2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2018.02.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intolerance of uncertainty as a vulnerability factor for excessive and inflexible avoidance behavior

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
46
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 91 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
2
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The explanatory potential of operant theory was further elaborated by classic research on Sidman avoidance (Sidman, 1953) showing that avoidance in the absence of external warning stimuli is maintained by an overall reduction in US-frequency (Herrnstein & Hineline, 1966), a finding further supported by research with humans (Baer, 1961;Hassoulas et al, 2014;Lejuez et al, 1998). In discriminated free-operant avoidance, responding in the presence of a warning signal delays upcoming shock, but responses during a safety signal (or absence of the warning signal) have no effect (Flores et al, 2018). As a result, responding becomes discriminated, occurring at higher rates under stimulus conditions leading to aversive event frequency reduction (see Schöenfeld (1950) and Dinsmoor (1977) for alternative accounts based on the role of temporal or proprioceptive stimuli in unsignaled avoidance).…”
Section: Theories Of Avoidance Learningmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The explanatory potential of operant theory was further elaborated by classic research on Sidman avoidance (Sidman, 1953) showing that avoidance in the absence of external warning stimuli is maintained by an overall reduction in US-frequency (Herrnstein & Hineline, 1966), a finding further supported by research with humans (Baer, 1961;Hassoulas et al, 2014;Lejuez et al, 1998). In discriminated free-operant avoidance, responding in the presence of a warning signal delays upcoming shock, but responses during a safety signal (or absence of the warning signal) have no effect (Flores et al, 2018). As a result, responding becomes discriminated, occurring at higher rates under stimulus conditions leading to aversive event frequency reduction (see Schöenfeld (1950) and Dinsmoor (1977) for alternative accounts based on the role of temporal or proprioceptive stimuli in unsignaled avoidance).…”
Section: Theories Of Avoidance Learningmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Other research with humans has employed fear extinction procedures to investigate low-cost avoidance (Vervliet & Indekeu, 2015;Vervliet et al, 2017;Rattel et al, 2017), avoidance generalization (Boyle et al, 2016;Cameron et al, 2015;van Meurs et al, 2014), the impact of safety signal learning (Sheynin et al, 2014) and the effects of US devaluation (Flores et al, 2018;Gillan et al, 2014).…”
Section: Varieties Of Avoidance Extinctionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, Flores et al (2018) did not incorporate a competing reward for US-avoidance, PREPRINT therefore may not fully tap into the pathological domain of safety behaviour. Furthermore, this novel procedure had no room for the measurement of conditioned fear to the CS+ after safety behaviour had been performed.…”
Section: Preprintmentioning
confidence: 99%