Factors affecting the measurement of classically conditioned fear in rats following exposure to escapable versus inescapable signaled shock.

Osborne, Francis H.; Mattingly, Bruce A.; Redmon, William K.; Osborne, Jeanne S.

doi:10.1037/0097-7403.1.4.364

Cited by 28 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, evidence that fear varies with stressor controllability remains equivocal. Stimuli predicting controllable and uncontrollable aversive events have been found to be differentially fear-inducing in some studies (Brennan & Riccio, 1975;Desiderato & Newman, 1971;Mineka et al, 1984;Mowrer & Viek, 1948;Osborne, Mattingly, Redmon, & Osborne, 1975), but not others (Brimer & Kamin, 1963;Morris, 1974;Payne, 1972;Randich & LoLordo, 1979;Weisman & Litner, 1972). In the most extensive of these studies, Mineka et al (1984) used multiple measures of fear to demonstrate that greater fear is associated with stimuli in the original pretreatment apparatus following inescapable shock than following escapable shock.…”

Section: Conditioned Fear and Neophobia Following Inescapable Shock Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditioned fear and neophobia following inescapable shock

Minor¹

1990

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lick-suppression tests were used in seven experiments to assess the transsituational transfer of fear in the learned helplessness paradigm. Two sources of fear combined to suppress test drinking in inescapably shocked rats. A situational odor was strongly associated with shock pretreatments and mediated the transfer of conditioned fear during testing. Fear of the pretreatment odor was greater following inescapable shock than after escapable shock or restraint. This conditioned suppression was retained for at least 72 h after pretreatment. Neophobia was enhanced as a second, nonassociative reaction to inescapable shock. Unconditioned fear was augmented by a novel odor in the test context, but otherwise was weak and dissipated within 72 h. However, neophobia was necessary for differential conditioned suppression in inescapably shocked rats. The pretreatment odor elicited fear only when tested in a novel context. Initial habituation to the test apparatus reduced conditioned fear. These data provide additional evidence for odor-mediated transfer of helplessness. Conditioned fear and neophobia are discussed in relation to recent anxiety interpretations of the phenomenon.

show abstract

Section: Conditioned Fear and Neophobia Following Inescapable Shock Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditioned fear and neophobia following inescapable shock

Minor¹

1990

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Experimental support for this idea has recently been obtained with the animal model of learned helplessness. In this model, animals that experience uncontrollable shock exhibit a behavioral profile different from that of animals that have control over and can escape an equivalent shock, including an interference with subsequent escape behavior (Overmier and Seligman, 1967; Irwin et al, 1980), increased conditioned fear responses (Osborne et al, 1975), and increased anxiety (Short and Maier, 1993). Converging evidence suggests that the expression of learned helplessness following an uncontrollable stressor requires activation of the serotonergic neurons of the DR, specifically, in the caudal half of the nucleus, and interventions that reduce that activation prevent the development and/or expression of learned helplessness behaviors (Maier et al, 1993, 1994, 1995; Maswood et al, 1998; Grahn et al, 1999; Greenwood et al, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential expression of 5HT‐1A, α_1b adrenergic, CRF‐R1, and CRF‐R2 receptor mRNA in serotonergic, γ‐aminobutyric acidergic, and catecholaminergic cells of the rat dorsal raphe nucleus

Day

Greenwood

Hammack

et al. 2004

J of Comparative Neurology

193

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dorsal raphe nucleus (DR) has a topographic neuroanatomy consistent with the idea that different parts of this nucleus subserve different functions. Here we use dual in situ hybridization to describe the rostral-caudal neurochemical distribution of three major cell groups, serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT), γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), and catecholamine, and their relative colocalization with each other and mRNA encoding four different receptor subtypes that have been described to influence DR responses, namely, 5HT-1A, α 1b adrenergic (α 1b ADR), and corticotropinreleasing factor type 1 (CRF-R1) and 2 (CRF-R2) receptors. Serotonergic and GABAergic neurons were distributed throughout the rostral-caudal extent of the DR, whereas catecholaminergic neurons were generally restricted to the rostral half of the nucleus. These phenotypes essentially represent distinct cell populations, because the neurochemical markers were rarely colocalized. Both 5HT-1A and α 1b ADR mRNA were highly expressed throughout the DR, and the vast majority of serotonergic neurons expressed both receptors. A smaller percentage of GABAergic neurons also expressed 5HT-1A or α 1b ADR mRNA. Very few catecholaminergic cells expressed either 5HT-1A or α 1b ADR mRNA. CRF-R1 mRNA was detected only at very low levels within the DR, and quantitative colocalization studies were not technically feasible. CRF-R2 mRNA was mainly expressed at the middle and caudal levels of the DR. At midlevels, CRF-R2 mRNA was expressed exclusively in serotonin neurons, whereas, at caudal levels, approximately half the CRF-R2 mRNA was expressed in GABAergic neurons. The differential distribution of distinct neurochemical phenotypes lends support to the idea of functional differentiation of the DR. Indexing termsGABA; tyrosine hydroxylase; serotonin; corticotropin; dual in situ hybridizationThe dorsal raphe nucleus (DR) contains the highest concentration of serotonin neurons in the brain and has extensive ascending projections that innervate most forebrain structures (Steinbusch, 1981). These projection neurons have been shown to regulate a wide variety of physiological responses and behaviors, including sleep-wake states, feeding, nociception, *Correspondence to: Heidi E.W. Day, Department of Psychology and Center for Neuroscience, University of Colorado, Muenzinger Building, Rm. D244, Boulder, CO 80309-0345. E-mail: heididay@psych.colorado.edu. (Jacobs and Azmitia, 1992). In addition, increasing evidence has implicated serotonin in affective conditions, such as depression and anxiety (Kahn et al., 1988;Graeff et al., 1996). NIH Public AccessHowever, the DR is not a homogeneous structure, and serotonin neurons have been classified into subpopulations according to their electrophysiological properties in behaving animals. For example, the activity of type I neurons that make up the majority of serotonergic neurons is correlated with the degree of behavioral arousal and motor activity (Jacobs and Fornal, 1999). In contrast, the firing rate of the small group...

show abstract

“…Requests for reprints should be sent to Dorothy E. McAllister, Psychology Department, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois 60115. 1968; Desiderato, Butler, & Meyer, 1966;Goldstein, 1960Goldstein, , 1976Kalish, 1954;Kent, Wagner, & Gannon, 1960;King&Cairncross,1974 Weldin, & Cohen, 1974;Osborne, Mattingly, Redmon, & Osborne, 1975;Spear & Parsons, 1976).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Escape-from-fear performance as affected by handling method and an additional CS-shock treatment

McAllister

Hampton

et al. 1980

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experiment 1 demonstrated that hurdle-jumping, escape-from-fear (EFF) performance was affected deleteriously when the handling of the rats was by the tail rather than the body and was facilitated by the administration, just prior to EFF training, of one additional CS-shock pairing along with the opportunity to jump the hurdle. Additional experiments elucidated the basis for the effect of these two variables. Experiment 2 indicated that tail handling degraded performance by decreasing reinforcement. In Experiment 3, the facilitatory effect of the extra CS-shock treatment was found to result from the occurrence of a response at the termination of the pairing and not from the CS-shock pairing per se.In a typical escape-from-fear (EFF) task, classical fear-conditioning trials (CS-shock) are administered in one side of a two-compartment apparatus. Later, in the absence of shock, subjects are allowed to jump a hurdle to an adjacent safe compartment and, thereby, to escape the fear-eliciting CS and situational cues in the shock compartment. Theoretically, the learning of the instrumental hurdle-jumping response is motivated by these two sources of fear and is reinforced by the reduction of this fear following the response.Recently, Crawford, Masterson, and Wilson (1977) have reported difficulty in consistently obtaining such instrumental learning based either on fear of the CS alone or on fear of both the CS and situational cues. In order to obtain learning, they found it necessary to administer not only the classicalfear-conditioning trials but also an additional such trial, along with the opportunity to jump the hurdle, just prior to regular hurdle-jumping training. The necessity for the inclusion of such an additional step in the normal procedures is surprising because there is a relatively large literature reporting successful escape-from-fear learning without such a requirement. These studies have been conducted in a number of laboratories with different experimenters, with different strains and sex of rats, and with differences in a number of specific details of apparatus and procedure (e.g., Brown & Jacobs,

show abstract

Factors affecting the measurement of classically conditioned fear in rats following exposure to escapable versus inescapable signaled shock.

Cited by 28 publications

References 6 publications

Conditioned fear and neophobia following inescapable shock

Conditioned fear and neophobia following inescapable shock

Differential expression of 5HT‐1A, α_1b adrenergic, CRF‐R1, and CRF‐R2 receptor mRNA in serotonergic, γ‐aminobutyric acidergic, and catecholaminergic cells of the rat dorsal raphe nucleus

Escape-from-fear performance as affected by handling method and an additional CS-shock treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Factors affecting the measurement of classically conditioned fear in rats following exposure to escapable versus inescapable signaled shock.

Cited by 28 publications

References 6 publications

Conditioned fear and neophobia following inescapable shock

Conditioned fear and neophobia following inescapable shock

Differential expression of 5HT‐1A, α1b adrenergic, CRF‐R1, and CRF‐R2 receptor mRNA in serotonergic, γ‐aminobutyric acidergic, and catecholaminergic cells of the rat dorsal raphe nucleus

Escape-from-fear performance as affected by handling method and an additional CS-shock treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Differential expression of 5HT‐1A, α_1b adrenergic, CRF‐R1, and CRF‐R2 receptor mRNA in serotonergic, γ‐aminobutyric acidergic, and catecholaminergic cells of the rat dorsal raphe nucleus