Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1968 Nov;11(6):767–775. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-767

Some effects of the conditioned suppression paradigm on operant discrimination performance1

Kenneth M Weiss
PMCID: PMC1338629  PMID: 5706542

Abstract

Three experiments were conducted with rats to determine the effects of electric shock on responding during an operant discrimination. In two of these experiments, a conditioned suppression procedure was superimposed upon a stimulus signalling the availability of food reinforcement (SD). Response rates were greatly suppressed, not only in the warning signal periods which preceded each shock, but in the presence of SD, and the stimulus signalling the unavailability of reinforcement (SΔ) as well. A third experiment, in which a very mild shock was used without a warning signal, demonstrated an increased response rate in SD and SΔ, although this effect was rather unsystematic. In a similar study, Hearst (1965) found an increased rate in SΔ independent of any change in the SD rate. The present study failed to obtain Hearst's effect but illustrated a suppressive effect with a similar procedure.

Full text

PDF
767

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. AMSEL A., MALTZMAN I. The effect upon generalized drive strength of emotionality as inferred from the level of consummatory response. J Exp Psychol. 1950 Oct;40(5):563–569. doi: 10.1037/h0061101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. AMSEL A. The effect upon level of consummatory response of the addition of anxiety to a motivational complex. J Exp Psychol. 1950 Dec;40(6):709–715. doi: 10.1037/h0054409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. ANNAU Z., KAMIN L. J. The conditioned emotional response as a function of intensity of the US. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1961 Aug;54:428–432. doi: 10.1037/h0042199. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Church R. M., Raymond G. A., Beauchamp R. D. Response suppression as a function of intensity and duration of a punishment. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1967 Feb;63(1):39–44. doi: 10.1037/h0024174. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. DUCHARME R., BELANGER D. [The effect of electric stimulation on the activation level and performance]. Can J Psychol. 1961 Jun;15:61–68. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. FLESHLER M., HOFFMAN H. S. A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:529–530. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. HEARST E. STRESS-INDUCED BREAKDOWN OF AN APPETITIVE DISCRIMINATION. J Exp Anal Behav. 1965 May;8:135–146. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1965.8-135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. HOFFMAN H. S., FLESHLER M. A relay sequencing device for scrambling grid shock. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Jul;5:329–330. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-329. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. STERRITT G. M. Inhibition and facilitation of eating by electric shock. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1962 Apr;55:226–229. doi: 10.1037/h0041388. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Strongman K. T. The effect of anxiety on food intake in the rat. Q J Exp Psychol. 1965 Aug;17(3):255–260. doi: 10.1080/17470216508416440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Strongman K. T. The effect of prior exposure to shock on a visual discrimination by rats. Can J Psychol. 1967 Feb;21(1):57–68. doi: 10.1037/h0082966. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. ULLMAN A. D. The experimental production and analysis of a "compulsive eating symptom" in rats. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1951 Dec;44(6):575–581. doi: 10.1037/h0057260. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES