Abstract

Four experiments examined the UCS preexposure phenomenon using conditioned suppression of food-reinforced responding as a measure of excitatory conditioning, and electric shock as a UCS. In Experiment 1, groups of rats were preexposed to unsignaled 0.8-mA electric shocks for 0, 1, 3, 5, or 10 days, and then conditioned with a 0.8-mA electric shock. Preexposure to electric shock 1 day prior to conditioning enhanced the acquisition of a CER, whereas preexposure to electric shock for 3, 5, or 10 days prior to conditioning attenuated the acquisition of a CER as a direct function of the number of days of preexposure. In Experiments 2 and 2A, groups of rats were preexposed to unsignaled electric shocks of 0.3, 0.5, 0.8, or 1.3 mA for 10 days, and then conditioned with a 0.8-mA electric shocl. All groups preexposed to electric shock acquired the CER at a slower rate than a group not preexposed to electric shock. The greatest attenuation of CER conditioning occurred when the same intensity electric shock was used during both the preexposure and conditioning phases. In Experiment 3, groups of rats were preexposed to signaled electric shocks of either 0.5, 0.8, or 1.3 mA, and then conditioned with a 0.8-mA electric shock. All groups preexposed to electric shock acquired the CER at a slower rate than a group not preexposed to electric shock. As in Experiments 2 and 2A, the greatest attenuation of CER conditioning occurred when the same intensity electric shock was used during both the preexposure and conditioning phases. In Experiment 4, groups of rats were preexposed to series of 0.5, 0.8, or 1.3-mA electric shocks which they could escape by performing a chain-pull response. Rats in each of these groups had yoked partners which received the same number, intensity, and temporal pattern of electric shocks, but could not perform a response to escape shock. All groups were then conditioned with a 0.8-mA electric shock. Rats preexposed to escapable electric shocks showed equal or greater attenuation of CER conditioning than rats which could not escape shock during the preexposure phase. These results are discussed in terms of nonassociative and associative explanations of the UCS preexposure phenomenon.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.