduled during one light and response-contingent shock during the other, Discriminative stimulus segments were separated by 30-sec periods of time-out from shocks and lights, Two extinction sessions were run 3 months after training, Almost from the beginning of conditioning, the monkeys made significantly more unelicited skin conductance responses in the avoidance periods than in punishment, The monkeys’ heart rates also increased significantly, but there was no difference between avoidance and punishment, SCR frequency during extinction continued to differentiate significantly between avoidance and punishment, and there was a significant increase in this differentiation from the last conditioning session to the first extinction session, but the difference then reduced in the second session, The results indicated that monkey’s SCRs are influenced by instrumental reinforcement contingencies somewhat in the same fashion as those of humans.     

Conditioned inhibition and the UCS-CS interval

The role of temporal factors in the development of conditioned inhibition was investigated in a backward conditioning design. Separate groups of rats received tone CSs either 3 or 30 sec following shock presentations. The CSs predicted the same shock-free interval for both groups. A third group was presented with a random relationship between CS and shock. The CSs were tested by super-imposition on a Sidman avoidance baseline and only the group with a 3-sec UCS-CS interval revealed an inhibitory effect of the CS. These results are in accord with predictions made by the Solomon-Corbit model of acquired motivation and by Denny’s “relaxation” theory of escape and avoidance.     

Differential response gradients to a Pavlovian safety signal following active avoidance training in young and adult rats

Following 300 training trials in two-way shuttle avoidance signaled by a tone (CS+), two groups each of weanling and adult rats were given Pavlovian discrimination training in which the CS+ was followed by inescapable shock, and a more intense tone (CS—) signaled no shock. An additional group at each age level received both tones paired randomly with shock or no shock. Subsequent generalization tests along the frequency dimension indicated that both pups and adults tested at the CS+ intensity showed similar gradients of frequency control. Gradients for the adults tested at the CS — intensity tended to be inverted, with least responding at CS—, a result not found in the young subjects. The results were considered in light of Pavlovian extradimensional influences on the control of avoidance behavior.     

Continuity and intensity of shock in one-way avoidance learning in the rat

Six groups of rats (n = 16) differed with respect to the continuity of shock (continuous or discontinuous) and the shock intensity (.3, .8, or 1.6 mA) used during 65 one-way avoidance-conditioning trials. In general, a facilitative effect on one-way avoidance learning was obtained for continuous as opposed to discontinuous shock and for strong as opposed to weak shock. For both variables, the results are opposite to those obtained in discriminated shuttlebox-avoidance and barpress avoidance tasks. The data support an interpretation of the effect of continuity of shock which holds that discontinuous shock is, in effect, less intense than continuous shock. This interpretation allows the effects of the continuity-of-shock variable to be incorporated within the effective reinforcement theory of avoidance learning which has been proposed to account for shock-intensity effects in various avoidance tasks.     

The response-shock interval and conditioned suppression of avoidance in rats

Rats were trained to avoid unsignaled shocks with response-shock intervals of 30, 60, or 120 sec. When CSs of 60 sec duration paired with unavoidable shocks were then superimposed upon the avoidance baseline, responding decreased during the CS. Reductions in responding resulted in extra shocks which were potentially avoidable in all response-shock interval conditions, with the greatest increase in shocks in the response-shock 30-sec condition. Decreases in responding were greater when the CS was paired with a 2.0-mA unavoidable shock than with a 1.0-mA shock.     

Acquisition and extinction of runway performance under escape,avoidance, and partial-avoidance procedures

The acquisition and extinction of locomotor responses of rats in a straight alley were examined for groups trained under escape, partial-avoidance, and avoidance procedures. During acquisition, one group (escape) received a 0-sec delay between being dropped into the alley and the onset of shock; two groups (partial avoidance) had 0.5- and 1-sec delays; and two groups (avoidance) had delays of 2 and 4 sec. On the final day of acquisition, the partial-avoidance rats displayed higher running speeds than either the escape- or avoidance-trained animals. The 4-sec avoidance group was consistently slower than all other groups. Speeds for all groups decreased during extinction, with rate of decline showing some relation to terminal acquisition level. Relative group performance levels proved to be consistent with a simple arithmetic model based on the assumption that changes in running speeds affect the aversiveness of the situation by altering US duration, CS duration, and effective US length.     

The influence of shock during response prevention upon resistance to extinction of an avoidance response

A recent study found that avoidance extinction is equally facilitated by response prevention (blocking) whether the latter involves CS-alone or CS-shock presentations. An experiment was performed to determine whether this result was due to the use of a lengthy shock (5 sec) during response prevention. Five groups of rats were extinguished: (1) without prior blocking, (2) after blocking with CS only, (3) after blocking with a lengthy (5 sec) CS-contingent shock, (4) after blocking with a brief (.5 sec) CS-contingent shock, or (5) after blocking with a brief (.5 sec) shock only. The group blocked with the brief CS-contingent shock was substantially more resistant to extinction than the other four groups. The unblocked group and the group blocked with brief shock only required more trials to extinguish than the groups blocked with CS only or with lengthy CS-contingent shock, but did not differ from each other. The groups blocked with CS only or with lengthy CS-contingent shock also failed to differ from one another. The data support a significant role for Pavlovian conditioning processes in the effect of response prevention upon avoidance extinction.     

Integration of cardiac responses to serial stimuli after Pavlovian conditioning in rats

The expression of cardiac responses to sequences of two sounds was studied in restrained rats following discriminative trace or delay conditioning. Stimuli paired with a tail shock 10 sec later (CS1) elicited conditioned bradycardia. Unpaired or neutral stimuli (CS0) elicited mostly tachycardia. Rats did not learn to suppress responding to nonreinforced sequences with an interval of 6 sec between sounds. Responses to the second stimulus were significantly augmented following a CS1 stimulus, but not following a CS0 stimulus. Real-time summation of simple responses provided a more complete and quantitative prediction of dual responses than did resetting or facilitation. These results extend the time range over which summation may be observed from less than 2 sec to at least 16 sec. They appear to be inconsistent with models involving competition between unitary representations of stimuli in short-term memory and suggest the existence of multiple stimulus traces with independent time courses.     

Spontaneous recovery in cross-motivational transfer (counterconditioning)

In two experiments with rat subjects, we examined the effects of a retention interval on performance in two conditioning paradigms in which a conditioned stimulus (CS) was associated with different unconditioned stimuli (USs) in successive phases of the experiment- Experiment 1 was designed to examine aversive-appetitive transfer, in which the CS is associated with shock and then food; Experiment 2 was designed to examine appetitive-aversive transfer, in which the CS is associated with food and then shock. Aversive and appetitive conditioned responses (freezing and head-jerk responding, respectively) were scored from videotape. In both experiments, a 28-day retention interval following the end of Phase 2 caused a recovery of the Phase 1 response and a resuppression of the Phase 2 response. The results suggest that the original association is not destroyed when the CS is associated with a new US in Phase 2. They also suggest that both retroactive and proactive interference effects may result-from interference with performance output rather than a disruption or loss of what is learned during or stored from the target phase.     

On inferring selective association: Methodological considerations

The theoretically appropriate means for demonstrating selective association are discussed and shown to be empirically necessary. Following the acquisition of an unsignaled instrumental avoidance baseline, dogs received either CS-contingent shocks (CS+) or random, independent CS/shock presentations. The CS was either a tone or a flashing light. When the CSs were subsequently presented during avoidance responding, only the tone-CS+ group showed absolute facilitation of response rate. However, both tone- and light-CS+ groups showed facilitation relative to their respective random controls due to the nonassociative inhibitory effects of the light. A bidirectionally sensitive dependent variable enabled the detection of this pattern of effects. Thus, a demonstration of selective association requires (1) appropriate controls for nonassociative effects and (2) selection of a dependent measure that is sensitive to both excitatory and inhibitory influences.     

Conditioned suppression of a positively reinforced shuttle response

Rats were trained to run up and down an alleyway for sucrose reinforcement on a variable interval schedule. Differential aversive classical conditioning with auditory CSs was then conducted in a separate apparatus (“off the baseline”) prior to those CSs being presented while the subjects were responding for sucrose in the alleyway. Once the effects of the CSs had extinguished, shock was reintroduced following one CS but not the other (“on the baseline” differential aversive classical conditioning). Both “off the baseline” and “on the baseline” conditioning resulted in conditioned suppression to the CS followed by shock, but little effect of the CS followed by no shock was found. In the “on the baseline” phase, total suppression of baseline responding occurred at moderate US intensities, and this appeared to result from the subject avoiding the location at which he was last shocked. At lower values, both baseline response rate and relative suppression ratio were functions of US intensity. The results are discussed in relation to the effects found in similar experiments using avoidance baselines.     

Discriminated and nondiscriminated avoidance conditioning of the rearing response in rats

Experiment 1 employed a shock box in which light beams ran at 10, 15, 20, or 25 cm above the floor level of the box. Four groups of nine rats each were trained to avoid shock by cutting the light beams or letting them pass by, which the animal accomplished by upward or downward change of its posture. Training employed a discriminated avoidance paradigm, 60 trials per day for 5 days, with a 5-sec CS-US interval. Acquisition of the rearing avoidance response was observed only in the 15-cm condition. Using the same apparatus as in Experiment 1 and with a beam height of 15 cm, the rearing avoidance response was successfully conditioned in five rats using a nondiscriminated avoidance conditioning paradigm. There was good evidence of temporal discrimination in these animals.     

Interference with avoidance behavior as a function of qualitative properties of inescapable shocks

Temporal form (continuous vs. pulsating) and shock source (alternating current vs. direct current) were factorially combined to produce four shock treatments. The effects of inescapable presentations of these stimuli on subsequent avoidance response acquisition were measured in dogs (Experiment 1) and in rats (Experiment 2) and revealed an interaction of shock variables. Initially, all groups that received ac shock showed impaired performance for the pulsating and continuous shock conditions; groups that received dc continuous shock were also impaired, while those that received dc pulsating shock were not. While this pattern of interference persisted for dogs, it was transient in rats, with only the ac continuous-shock group continuing to be impaired. Mean avoidance performance were positively related to mean activity levels during inescapable shocks for the dc shock groups but not for the ac shock groups.     

Concurrent observations of barpress suppression and freezing: Effects of CS modality and on-line vs. off-line training upon posttrial behavior

In a conditioned suppression study with rats, CS modality (light vs. noise) and type of conditioning (on-line vs. off-line training) were manipulated. All rats were then tested on-line with only half the test trials reinforced. Some results and conclusions were as follows: (1) During initial training, suppression following reinforced noise trials was moderately strong at first but weakened over days; for the light, it was weak from the start. It was suggested that this strong influence of CS modality might complicate interpretations of posttrial suppression as a measure of US effectiveness. (2) During testing, posttrial suppression and freezing were greater following non-reinforced trials than following reinforced trials (US-omission effect), and this effect was stronger for noise than for light. Since noise also produced more freezing than light, this result favors the hypothesis that the US-omission effect is due to persistent CS-elicited freezing that is un-disrupted by a shock US. (3) Although noise produced more freezing, both noise and light produced similar barpress suppression. This result is consistent with the suggestion that noise and light acquire equal associative strength but elicit different defensive behaviors.     

Additive summation by stimulus compounding irrespective of behavioral contrast during discrimination training: An investigation with positive reinforcement and avoidance schedules

The similarity in the discrimination training leading to behavioral contrast and that preceding tests producing response enhancement to combined discriminative stimuli suggested that the two phenomena might be related. This was investigated by determining if contrast indiscrimination training was necessary for this outcome of stimulus compounding. Responding to tone, light, and to the simultaneous absence of tone and light (T + L) was maintained during baseline training by food reinforcement in Experiment I and by shock avoidance in Experiment II. During subsequent discrimination training, responding was reduced in T + L by programming nonreinforcement in Experiment I and safety or response-punishment in Experiment II. In the first experiment, one rat exhibited positive behavioral contrast, i.e., tone and light rates increased while his T + L rate decreased. In Experiment II, rats punished in T + L showed contrast in tone and light, this being the first demonstration of punishment contrast on an avoidance baseline with rats. The discrimination acquisition data are discussed in the light of current explanations of contrast by Gamzu and Schwartz (1973) and Terrace (1972). During stimulus compounding tests, all subjects in both experiments emitted more responses to tone-plus-light than to tone or light (additive summation). An analysis of the terminal training baselines suggests that the factors producing these test results seem unrelated to whether or not contrast occurred during discrimination training. It was concluded that the stimulus compounding test reveals the operation of the terminal baseline response associations and reinforcement associations conditioned on these multicomponent free-operant schedules of reinforcement.