Signaling and affective functions of conditioned aversive stimuli in an appetitive choice discrimination: US intensity effects

Ghiselli, William B.; Fowler, Harry

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(76)90014-x

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analysis of suppression ratios over the course of additional training trials showed that the es effect extinguished comparably rapidly for all groups and was completely absent by the third block of five es and five es presentations. Furthermore, there was no indication of areversal of speed effects attributable to the ess on subsequent trials prior to the onset of discrimination learning, Comparable to Ghiselli and Fowler's (1976) findings, the present results show that the ess initially exerted differential suppressing effects on speed of running, attesting to the conditioned aversive property of the es + and the conditioned reinforcing property of the es -relative to the eso control. These differential speed effects also extinguished rapidly but, surprisingly, they were unaffected by reward magnitude even though this variable itself affected speed of running.…”

Section: Learning Measuressupporting

confidence: 68%

“…In support of such a transformation, Ghiselli and Fowler (1976) have shown, on the basis of differential speed effects, that AvCSs, when contingent upon a running response in an Ap choice discrimination, will rapidly lose their initial suppressing properties and subsequently function as signals for the presence (CS +) or absence (CS -) of the new (Ap) reinforcer. Accordingly, when administered for the reinforced response, the AvCS + (as it is transformed) facilitates choice learning by signaling, i.e., mediating, the presence of the reinforcer, whereas the AvCS -retards learning by signaling the reinforcer's absence (Fowler et al, 1973;Ghiselli & Fowler, 1976). However, when administered for the nonreinforced response, the AvCS + can retard learning by inappropriately signaling the reinforcer's presence, whereas the AvCS -can facilitate learning by appropriately signaling the reinforcer's absence.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pavlovian aversive to instrumental appetitive transfer: Evidence for across-reinforcement blocking effects

Fowler

Goodman

Zanich

1977

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats received Pavlovian aversive (shock) conditioning in which white noise was established for different groups as a es+, eso, or es-. Then, in an appetitive T-maze discrimination, the ess were presented contingent upon adesignated correct response for which food reinforcement was factorially varied at 0, 1, 2, or 4 pellets. Although the es+ suppressed and the es-facilitated speed of running in the correct arm at the start of discrimination training, these effects extinguished rapidly and did not interact with reward magnitude. Furthermore, choice learning was faciltated by the es+ and retarded by the es-, with these effects being comparable for the 1-to 4-pellet reinforcement conditions, but ab sent for the O-pellet condition. These findings are difficult to reconcile with a transfer interpretation positing a general signaling property of the es and are better interpreted as across-reinforcement blocking effects: By predicting a preferred outcome (safetyl comparable to the preferred outcome of food reinforcement, the es-blocks (retardsl the association of reinforcement and the SD; conversely, by predicting a nonpreferred Ishock] outcome discrepant from the preferred food outcome, the CS+ "counterblocks" (enhancesl the association of reinforcement and the SD.

show abstract

Section: Learning Measuressupporting

confidence: 68%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pavlovian aversive to instrumental appetitive transfer: Evidence for across-reinforcement blocking effects

Fowler

Goodman

Zanich

1977

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Stage 3 data for the other groups indicate that the effects of water deprivation and prior unpaired CS and shock-US deliveries contributed to membrane CR acquisition in a manner consistent with the associative account of mediation (e.g., Fowler et al, 1973;Ghiselli & Fowler, 1976;Overmier & Schwarzkopf, 1974;Trapold & Overmier, 1972). The associative position would explain the faster membrane CR acquisition under high relative to moderate deprivation by first noting the positive relationship between thirst and jaw-movement conditioning in Stage 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Other investigations (e.g., Fowler, Fago, Domber, & Hockhauser, 1973; Ghiselli & Fowler, 1976; Overmier & Schwarzkopf, 1974;Trapold & Overrnier, 1972) have postulated an "associative" account of mediation. Their position emphasizes that the various classical conditioning operations embedded within instrumental conditioning situations establish the CS with general signaling properties for the delivery of reinforcement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of an aversive CS+ and CS− under deprivation upon successive classical appetitive and aversive conditioning

Bromage

Scavio

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Support for the generality of blocking effects for instrumental learning also comes from a recent series of simple discrimination experiments with rats (Fowler, in press;Fowler, Goodman, & Zanich, 1977;Ghiselli & Fowler, 1976 Figure 3 shows the behavior maintained by the four conditions across the 12 sessions of training. The differences among the conditions gradually increased with continued training.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information effects on the response-reinforcer association

Williams

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pigeons were trained on a discrete-trial delayed reinforcement procedure with respect to one response key that was periodically illuminated. In some conditions, a second response key, or a tone, both previously paired with reinforcement, was interpolated in the delay-ofreinforcement interval. In comparison to a control condition with neither stimulus in the delay interval, the interpolated stimulus attenuated (blocked) the amount of responding that was maintained by the delayed reinforcement contingency. The degree of blocking was unaffected by whether the interpolated stimulus was the tone or keylight, in spite of the fact that the keylight evoked responding and the tone did not. A second study showed that the blocking effects involved the response-reinforcer association in that blocking occurred when the delayed reinforcement was response-dependent but did not occur when reinforcement was responseindependent. The results thus show that response-reinforcer associations are affected by informational variables in the same manner as has been shown for stimulus-reinforcer associations. They also demonstrate that preexisting stimulus-reinforcer associations can block response-reinforcer associations, thus suggesting that both types of association depend upon the same associative process.Research during the past 10 years has shown that "informational" variables are an important determinant of whether conditioning will occur. Perhaps the simplest, and most compelling, demonstration of an informational effect is the phenomenon of "blocking" (cf. Kamin, 1%9). The typical procedure for producing blocking is to pair some compound stimulus (AB) with reinforcement. Normally, both elements gain stimulus control, as shown when they are tested separately. If pretraining is given with one of the elements (A) alone, however, acquisition of stimulus control by the other element (B) during compound AB training is much weaker. Thus, pretraining with A blocks control by B. The importance of the finding is its demonstration that temporal contiguity between element B and the reinforcer is not sufficient to cause conditioning to occur. Instead, the stimulus also must provide information about the occurrence of the reinforcer that is not already provided by other events in the situation.The process underlying information effects like blocking currently is a matter of dispute (cf. Mackintosh, 1975). The experiments to be reported are not concerned with this theoretical issue, however, but instead are addressed to defining the domain over which blocking effects occur. More specifically, do informational variables determine the effects of

show abstract

Signaling and affective functions of conditioned aversive stimuli in an appetitive choice discrimination: US intensity effects

Cited by 14 publications

References 16 publications

Pavlovian aversive to instrumental appetitive transfer: Evidence for across-reinforcement blocking effects

Pavlovian aversive to instrumental appetitive transfer: Evidence for across-reinforcement blocking effects

Effects of an aversive CS+ and CS− under deprivation upon successive classical appetitive and aversive conditioning

Information effects on the response-reinforcer association

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About