Effects of inescapable shock on subsequent avoidance performance: Role of response repertoire changes

Anisman, Hymie; Waller, T. Gary

doi:10.1016/s0091-6773(73)80183-x

Cited by 80 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The possibility that learned inactivity, freezing, or the punishment of movement is the cause of the helplessness phenomenon has been proposed by others (Anisman, deCatanzaro, & Remington, 1978;Anisman & Waller, 1973;Bracewell & Black, 1974;Levis, 1976). The present explanation differs from those of other investigators in an important way, however.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 44%

A potential shock-reducing contingency in the backshock technique: Implications for learned helplessness

Wilson¹,

Butcher²

1980

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 44%

A potential shock-reducing contingency in the backshock technique: Implications for learned helplessness

Wilson¹,

Butcher²

1980

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Place avoidance requires the initiation of movement; freezing involves suppression of movement. Elevated freezing interferes with the ability of rats to initiate active (place) avoidance (Sidman 1962a,b;Anisman 1973;Anisman and Waller 1973;Holahan and White 2001). The elimination of both of these incompatible behaviors by amygdala inactivation is further evidence that its effects were due to elimination or attenuation of a CIR rather than impaired the ability to perform either of the observed behaviors.…”

Section: Identification Of the Ur/crmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is obvious that the two behaviors cannot occur at the same time, and it has been shown that elevations in freezing interfere with expression of active avoidance (Anisman andWaller 1972, 1973;Anisman 1973). Although they represent opposing behavioral tendencies, freezing and place avoidance are both elicited by aversive contextual CSs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intra-Amygdala Muscimol Injections Impair Freezing and Place Avoidance in Aversive Contextual Conditioning

Holahan¹,

White²

2004

Learn. Mem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats were trained by shocking them in a closed compartment. When subsequently tested in the same closed compartment with no shock, normal rats showed an increased tendency to freeze. They also showed an increased tendency to actively avoid the compartment when given access to an adjacent neutral compartment for the first time. Amygdala inactivation with bilateral muscimol injections before training attenuated freezing and eliminated avoidance during the test. Rats trained in a normal state and given intra-amygdala muscimol injections before the test did not freeze or avoid the shock-paired compartment. This pattern of effects suggests that amygdala inactivation during training impaired acquisition of a conditioned response (CR) due either to inactivation of a neural substrate essential for its storage or to elimination of a memory modulation effect that facilitates its storage in some other brain region(s). The elimination of both freezing and active avoidance by amygdala inactivation during testing suggests that neither of these behaviors is the CR. The possibility that the CR is a set of internal responses that produces both freezing and avoidance as well as other behavioral effects is discussed.

show abstract

“…Anisman andWaller (1973), Bracewell andBlack (1974), and Weiss (1976a, 1976b) have all argued that a motor response of inactivity is acquired during exposure to inescapable shock and that this reduced movement response transfers to the escape/ avoidance test situation. These positions differ only with regard to the mechanism by which the lack of movement in response to shock is acquired.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inescapable shock and food-competition dominance in rats

Rapaport

Maier

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inescapable electric shock disrupts escape-avoidance learning in another apparatus. This . study demonstrates a deficit in a nonlearning task in which no aversive stimulus occurs.In Experiment 1, inescapable shock lowered rats' dominance in a food-competition situation relative to restrained controls. In Experiment 2, inescapable shock lowered rats dominance in the same food-competition situation relative to a group that received the equivalent amount of escapable shock, demonstrating that the inescapability of the shock caused at least part of the decrement observed in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 does not find that inescapable shock caused a significant difference in food consumed or running time when the rats were tested alone, showing it unlikely that the dominance effects were caused by decreased hunger or reduced running following inescapable shock.Variations in the degree to which organisms can control electric shocks to which they are exposed has both behavioral and physiological consequences (see Maier & Seligman, 1976 for a review), although the behaviors that have been shown to be influenced by exposure to inescapable shock all involve learning, aversive stimuli, or both. The range of behaviors influenced by prior exposure to inescapable shock remains unknown. There should be boundary conditions so that not all behaviors would be affected, but these conditions have not been explored. The purpose of the present series of studies was to discover whether exposure to inescapable shock can produce deficits in psychological processes other than learning in situations in which aversive stimuli do not occur. This seemed a reasonable first step in attempting to delineate the behavioral boundary conditions of inescapable shock effects.We chose to study whether exposure to inescapable shock would reduce the organism's position in a dominance hierarchy established in a food-competition situation. This seemed a reasonable choice because no obvious aversive stimulus such as electric shock is involved and the behavior does not appear to be learned during testing. It could be argued that the encounter between two rats during dominance testing is aversive, but it should be noted that the rats do not fight. Thus, at a minimum, physical pain is not involved. The behavior involved does not appear to be learned during testing, because the hierarchy typically appears on the very first test and remains stable if tested again (Stewart & Palfai, 1967). Because ines-

show abstract

Effects of inescapable shock on subsequent avoidance performance: Role of response repertoire changes

Cited by 80 publications

References 98 publications

A potential shock-reducing contingency in the backshock technique: Implications for learned helplessness

A potential shock-reducing contingency in the backshock technique: Implications for learned helplessness

Intra-Amygdala Muscimol Injections Impair Freezing and Place Avoidance in Aversive Contextual Conditioning

Inescapable shock and food-competition dominance in rats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About