Timing in free-operant and discrete-trial avoidance

A procedure (“discrete-trial” avoidance) was devised to differentiate between the two main theories of responding in Sidman's “free-operant” avoidance procedure. One theory, a version of two-factor theory, holds that responding is reinforced by the removal of a conditioned aversive stimulus. The conditioned aversive stimulus is held to be temporal, which accounts for the spaced responding, or timing, that Sidman's procedure produces. The other theory holds that the reinforcement for both responding and timing is shock-frequency reduction. The new procedure eliminated this reinforcement for timing, but retained the conditions for the formation of conditioned aversive temporal stimuli. According to one theory, the new procedure should have sustained timing as well as Sidman's, while according to the other, it should have sustained no timing. The results confirmed neither theory. Timing was found with both procedures, but unequally in degree and kind. Large variations in the precision of timing did not appear to be correlated with successful avoidance for either procedure.     

Second-order avoidance behavior in monkeys

Two monkeys were trained on a three-component multiple schedule using discrete trials. In one component (food), a response terminated a red stimulus and produced food and S(Delta). In the second component (avoidance), a response terminated a green stimulus and avoided shock. In the third component (optional), a response terminated a blue stimulus and produced S(Delta). The consequence of not responding in the blue stimulus, however, was the production of either a food or an avoidance trial. Manipulation of these consequences showed that when food trials were available only a small percent of the time after optional trials, the subjects tended not to respond in the blue, even though this led to an increase in the total number of avoidance trials per day. If only avoidance trials followed as a consequence of not responding in the optional component, the animals terminated the blue stimulus and avoided the avoidance trials. Throughout the experiment both subjects maintained consistently low shock rates (about 10 per day) and these were not affected by the various manipulations. The data suggest that a stimulus associated with avoidance can be a conditioned aversive stimulus and will maintain a more remote avoidance response under certain conditions.     

Compounding discriminative stimuli controlling free-operant avoidance

The performances of three rats were stabilized on a multiple schedule that maintained responding by a free-operant avoidance schedule during independent presentations of tone and light. The simultaneous absence of these stimuli signalled shock-free periods and controlled response cessation. Subsequently, test sessions were administered consisting of independent presentations of each stimulus and these stimuli compounded (tone-plus-light). During an extinction test, additive summation was observed to the compounded stimuli, i.e., more responses were emitted to the compound than to either tone or light. During a series of 28 maintenance-test sessions in which the shock schedule remained operative, the compounded stimuli produced a generally enhanced response rate and fewer pauses terminating with shock than either single stimulus condition. These results extend the generality of free-operant additive summation to responding maintained by aversive control. In addition, a comparison of the present study with previous experiments reporting additive summation of positively reinforced responding indicates that similar variables—rate and aversive differences between training stimulus conditions—should be considered in accounting for response distributions during stimulus compounding when responding is controlled by either positive or negative contingencies.     

Generalization peak shift in rats under conditions of positive reinforcement and avoidance

Rats were trained to discriminate between two click frequencies. One frequency was associated with either variable-interval food reinforcement (Experiment 1) or free-operant avoidance (Experiment 2). The other frequency was associated with the absence of food in Experiment 1 and the absence of shock in Experiment 2. On a click frequency generalization test, the rats in both experiments showed positive peak shift with the shape of the relative gradients being very similar. This is the first reported instance of peak shift in rats when responding was maintained by an avoidance contingency. Nondifferentially trained controls showed that this shift was due exclusively to associative processes, with nonassociative stimulus factors in themselves apparently making no contribution to increased rates at particular stimulus values. These results show the comparability of appetitive and aversive control and support the position that gradient differences do not result from approach versus avoidance per se.     

Evidence for expectancy as a mediator of avoidance and anxiety in a laboratory model of human avoidance learning

A laboratory model was developed to study human avoidance learning. Participants could avoid an electric shock signalled by a 5-s conditioned stimulus (CS) by pressing one of a set of response buttons. Self-reported shock expectancy and skin conductance were recorded during a subsequent 10-s interval before shock. Shock expectancy declined when the correct avoidance response was learned and returned when the response was unavailable. Learning transferred to another shock CS. Parallel effects were observed on skin conductance once performance anxiety was controlled by requiring responding on all trials. Learning was faster when the Pavlovian contingencies were trained before introduction of the instrumental response. The results support a cognitive model of anxiety in which performance of an avoidance response reduces expectancy of an aversive outcome and thereby reduces anxiety.     

Evidence for expectancy as a mediator of avoidance and anxiety in a laboratory model of human avoidance learning

A laboratory model was developed to study human avoidance learning. Participants could avoid an electric shock signalled by a 5-s conditioned stimulus (CS) by pressing one of a set of response buttons. Self-reported shock expectancy and skin conductance were recorded during a subsequent 10-s interval before shock. Shock expectancy declined when the correct avoidance response was learned and returned when the response was unavailable. Learning transferred to another shock CS. Parallel effects were observed on skin conductance once performance anxiety was controlled by requiring responding on all trials. Learning was faster when the Pavlovian contingencies were trained before introduction of the instrumental response. The results support a cognitive model of anxiety in which performance of an avoidance response reduces expectancy of an aversive outcome and thereby reduces anxiety.     

Negative reinforcement as shock-frequency reduction

Is a conditioned aversive stimulus necessary in avoidance conditioning? Or is a reduction in the rate of aversive stimulation alone sufficient to generate and maintain an avoidance response? Rats were subjected to an avoidance procedure in which shocks occurred randomly in time, but a response could reduce the overall rate of shock. Fifteen acquisition curves, obtained from 16 animals, showed both immediate and delayed, rapid and gradual increases in response rate; there was no representative acquisition curve. Response rates were directly related to the amount by which the response reduced shock frequency. In extinction, when shock rates were not affected by responding, the response total was inversely related to the amount by which the response had reduced shock frequency during prior conditioning, with as many as 20,000 extinction responses when the shock frequency reduction had been relatively small. Responding on this procedure shows that avoidance conditioning can occur without benefit of either classical exteroceptive stimuli or covert stimuli inferred from the temporal constancies of a procedure. It also shows that reduction in shock rate is alone sufficient to maintain avoidance.     

Transformation of avoidance response functions in accordance with same and opposite relational frames

Research on the emergence of human avoidance behavior in the absence of direct contact with an aversive event is somewhat limited. Consistent with work on derived relational responding, the present study sought to investigate the transformation of avoidance response functions in accordance with the relational frames of Same and Opposite. Participants were first exposed to nonarbitrary and arbitrary relational training and testing in order to establish Same and Opposite relations among arbitrary stimuli. The training tasks were; Same-A1-B1, Same-A1-C1, Opposite-A1-B2, Opposite-A1-C2. Next, all possible combinatorially entailed (i.e., B-C and C-B) relations were tested. During the avoidance-conditioning phase, one stimulus (B1) from the relational network signaled a simple avoidance response that cancelled a scheduled presentation of an aversive image and sound. All but one of the participants who met the criteria for conditioned avoidance also demonstrated derived avoidance by emitting the avoidance response in the presence of C1 and the nonavoidance response in the presence of C2. Control participants who were not exposed to relational training and testing did not show derived avoidance. Implications of the findings for understanding clinically significant avoidance behavior are discussed.     

Human, free-operant avoidance of “time out” from monetary reinforcement

To assess the aversive effects of withdrawing monetary reinforcement, human subjects were exposed to a free-operant avoidance procedure in which periods of no reinforcement occurred if the subject failed to respond, and each response postponed withdrawal of reinforcement. Avoidance behavior was developed either through specific instructions about the consequence of responding or through preliminary escape-avoidance training. In all cases, rates of response were found to be a positively accelerated function of decreases in the duration by which responding postponed reinforcement withdrawal. The findings with respect to the function relating avoidance behavior to the interval of postponement were viewed as similar to those obtained when shock is used as the aversive event in free-operant avoidance conditioning.     

Facilitation and suppression of human loss-avoidance by signaled, unavoidable loss

A 15-sec stimulus followed by unavoidable monetary loss was presented to human subjects who were avoiding loss on a free-operant schedule. As has been observed in studies where shock is the aversive event, initial reactions to the pre-loss stimulus were transient increases in overall and stimulus rates. Unlike shock studies, continued training produced decreased rates, in the presence of the 15-sec stimulus, which were maintained in two of three subjects. Subsequent observations indicated that lowered rates were a function of the subject's rate of avoidance responding, the duration of the stimulus, and the scheduling of avoidable losses. Increasing the duration of the stimulus eliminated lowered rates in the presence of the stimulus and subsequent exposures to conditions which previously produced lowered rates did not result in recovery of the phenomenon. Introduction of the pre-loss stimulus on an extinction baseline (avoidable losses were omitted), however, reinstituted lowered rates. It is proposed that the pre-loss stimulus assumed discriminative control over low rates because responding in the presence of the stimulus was ineffective in avoiding the unavoidable loss. Recovery from lowered rates is attributed to the occurrence of avoidable losses during the stimulus period, and maintenance of lowered rates on the extinction schedule to the omission of such avoidable losses.     

Positive conditioned suppression: conditioned suppression using positive reinforcers as the unconditioned stimuli

Research has revealed the phenomenon of conditioned suppression in which the rate of responding is reduced during a stimulus that is paired with noncontingent shock. The present study replicated this procedure, but used noncontingent positive reinforcers instead of the aversive shock. The lever-pressing responses of rats were reinforced with food or water. While the rats were responding, a stimulus was occasionally presented and paired with the delivery of a noncontingent positive reinforcer, which was either food, water, or brain stimulation for different rats. The result was a reduction in the rate of responding during the conditioned stimulus. This finding shows that conditioned suppression occurs during a signal for reinforcing as well as aversive stimuli.     

The effects of stimuli followed by response-independent shock on shock-avoidance behavior

Four rhesus monkeys were trained on a non-discriminated shock-avoidance schedule (baseline). Stimuli followed by response-independent shock were then presented with the avoidance baseline no longer in effect. The main portion of the experiment consisted of superimposing (independently of responding) the stimuli followed by response-independent shock on the avoidance baseline. Different temporal values of stimulus duration and delay of shock (produced by an avoidance response) were presented successively, using each subject as his own control. When the stimulus duration was short or the delay of shock was long, so that avoidance rate during the stimulus could assume any value without resulting in baseline (avoidable) shocks during the stimulus, a lowered or "suppressed" rate of responding developed during the stimulus. When the stimulus duration was long or the delay of shock was brief, so that avoidable shocks resulted from a response decrement during the stimulus, high or "facilitated" rates of responding developed for a large proportion of the time that the stimulus was present.     

Can a shuttlebox computer analog be used to condition human avoidance behavior?

Freedman (1990) introduced a computer analog of the shuttlebox paradigm and presented results to show that this analog could be used for studying human avoidance conditioning. In the present study, a first experimental phase was conducted to test how the fact that the tone was considered aversive in the instructions and the intensity of this tone affect avoidance behavior. In a transfer-of-control test phase, it was tested as to whether the warning stimulus presented as a cue to the aversive stimulus had acquired either aversive or informative quality. An effect of instructions was observed for both levels of the auditive stimulus, and a stimulus effect was found for those groups that were given the instructions that described the tone as aversive. In the case of subjects who in the first phase achieved a certain learning criterion, it was recorded how often they in the second phase selected a condition in which the warning signal of the first phase was not presented. No transfer of control was observed. Thus, no positive evidence was found indicating that Freedman’s computer analog could be used for studying human avoidance conditioning.     

Fearing shades of grey: individual differences in fear responding towards generalisation stimuli

Individual differences in fear generalisation have been proposed to play a role in the aetiology and/or maintenance of anxiety disorders, but few data are available to directly support that claim. The research that is available has focused mostly on generalisation of peripheral and central physiological fear responses. Far less is known about the generalisation of avoidance, the behavioural component of fear. In two experiments, we evaluated how neuroticism, a known vulnerability factor for anxiety, modulates an array of fear responses, including avoidance tendencies, towards generalisation stimuli (GS). Participants underwent differential fear conditioning, in which one conditioned stimulus (CS+) was repeatedly paired with an aversive outcome (shock; unconditioned stimulus, US), whereas another was not (CS?). Fear generalisation was observed across measures in Experiment 1 (US expectancy and evaluative ratings) and Experiment 2 (US expectancy, evaluative ratings, skin conductance, startle responses, safety behaviours), with overall highest responding to the CS+, lowest to the CS? and intermediate responding to the GSs. Neuroticism had very little impact on fear generalisation (but did affect GS recognition rates in Experiment 1), in line with the idea that fear generalisation is largely an adaptive process.     

Leverpress escape/avoidance conditioning in rats: Safety signal length and avoidance performance

Leverpress escape/avoidance is an excellent model for assessing coping in rats. Acquisition of the leverpress response is determined by the interstimulus (signal-shock) interval, as well as the type and duration of the aversive event. One factor that has received less research attention is the safety or feedback signal. The safety signal presumably negatively reinforces leverpress responding through fear reduction. Here, we present a parametric manipulation of safety signal length and avoidance performance. All rats were trained with a 60-s tone conditioned stimulus and an intermittent 1-s, 1.0-mA footshock. Training was further accomplished with a 1−, 2−, 4−, or 6-min safety signal. Acquisition of the avoidance response was comparable at all safety signal durations. Rats trained with the shortest safety signal (1 min) exhibited more leverpresses during the safe period, a measure of anxiety. Thus, acquisition of the leverpress avoidance response was efficient regardless of safety signal duration, even though shorter periods were associated with greater anxiety.     

Leverpress Escape/Avoidance Conditioning in Rats: Safety Signal Length and Avoidance Performance

Leverpress escape/avoidance is an excellent model for assessing coping in rats. Acquisition of the leverpress response is determined by the interstimulus (signal-shock) interval, as well as the type and duration of the aversive event. One factor that has received less research attention is the safety or feedback signal. The safety signal presumably negatively reinforces leverpress responding through fear reduction. Here, we present a parametric manipulation of safety signal length and avoidance performance. All rats were trained with a 60-s tone conditioned stimulus and an intermittent 1-s, 1.0-mA footshock. Training was further accomplished with a 1-, 2-, 4-, or 6-min safety signal. Acquisition of the avoidance response was comparable at all safety signal durations. Rats trained with the shortest safety signal (1 min) exhibited more leverpresses during the safe period, a measure of anxiety. Thus, acquisition of the leverpress avoidance response was efficient regardless of safety signal duration, even though shorter periods were associated with greater anxiety.     

The sensory basis of avoidance responding in the rat : Relative dominance of auditory or visual warning signals and safety signals

Three experiments determined the relative degree of stimulus control exerted by the elements of a compound auditory-visual stimulus when this stimulus was presented in various temporal relationships to a barpress avoidance response. When the compound discriminative stimulus for barpress avoidance responding consisted of onset of white noise and onset of either light or darkness, the white noise always exerted dominant control. When the compound discriminative stimulus consisted of offset of white noise and onset of light, neither element controlled avoidance responding. On the other hand, when a barpress avoidance response produced a compound feedback stimulus consisting of onset of white noise and onset of either light or darkness, the visual element always exerted dominant control. When the compound feedback stimulus consisted of offset of white noise and onset of light, both elements exerted stimulus control.     

Persistent behavior maintained by unavoidable shocks

Squirrel monkeys were trained on a multiple schedule in which 10-min periods on a continuous shock avoidance schedule, indicated by a yellow light, alternated with 10-min periods on a 1.5-min variable interval schedule of food reinforcement (VI 1.5). A white light indicated that VI 1.5 was in effect, except for the middle 2 min of the period on VI 1.5, in which a blue light appeared and terminated with the delivery of a 0.5-sec unavoidable shock. Stable response rates developed in the avoidance and VI 1.5 components. However, the highest response rates occurred in the blue, preshock stimulus. A series of experiments showed that responding in the blue stimulus persisted even when responding had been extinguished on both the VI schedule of food reinforcement and the shock avoidance schedule. Responding in the blue stimulus ceased when the blue stimulus terminated without shock or when it terminated with a response-contingent shock. Each time responding ceased, it was restored by terminating the blue stimulus with an unavoidable shock. When the blue stimulus was on throughout each session and unavoidable shocks were delivered at regular 10-min intervals, responding was well maintained. These results show that in monkeys that have been trained on a continuous avoidance schedule, unavoidable shocks can maintain responding even under conditions where responses have no programmed consequences.     

The relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled avoidance

Subjects avoided shock by pressing on one lever under an unsignalled condition, but by pressing a separate lever they changed the condition to signalled avoidance for 1-min periods. Signalled avoidance periods were identified by a correlated stimulus. All eight subjects responded to change the unsignalled schedule to a signalled one. Once contact with signalled avoidance was made, subjects continued responding to remain in that condition. Other tests showed that changeover responding was greater when the correlated stimulus was presented without the signal than when the signal was presented without the correlated stimulus. An analysis based upon shock and shock-free periods is presented.     

Avoidance of pain of unpredictable intensity

Unpredictability of the intensity of an aversive event might be an important factor in producing negative effects of the event, especially if the UCS becomes stronger than could have been expected. The present experiment tested the hypothesis that unpredictability of intensity of a painful stimulus contributes to avoidance behaviour. The experiment was concealed in a shock working-up procedure, which was done to assess the pain level subjects were willing to tolerate in a subsequent experiment. The experimental subjects, who received an unannounced sudden increase of the pain stimulus during the working-up procedure, tolerated less pain on a subjective as well as on an objective level (avoidance of high levels of pain) than the control subjects, who received the stimuli in a predictable pattern. The results support the hypothesis that unpredictability of intensity of an aversive event contributes to avoidance behaviour.