The effect of UCS intensity in classical and avoidance GSR conditioning

This study compared GSR avoidance and yoked-control conditioning procedures. Classical conditioning at two UCS intensities was followed by extinction and, two months later, by an avoidance session. Matching of Ss was based on GSR responsiveness and classical conditioning in the first session. The strong UCS led to more rapid reduction in CR latency (due to an increase in number of Ss responding) in the first session, and there was a tendency for maximum CR magnitude to occur in fewer trials with the strong UCS. No UCS-intensity difference in level of responding to the CS or UCS was found in the first session. A greater amount of spontaneous recovery in the second session was found in the strong UCS group. The avoidance and yoked control groups did not differ in CR magnitudes, latencies, or frequencies, nor in UCR magnitudes in the second session. They did differ significantly in the rate of decline in intertriai responses, the decline being more rapid in the avoidance condition.     

Effects of UCS intensity and postpeak acquisition trials on classical conditioning of the SCR

The present study examined the effects of UCS intensity and number of postpeak acquisition trials on classical conditioning and extinction of the SCR. A 2 × 3 design was employed in which subjects received either a 1, 2, or 4 mA shock UCS and either two or 16 acquisition trials beyond the peak CR. While conditioning was demonstrated during acquisition, there was no relationship between strength of conditioning and intensity of UCS. The phenomenon of stronger resistance to extinction following fewer acquisition trials (e.g., two past the peak CR) than with many (e.g., 16 past the peak CR) was demonstrated only for the groups that were conditioned with the 4 mA UCS. Resistance to extinction varied positively with UCS intensity, but only for the subjects who received two postpeak acquisition trials. Sixteen trials beyond the peak CR resulted in the UCS intensity having little or no effect on resistance to extinction.     

Classical conditioning in the leechMacrobdella Ditetra as a function of CS and UCS intensity

Classical conditioning in the leech was obtained using two levels of shock as the UCS, two levels of light as the CS; for each condition there was a CS-UCS paired and unpaired group. Analysis showed significant effects of pairing and a UCS intensity by trials interaction during acquisition. Spontaneous recovery was evident during the second day of extinction.     

Skin conductance response conditioning with CS intensities equal to and greater than UCS intensity

With .2-sec bursts of white noise as both conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (UCS), conditioning of first-interval skin conductance responses was obtained when the intensity of the CS equaled and exceeded that of the UCS. There was no evidence that second-interval response conditioning occurred. Nonspecific response frequencies were also affected by the variations in stimulus intensity, this raising some question about typical controls employed in SCR conditioning. There was some evidence that second interval responses were suppressed by the intense CS values. It was concluded that the existence of simple conditioning with a CS/UCS intensity ratio equal to or greater than unity was contrary to the Pavlovian proposition that a CS must be biologically less salient than the UCS in order for conditioning to occur. It was noted, however, that the suppression of second-interval responses might indicate that anticipatory CRs which are not confounded with orienting reflexes are prevented from exhibiting a conditioning effect when a high CS/UCS intensity ratio is employed.     

UCS revaluation and conditioning models of acquired fears

Recent developments in the study of Pavlovian conditioning in humans have suggested that the strength of a conditioned response (CR) is affected not only by associative processes that link the conditioned stimulus (CS) with the unconditioned stimulus (UCS), but also by processes which lead the individual to revalue the UCS itself. These latter processes can frequently lead to dramatic changes in CR strength independently of any experience with the CS-UCS contingency. This paper discusses a number of ways in which UCS revaluation can be effected in human subjects, and discusses their implications for conditioning models of acquired fears.     

The influence of context and UCS intensity on the UCS preexposure effect in a flavor aversion paradigm

Three studies were conducted to evaluate the influence of environmental context and UCS preexposure intensity on the acquisition of a flavor aversion. In the first study, rats were exposed to two UCS-alone presentations at one of three dose levels of LiCl. The rats were given the two UCS preexposures in one of two contexts (familiar or novel). Following the UCS-alone treatment, all of the subjects received two pairings of sucrose and LiCl (1.25 meq) in the familiar context. Animals receiving UCS preexposures in the same context as used during conditioning consumed significantly more sucrose than did saline control animals. In contrast, the influence of prior UCS preexposure was not evident when UCS preexposure was experienced in a context different from that experienced during conditioning. In Experiment 2, all animal received UCS preexposure and conditioning in the novel room. Animals received either two or four preexposures at 0, 1.25, or 3.75 meq dose of LiCl. Two UCS preexposures at 3.75 meq dose produced a stronger UCS preexposure effect than did the 1.25 meq dose. Animals in Experiment 3 received two exposures to either 0-, 1.25-, or 3.75-meq LiCl in one of two contexts, followed by conditioning with the 1.25-meq LiCl dose in the same context as preexposure. Greater UCS interference occurred in animals preexposed to LiCl in the novel rather than familiar environment, with no specific dose effects in either context. These observations are discussed in terms of context blocking and generalization decrement models of the UCS preexposure effect.     

Sensory preconditioning and UCS inflation in human 'fear' conditioning

This study describes a human electrodermal conditioning experiment involving processes of sensory preconditioning and UCS inflation. In stage 1 of the experiment Ss received six presentations of a CS+ paired with an innocuous 65 dB tone (UCS) and six presentations of an unpaired CS-. In stage 2, Ss in the experimental group had the aversiveness of the UCS inflated as the intensity of the 65 dB tone was increased to 115 dB. In stage 3, Ss were given test presentations of CS+ and CS-. A differential CR to CS+ was found only in stage 3 of the experiment and only in Ss who had experienced the UCS inflation procedure. These results suggest that (i) sensory preconditioning had occurred in stage 1 despite the failure to observe a differential CR in this stage, and (ii) the differential CR observed in stage 3 was mediated by an internal representation of the UCS whose aversiveness had been inflated in stage 2. As well as confirming that processes of sensory preconditioning and UCS inflation can be observed in human as well as animal Ss, these findings have important implications for contemporary conditioning models of clinical fears. In particular, they suggest that a contemporary conditioning model of acquired fears is not bound by the need to discover contiguous stimulus-trauma experiences in the histories of clinical phobias since, in humans at least, processes of stimulus association and UCS revaluation appear to be relatively independent.     

Differential pavlovian fear conditioning as a function of the qualitative nature of the UCS: Constant versus pulsating shock

Dogs were trained in a shuttlebox to perform an instrumental avoidance response to a visual signal. Then, while pharmacologically immobilized in a hammock, they received differential Pavlovian fear conditioning with two tones: one paired with a constant shock and one with a pulsating shock. During Pavlovian conditioning EKG’s were recorded. Later, in the shuttlebox, Ss received tests for the transfer of control of avoidance responding. Although no significant heart rate differences were found,Ss hurdled the barrier significantly more quickly in response to the tone previously paired with the pulsating shock than to the tone paired with the constant shock, indicating that pulsating shock results in better fear conditioning.     

The effect of UCS inflation and deflation procedures on 'fear' conditioning

Davey (1992: Classical conditioning and the acquisition of human fears and phobias: a review and synthesis of the literature. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy, 14, 29-66) hypothesized that subjective revaluation of an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) would determine the strength of the autonomic conditioned response (CR) in the fear conditioning paradigm. The purpose of the present study was to examine the effect of UCS aversiveness on the CR strength in the fear conditioning paradigm. The UCS aversiveness was controlled by the UCS intensity; that is, the UCS intensity was increased for the inflation group or decreased for the deflation group. Thirty subjects were randomly assigned to the inflation or the deflation group, and they participated under both experimental and control conditions. All subjects went through the pretest, the acquisition of classical conditioning, the UCS intensity operation, and the test sessions. The indices of the CR were skin conductance responses (SCRs) and a subjective aversion to the conditioned stimulus (CS). The main results were as follows. (1) The CR strength measured by SCR was increased by the UCS inflation and decreased by the UCS deflation. (2) The subjective aversiveness of the CS was not sensitive to both manipulations of UCS intensity. These results suggested that the autonomic CR strength might be influenced by the subjective revaluation of UCS, as Davey (1992) described. The result from the test of the subjective aversiveness of the CS, however, could not support Davey's model. The difference between expressions of the SCR and the subjective aversiveness of the CS might be caused by different learning systems.