Acquired fear, brightness preference, and one-way shuttlebox performance

Allison, James P.; Larson, Daniel J.; Jensen, Donald D.

doi:10.3758/bf03331655

Cited by 45 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 3 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar problems arise when one tries to apply an account proposed by Aitken (1974) and Allison, Larson, and Jensen (1967) to the present data. On that account, the signaled-shock groups showed a higher preference for dark places than did the unsignaled-shock groups because they were more fearful.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…On this view, it may be a mistake to interpret the outcomes of the context preference tests in terms of differences in the strength of a context-US association. Second, it may be that the unconditioned preference for dark shown in a light/dark twocompartment apparatus is increased by fear (Aitken, 1974;Allison, Larson, & Jensen, 1967). Thus, a long time spent in the former shock context would not necessarily reflect limited context conditioning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of a Discrete Signal on Context Conditioning: Assessment by Preference and Freezing Tests

Maes

LoLordo

1996

Learning and Motivation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experiments with rats assessed conditioning to contextual cues after the delivery of footshocks that were either signaled by a discrete stimulus or unsignaled. Two different tests were used. The first was a context preference test in which subjects were allowed to move freely in a brightly lit, unconditionally aversive context and the former shock context. The second test consisted of scoring freezing behavior while the animals were confined to the former conditioning context. During context preference tests, signaled-shock animals spent more time in the conditioning context and/or entered that context more frequently than did unsignaled-shock subjects. However, freezing tests largely failed to detect a difference between groups. These results were discussed in terms of possible interactions between the formation of contextshock, signal-shock, and context-signal associations and their effect on performance in each of the two types of tests. ᭧

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of a Discrete Signal on Context Conditioning: Assessment by Preference and Freezing Tests

Maes

LoLordo

1996

Learning and Motivation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rats tend to avoid brightly illuminated places (see review by Hill, 1978Hill, , p. 1179, and their preference for dark or dimly illuminated places is markedly enhanced when they are frightened (Allison, Larson, & Jensen, 1967; Whittleton et al 1965). However, avoidance impairments have also been observedwith a "noise-off" CS and whenrats were required to move toward the source of the acoustic signal (Hurwitz & Dillow, 1968;Myers, 1960;Whittleton et al 1965).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bidirectional avoidance by mice as a function of CS, US, and apparatus variables

Bignami

Alleva

Amorico

et al. 1985

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acquisition of two-way avoidance by mice was slower with a light CS than with a buzzer CS, with punishment of intertrial responses than without punishment, and with a short CS-CS interval than with a long CS-CS interval (30 vs. 60 sec). Light-cued avoidance was little affected by shock level (.35-1.5 mA), whereas mice trained with the buzzer CS learned faster at 1.5 mA. Animals required to move away from light or toward light showed comparable rates of acquisition. Other CS, US, and apparatus variables (directionality of cue, maximal shock duration, and presence vs. absence of a central partition in the shuttlebox) interacted in a complex fashion with those already mentioned. This resulted in widely differing performances in what may superficially appear to be different versions of the same task. The differences in mouse and rat responses to some of the variables can contribute to an understanding of the interactions between organismic and test factors and the relative explanatory value of alternative avoidance models.

show abstract

“…We would suppose that rearing is not one of the rat's innate defense reactions, but that running is. So too, apparently, is running from a black box to a white box (Allison, Larson, & Jensen, 1967).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A failure to reinforce instrumental behavior by terminating a stimulus that had been paired with shock

Bolles

Tuttle

1967

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acquired fear, brightness preference, and one-way shuttlebox performance

Cited by 45 publications

References 3 publications

The Effect of a Discrete Signal on Context Conditioning: Assessment by Preference and Freezing Tests

The Effect of a Discrete Signal on Context Conditioning: Assessment by Preference and Freezing Tests

Bidirectional avoidance by mice as a function of CS, US, and apparatus variables

A failure to reinforce instrumental behavior by terminating a stimulus that had been paired with shock

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About