Preference behavior in an immediate versus variably delayed shock situation with and without a warning signal.

Badia, Pietro; McBane, Bonnie M; Suter, Steve

doi:10.1037/h0023867

Cited by 55 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Secondly, we find a correlation between dread and social discounting, such that people who more strongly prefer immediate pain show steeper social discounting of pain, and thereby tend to be less altruistic overall. In keeping with previous findings, participants chose to speed up the delivery of pain both for themselves or others, even if this entailed an increased intensity of the pain, consistent with an effect of dread (Badia et al, 1966;Berns et al, 2006;Cook & Barnes, 1964;Hare, 1966a;Loewenstein, 1987;Story et al, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Social discounting of pain

Story

Kurth‐Nelson

Crockett

et al. 2020

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impatience can be formalized as a delay discount rate, describing how the subjective value of reward decreases as it is delayed. By analogy, selfishness can be formalized as a social discount rate, representing how the subjective value of rewarding another person decreases with increasing social distance. Delay and social discount rates for reward are correlated across individuals. However no previous work has examined whether this relationship also holds for aversive outcomes. Neither has previous work described a functional form for social discounting of pain in humans. This is a pertinent question, since preferences over aversive outcomes formally diverge from those for reward. We addressed this issue in an experiment in which healthy adult participants (N = 67) chose the timing and intensity of hypothetical pain for themselves and others. In keeping with previous studies, participants showed a strong preference for immediate over delayed pain. Participants showed greater concern for pain in close others than for their own pain, though this hyperaltruism was steeply discounted with increasing social distance. Impatience for pain and social discounting of pain were weakly correlated across individuals. Our results extend a link between impatience and selfishness to the aversive domain.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Social discounting of pain

Story

Kurth‐Nelson

Crockett

et al. 2020

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this situation, the animals appeared extremely agitated, a condition he described as experimental neurosis (described in Windholz, 1990). Further, when human subjects are given a choice between uncertainty about future shock delivery and predicted immediate shock, they prefer imminent immediate shocks, exhibiting an aversion to uncertainty about the future delivery of shocks (Badia et al, 1966). Thus, cognitive uncertainty can generate a similar stress response as other threatening stimuli (Greco and Roger, 2003); further, it has been proposed that a low threshold to uncertainty is a reliable cognitive marker of depression susceptibility (Liao and Wei, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Profiling coping strategies in male and female rats: Potential neurobehavioral markers of increased resilience to depressive symptoms

Kent

Bardi

Hazelgrove

et al. 2017

Hormones and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coping strategies have been associated with differential stress responsivity, perhaps providing a valuable neurobiological marker for susceptibility to the emergence of depressogenic symptoms or vulnerability to other anxiety-related disorders. Rats profiled with a flexible coping phenotype, for example, exhibit increased neurobiological markers of emotional regulation compared to active and passive copers (Bardi et al., 2012; Lambert et al., 2014). In the current study, responses of male and female rats to prediction errors in a spatial foraging task (dry land maze; DLM) were examined after animals were exposed to chronic unpredictable stress (CUS). Brains were processed following the DLM training/assessment for fos-activation patterns and several measures of neuroplasticity in relevant areas. Behavioral responses observed during both the CUS and DLM phases of testing suggested that males and females employ different means of gathering information such as increased ambulatory exploration in males and rear responses in females. Fecal samples collected during baseline and following CUS swim exposure revealed higher corticosterone (CORT) in active copers, whereas flexible copers had higher dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and DHEA/CORT ratios, both indications of enhanced emotional regulation. Focusing on the neural analysis, flexible copers exhibited fewer fos-immunoreactive cells in the basolateral amygdala and a trend toward lower activation in the insula while encountering the prediction error associated with the DLM probe trial. Coping profiles also differentially influenced markers of neuroplasticity; specifically, flexible copers exhibited higher levels nestin-immunoreactivity (ir). Further, less hippocampal glucocorticoid receptor-ir was observed in the flexible copers than the active and passive copers. In sum, flexible coping rats exhibited evidence of emotional resilience as indicated by several neurobiological measures; however, despite increased rates of depression and related symptoms reported in human females, sex effects weren’t as pervasive as coping strategy profiles in the analysis of neurobiological markers employed in the current study.

show abstract

“…Numerous studies provide empirical evidence for the linkage between uncertainty and stress. In the laboratory, for example, research has shown that anxiety increases when individuals receive unpredictable shocks as opposed to immediate, expected ones (e.g., Badia, McBane, Suter, & Lewis, 1966;Lanzetta & Driscoll, 1966;Pervin, 1963). Similarly, in the field, research has demonstrated that job-related uncertainty is associated with stress (Bordia, Hobman, Jones, Gallois, & Callan, 2004;Mantler, Matejicek, Matheson, & Anisman, 2005;O'Driscoll & Beehr, 1994).…”

Section: Justice Variability and Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Consistently Unfair Better than Sporadically Fair? An Investigation of Justice Variability and Stress

Matta¹,

Scott

Colquitt³

et al. 2017

AMJ

193

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on organizational justice has predominantly focused on between-individual differences in average levels of fair treatment experienced by employees. Recently, researchers have also demonstrated the importance of considering dynamic, withinindividual fluctuations in fair treatment experienced by employees over time. Drawing on uncertainty management theory, we merge these two streams of research and introduce the concept of "justice variability," which captures between-person differences in the stability of fairness over time. Contrary to the intuitive notion that more fairness is always better, our work shows that being treated consistently unfairly can be better for employees than being treated fairly sometimes and unfairly at other times. Specifically, in a lab study, variably fair treatment resulted in greater physiological stress than both consistently fair and consistently unfair treatment. In a multilevel, experience-sampling field study, we replicated the positive association between justice variability and stress, and we also showed that justice variability exacerbated the positive, daily relationship between general workplace uncertainty and stress. Moreover, daily stress mediated the effects of justice variability on daily job dissatisfaction and emotional exhaustion. Finally, we showed that supervisors with more self-control tended to be less variable in their fair treatment over time. "Visually it looks stunning. .. So stop doubting yourself. Be bold. Pie underneath the pastry looks cooked. Do you hear that on top? Good and crusty. So stop feeling upset with yourself. You've got to start believing in yourself." "Why is the oven not on? Hello, derp brain! Why is the oven not on?. .. You donkey!" "Nothing would make me happier to see you rise and absolutely nail the service tonight, okay?" "I wish you'd jump in the oven! That would make my life a lot easier!" (Smith, Weed, & Ramsay, 2005-present) The above quotes are from celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay. Imagine that Gordon is your boss, and, during a single week of work, he directs the above statements toward you, each on a different day. One The authors would like to thank editor Gerard George and three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.

show abstract

Preference behavior in an immediate versus variably delayed shock situation with and without a warning signal.

Cited by 55 publications

References 7 publications

Social discounting of pain

Social discounting of pain

Profiling coping strategies in male and female rats: Potential neurobehavioral markers of increased resilience to depressive symptoms

Is Consistently Unfair Better than Sporadically Fair? An Investigation of Justice Variability and Stress

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About