The extinction of shuttlebox avoidance

Bolles, Robert C.; Moot, Seward A.; Grossen, Neal E.

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(71)90013-0

Cited by 28 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A within-session decline has often been used as evidence supporting the reinforcement attenuation effect of dopamine antagonists (Fouriezos et al, 1978;Dickinson et al, 2000). Second, one behavioral technique (Experiment 4; Figure 2c) that is known to attenuate reinforcement of the CS in this model (Bolles et al, 1971) produced a pattern of avoidance responding decline, as well as recovery, very similar to that produced by haloperidol. Other (unpublished) data from our lab indicate that this behavioral technique can even substitute for haloperidol in maintaining decreased avoidance responding, indicating a functional equivalence between haloperidol and 'reinforcement attenuation'.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…This experiment examined whether reinforcement attenuation contributes to the antipsychotic-induced avoidance responding decline by comparing the effect of haloperidol with a behavioral technique that is known to attenuate reinforcement of the stimulus in this model (Bolles et al, 1971). Forty-two rats were initially trained for conditioned avoidance responding for a total of 12 sessions.…”

Section: Experiments 4: Functional Equivalence Between Haloperidol Trementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Time Course of the Antipsychotic Effect and the Underlying Behavioral Mechanisms

Fletcher

Kapur

2006

Neuropsychopharmacol

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antipsychotic drugs work for patients only when given repeatedly. The overall temporal pattern of symptom improvement is not clear. Some recent data question the traditional 'delayed-onset' hypothesis and suggest that the onset of antipsychotic response may be relatively early, and the improvement may grow with repeated treatment. The present study systematically examined the time course of the antipsychotic effect and the underlying behavioral mechanisms using a conditioned avoidance response (CAR) model. Rats repeatedly treated with either typical (haloperidol) or atypical (olanzapine, risperidone) antipsychotics, but not anxiolytics (chlordiazepoxide), show an early-onset, progressive across-session decline in avoidance responding, which re-emerges when the treatment is stopped. This effect is dose-dependent, transferable between antipsychotics, and cannot be attributed to simple sedation or motor side effects. Furthermore, we found that the pattern of this drug-induced decline depends on the number of exposures to the conditioned stimulus in the presence of the drug, and is best understood as the result of drug-induced attenuation of the reinforcing effectiveness of the conditioned stimulus. We also found that repeated drug exposure can create a drug interoceptive state that allows the attenuated reinforcing property of the stimulus to be maintained over time. Together, these data provide preclinical support for the newly postulated 'early-onset' hypothesis, and suggest that the repeated antipsychotic CAR model may be useful for understanding the neurochemical and behavioral mechanisms underlying the clinical effects of antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Experiments 4: Functional Equivalence Between Haloperidol Trementioning

confidence: 99%

Time Course of the Antipsychotic Effect and the Underlying Behavioral Mechanisms

Fletcher

Kapur

2006

Neuropsychopharmacol

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, a comparable design is currently being attempted in a two-way shuttlebox situation where place cues are as irrelevant as they are in the operant chamber. Although Bolles, Moot, and Grossen (1971) recently found greater resistance to extinction of avoidance with classical as compared to a nondifferential punishment procedure (OE), they employed a one-way shuttle response which occurred in a situation in which place cues were not irrelevant.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of two procedures for breaking the response-reinforcement contingency in discriminated barpress avoidance

Jackson

Scheuer

1972

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Whether the function of feedback is to provide the subject with information regarding the nonoccurrence of shock or it acts as a conditioned inhibitor of fear or serves both functions is as yet unresolved. Bolles, Moot, and Grossen (1971) compared the removal of either feedback or CS termination during extinction of avoidance behavior. Their results demonstrated that either contingency can serve to maintain avoidance behavior in extinction, but only in the absence of further shock.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of response-contingent feedback stimuli under two types of avoidance extinction conditions

Scheuer

Schonfeld

1979

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four groups of rats were conditioned to avoid shock in a two-way shuttlebox. During acquisition. each response both precluded a brief programmed shock and produced a I-sec feedback signal. CS termination was not permitted during either acquisition or' extinction. During extinction, response-produced or yoked feedback was combined with either 100% response-independent shock or no-shock conditions. Greatest resistance to extinction of avoidance behavior was obtained when response-produced feedback occurred in the absence of shock relative to any other combination of these events. These results, when compared to those of previous studies investigating the role of warning signal termination in combination with the presence or absence of shock in extinction (Hartley, 1968), clearly reveal a functional similarity between feedback and CS termination.The most prevalent interpretation of discriminative avoidance behavior has been the two-factor theory, originally discussed by Mowrer and Lamoreaux (1946) and more recently by Solomon and Brush (1956). According to the theory, conditioning is accomplished by both Pavlovian and operant processes. A classically conditioned fear response develops by repeated pairings of CS and US. This fear reaction motivates the subject to avoid the US. Reinforcement of avoidance occurs when fear is reduced by response-produced termination of the CS and preclusion of the US.An alternative explanation of avoidance views the CS, CS termination, and the presence or absence of the US as having discriminative rather than motivational properties (Mowrer & Jones, 1945;Sheffield, 1949). When one or all of these cues are altered during extinction, avoidance behavior declines due to generalization decrement. Thus, if a subject is avoiding either a high proportion of shocks during terminal acquisition or all of them, a no-shock extinction procedure should prolong extinction over a procedure in which shocks occur on all extinction trials. Similarly, any extinction procedure that alters the consequences of responding from those occurring during the acquisition phase, whether the events be CS termination, US avoidance, or any other highly discriminable events, should facilitate extinction of the behavior.This study was a portion of a thesis submitted by the second author in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in psychology at Florida Atlantic University.

show abstract

The extinction of shuttlebox avoidance

Cited by 28 publications

References 8 publications

Time Course of the Antipsychotic Effect and the Underlying Behavioral Mechanisms

Time Course of the Antipsychotic Effect and the Underlying Behavioral Mechanisms

A comparison of two procedures for breaking the response-reinforcement contingency in discriminated barpress avoidance

The effect of response-contingent feedback stimuli under two types of avoidance extinction conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About