Effect of prior Pavlovian discrimination training upon learning an operant discrimination

The effect of Pavlovian discrimination training with two stimuli upon subsequent learning of an operant discrimination involving those stimuli was studied. After preliminary lever press training, the lever was removed and thirsty rats received noncontingent pairings between S₁ (a tone or a clicker) and water reinforcements, whereas S₂ (a clicker or a tone) occurred always without reinforcement. This procedure presumably established S₁ as a positive CS for respondent behavior, whereas S₂ was established as an inhibitory CS. Following this training, the lever was reintroduced and the rats were trained on an operant (lever pressing) discrimination involving S₁ and S₂. For the Consistent Ss, S₁ was the S^D and S₂ the S^Δ in the operant discrimination; for the Reversed Ss, S₂ served as S^D and S₁ as S^Δ. The Consistent Ss learned the operant discrimination significantly faster than did the Reversed Ss. The result emphasizes the importance of respondents, conditioned to S^D and S^Δ, which modulate operant performance to these stimuli.     

Genetic differences in avoidance learning by Rattus norvegicus: escape/avoidance responding, sensitivity to electric shock, discrimination learning, and open-field behavior

The behaviors of rats selectively bred for either good or poor shuttle box avoidance learning were studied. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that the phenotypic difference in avoidance learning is not associated with differences in speed of escape or avoidance responding. Differences between the lines in frequency of intertrial responses (ITRs), which appear during training but not during pretest, suggest that ITRs in animals of the low-avoidance (SLA) line are more suppressed by electric shock than in animals of the high-avoidance (SHA) line. This result suggests that SLA animals may be more emotionally responsive than SHA animals. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the animals of the two lines do not differ in absolute sensitivity to electric shock, and Experiment 3 showed that the poor performance of the SLA line is not due to an inability to learn. Experiment 3 also provided evidence which suggests that the poor avoidance learning by SLA animals is due to their emotional reactivity. Observations of open-field behavior in Experiment 4 are consistent with this hypothesis. The major consistent correlate of the phenotypic difference in avoidance learning is greater emotionality or emotional reactivity in SLA than in SHA animals.     

The effects of restraint and noncontingent preshock on subsequent escape learning in the rat

Three experiments investigated the effects of restraint and of inescapable fixed duration preshocks on subsequent shuttlebox escape-from-shock learning. Fixed-intensity preshock, random-intensity preshock, and no-preshock conditions were included in each experiment. In Experiment 1, restraining the rat in a harness prior to escape training retarded escape acquisition. There was no effect of preshock. In Experiment 2, both restraint and high fixed-intensity (1.0 mA) preshock retarded escape acquisition, when escape training occurred either immediately or 24 hr after preshock. In Experiment 3, movement was punished by positively correlating preshock intensity with the rat's movement; this treatment retarded escape conditioning. No effects were found for low fixed-intensity or random-intensity preshock nor for a condition in which movement was rewarded during preshock. The retarding effects of restraint and certain types of preshock were explained in terms of interfering instrumental responses.     

DRL escape: effects of minimum duration and intensity of electric shock

Three dogs were exposed to a DRL-escape procedure that required them to endure a minimum duration of electric shock without responding in order for a response to terminate that shock. When this minimum duration increased from 0 to either 2.25 or 7.00 sec, response latencies increased proportionately. With the minimum duration held constant at 2.25 sec, a gradual increase in shock intensity to 5.0 ma had no systematic effect upon latencies. Even under the highest shock intensity, 5.0 ma, latency and interresponse-time distributions were unimodal with very few latencies and interresponse times less than the minimum duration. Three additional dogs were exposed to an escape procedure in which every response was immediately reinforced. For these subjects, the same increase in shock intensity to 5.0 ma was accompanied by a decrease in latencies. The precise temporal spacing of responses obtained with the DRL-escape procedure may in part be due to the fact that every response latency and interresponse time that did not meet the minimum duration was not only extinguished but was also punished.     

The effects of escape conditioning and shock intensity on responding during inescapable shock

Eight albino rats, conditioned to press a lever to escape shock, continued to lever press during short inescapable shocks presented subsequently. The rate of this behavior was found to be higher for higher shock intensities regardless of the order in which shock values were presented. Relative to the immediately preceding escape rate, responding during inescapable shock was higher following conditioning at higher fixed-ratio escape requirements. Four subjects not conditioned to escape shock pressed the lever very infrequently during inescapable shock and showed little change with changes in shock intensity. The escape conditioning effects suggest that responding during inescapable shock is superstitious escape behavior. The effects of shock intensity on this behavior appear to be similar to reported effects of shock intensity on escape behavior.     

Effects of signaling inescapable shock on subsequent escape learning: implications for theories of coping and "learned helplessness"

The present experiments reveal that shuttle-escape performance deficits are eliminated when exteroceptive cues are paired with inescapable shock. Experiment 1 indicated that, as in instrumental control, a signal following inescapable shock eliminated later escape performance deficits. Subsequent experiments revealed that both forward and backward pairings between signals and inescapable shock attenuated performance deficits. However, the data also suggest that the impact of these temporal relations may be modulated by qualitative aspects of the cues because the effects of these relations depended upon whether an increase or decrease in illumination (Experiment 2) or a compound auditory cue (Experiment 4) was used. Preliminary evidence suggests that the ability of illumination cues to block escape learning deficits may be related to their to reduce contextual fear (Experiment 3). The implications of these data for conceptions of instrumental control and the role of fear in the etiology of effects of inescapable shock exposure are discussed.     

Inescapable shock and attention to internal versus external cues in a water discrimination escape task

In these experiments we examined discrimination learning in a water escape task following exposure to escapable, yoked inescapable, or no electric shock. Inescapable shock did not have an effect on swim speeds in any of the experiments. Inescapable shock interfered with the acquisition of a position (left-right) discrimination when an irrelevant brightness cue (black and white stimuli) was present. However, inescapable shock did not affect the acquisition of the position discrimination when the irrelevant brightness cue was removed. Inescapably shocked subjects showed facilitated learning relative to escapably shocked and nonshocked subjects when the brightness cue was included as a relevant cue. These data may resolve discrepancies between studies that did, and did not, find inescapable shock to interfere with the acquisition of discriminations. Moreover, they point to attentional processes as one locus of the cognitive changes produced by inescapable shock and suggest that exposure to inescapable shock biases attention away from "internal" response-related cues toward "external" cues.     

Effects of shock source and method of contact upon runway escape behavior

Rats performed better in a shock-escape apparatus with L-shaped metal strips as a runway when a constant-current (CC) shock source was used as compared to a matched impedance source. CC source superiority disappeared when the shock surface was wet (saline solution). Several additional demonstrations strongly suggest that the superiority of the CC source was not related to aversiveness per se but to responses peculiar to particular shock sources.     

The effects of negative relatedness upon word-picutre and word-word comparisons and subsequent recall.

In two experiments subjects were required to compare the meanings of either a word and a picture, or of two words. Different name levels, i.e. category versus superordinate names, had only a small effect on the time to compare a name with a picture. When incongruent stimulus pairs were semantically related, both positive and negative decision times were longer than when the incongruent pairs were unrelated; relatedness also affected subjects' recall of stimuli. Implications for models of semantic decision are discussed.     

Effects of stimulus similarity in discrimination training upon wavelength generalization in pigeons.

Thirty pigeons were given variable interval training to peck a 555-nm. light and then were tested for wavelength generalization. The subjects were later assigned to 1 of 3 groups, matched for both relative generalization slope and response rate. One group then received successive discrimination training between the 555-nm. stimulus (S+) and a vertical white line on a 555-nm. background (S minus); another group experienced the same S+ but a vertical white line on a black background as S minus. A third group received a comparable amount of single stimulus training with the 555-nm. value. On a second wavelength generalization test, the first group yielded greater sharpening of generalization than the second group, whereas the third group showed no change from Test 1. These results indicate that the sharpening of generalization gradients by discrimination training is directly related to the similarity of the discrimination training stimuli.