Effect of pretraining and instructions on avoidance conditioning in preschool children

Moffat, Gene H.; Miller, Frank D.

doi:10.1016/0022-0965(71)90069-5

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The purpose of the present experiment was to investigate the CS-only, punishment, and UI extinction procedures in preschool children , using omission of entertaining material as the aversive event. Omission of entertaining material had been effective in establishing avoidance responding in young children (Moffat, 1972;Moffat & Miller, 1971). Moreover, the avoidance response, once acquired by young children , is highly resistant to extinction with the CS-only procedure (Moffat, 1972).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of three extinction procedures following avoidance conditioning in preschool children

Moffat

McGown

1974

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following acquisition of an instrumental avoidance response, 36 preschool Ss were given 200 extinction trials. Omission of children's songs served as the aversive event. Three extinction procedures were established: (a) a CS-only procedure in which the music was never omitted, (b) Ii punishment procedure in which music omission was response contingent, and (c) a procedure whereby music omission was unavoidable and inescapable. The results were dependent upon the extinction procedures being compared; however, the CS-only procedure was most resistant to ex tinction. The most commonly used procedure for extinguishing avoidance responses consists of presenting the warning signal (CS) while withholding the aversive stimulus (US) which had been associated with it during acquisition. However, Davenport and Olson (1968) argued that a more appropriate procedure would be to make the US unavoidable and the CS inescapable until the US occurred , since the reinforcing event in acquiring an avoidance response is presumed to be the escape of the CS and/or omission of the US. Using this procedure, Davenport and Olson (1968) reported rapid and reliable decreases in avoidance responding in rats. Hartley (1968) compared two unavoidable and inescapable US procedures (UI) with the typical CS-only extinction procedure in rats. No significant differences were reported between the two UI procedures. Ss in both UI groups extinguished significantly faster than Ss in the CS-only group. Bolles, Moot, and Grossen (I 971) investigated CS-only, punishment, and two UI procedures in the ex tinction of shu ttIebox avoidance in rats. Extinction occurred most readily when Ss acquired an effective alternative response to avoid shock (Le., punishment). When all behaviors avoided shock (i.e., CS-only), avoidance was extremely resistant to extinction. When Ss continued to receive unavoidable shock (Le ., VI procedures) avoidance responding felI to a level intermediate between the two other procedures. Research comparing various extinction of avoidance responding in human Ss has not been extensive. Meyer (1970) investigated CS-only, punishment, and two UI extinction procedures in co lIege Ss. A 6-sec-duration, 40-psi air blast behind the right ear served as the US. Meyer (1970) stated that the CS-only was the least effective and punishment was most effective in *Reprint requests should be sent to the first author,

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of three extinction procedures following avoidance conditioning in preschool children

Moffat

McGown

1974

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a signalled avoidance procedure (i.e. the oncoming aversive event was signalled during the negative reinforcement schedule), children engaged in avoidance behaviour, such as pulling a lever, to avoid timeout from a cartoon movie (Baer, 1960), withdrawal of a mechanical puppet's attention (Baer, 1962), the omission of nursery rhymes (Moffat & Miller, 1971), the interruption of listening to music (Moffat, 1972), and timeout from access to a story (O'Leary, 1974).…”

Section: Experiential Negative Reinforcement Procedures In Humansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negative Reinforcement in the Description-Experience Gap

Smieszhala¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When faced with decisions in everyday life, sometimes an individual knows the probability of an event occurring and bases their decision on that knowledge (decision from description). In other situations, the individual does not know that probability and bases their decision on information learned through experience (decision from experience). In decisions from description, people are more risk averse in decisions involving gains (positive reinforcement) and more risk seeking in decisions involving losses (negative punishment). The reverse is evident in decisions from experience – the description-experience gap. Across eight experiments I investigated decisions about loss prevention (negative reinforcement). These types of decisions are analogous to many everyday decisions, particularly within medical contexts but have not been examined previously. Participants completed a computer task where they could prevent the loss of points (negative reinforcement condition), as well as gain (positive reinforcement condition) and lose (negative punishment condition) points by clicking on images of doors. On each trial, participants chose between a safe (guaranteed chance of a smaller outcome) and a risky (non-guaranteed chance of a larger outcome) alternative. Across experiments, I varied the outcome probability of the risky alternative’s larger outcome. In Study 1 I investigated whether I would observe a description-experience gap in decisions involving loss prevention. I also examined whether I would replicate a description-experience gap in decisions about gains and decisions about losses. Participants completed description, experience, and hybrid (i.e. a combination of descriptive information and experience) conditions. The outcome probability of the risky choice alternative’s larger outcome was either 50% or 20% across experiments. In decisions about loss prevention, information obtained from description produced lower risk preference than information obtained from a) experience when the outcome probability of the larger outcome was 50%, and b) hybrid information when the outcome probability of the larger outcome was 20%. Regarding decisions about gains and decisions about losses, the data of the current thesis lend only partial support to the phenomenon of a description-experience gap. Because in many everyday situations an individual has both descriptive information and experience available to them, in Study 2 I investigated decisions from hybrid information more closely. I investigated whether the hybrid’s description or its experience component drives risk preference in situations where those two components conflict. Participants completed experience, hybrid/conflict, and hybrid/congruent conditions. The outcome probability of the risky choice alternative’s larger outcome was either 50%, 20%, or 10% across experiments. Results suggested that conflicting descriptions affected participants’ choice behaviour where the likelihood of the risky alternative’s larger outcome occurring was 10% and 50%, but not when it was 20%. Across experiments, choice behaviour in decisions about loss prevention and in decisions from hybrid information did not consistently follow the predictions of previous literature regarding decisions about gains/losses, and decisions from description/experience, respectively. Decisions about loss prevention and decisions from hybrid information should be added to existing frameworks of decisions making to enable researchers to arrive at predictions of choice behaviour in those decisions. I proposed first steps towards a framework of decisions from hybrid information.

show abstract

Avoidance conditioning in young children with interruption of a positive stimulus as the aversive event

Moffat

1972

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of pretraining and instructions on avoidance conditioning in preschool children

Cited by 5 publications

References 4 publications

Effect of three extinction procedures following avoidance conditioning in preschool children

Effect of three extinction procedures following avoidance conditioning in preschool children

Negative Reinforcement in the Description-Experience Gap

Avoidance conditioning in young children with interruption of a positive stimulus as the aversive event

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About