Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Suppression of operant vs consummatory behavior.

M J DeCosta, J J Ayres

    Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
    |July 1, 1971
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Two issues in Pavlovian fear conditioning: selective fear of bright vs. dark, and CS determinants of CR form.

    Behavioural processes·2014
    Same author

    Treatments that weaken Pavlovian conditioned fear and thwart its renewal in rats: implications for treating human phobias.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes·2001
    Same author

    Blocked and overshadowed stimuli are weakened in their ability to serve as blockers and second-order reinforcers in Pavlovian fear conditioning.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes·1999
    Same author

    Converging evidence for one-trial context fear conditioning with an immediate shock: importance of shock potency.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes·1997
    Same author

    Conditioned stimulus determinants of conditioned response form in Pavlovian fear conditioning.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes·1996
    Same author

    A deficit in one-trial context fear conditioning is not due to opioid analgesia.

    Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior·1994

    Conditioned suppression of bar pressing is more profound and stable than dipper licking suppression. Bar pressing suppression also shows slower extinction, indicating distinct learning dynamics between these behavioral measures.

    Area of Science:

    • Behavioral neuroscience
    • Comparative psychology

    Background:

    • Conditioned suppression is a key paradigm for studying learned fear and aversion.
    • Comparing different response measures (e.g., bar pressing, dipper licking) is crucial for understanding the nuances of this phenomenon.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To compare the magnitude and variability of conditioned suppression between bar pressing and dipper licking responses.
    • To investigate the stability and inter-trial correlations of these suppression measures.

    Main Methods:

    • Two steady-state experiments were conducted comparing conditioned suppression of bar pressing and dipper licking.
    • A transient state experiment was used to eliminate adventitious punishment effects.
    • Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were computed to assess response correlations.

    Related Experiment Videos

    Main Results:

    • Suppression of bar pressing was consistently more profound and stable than dipper licking suppression.
    • Measures of suppression for bar pressing and dipper licking were uncorrelated.
    • Internal consistency of suppression measures was higher for bar pressing, except under specific conditions of complete suppression.
    • In a transient state, bar press suppression was more profound and extinguished more slowly.

    Conclusions:

    • Bar pressing and dipper licking exhibit distinct characteristics in conditioned suppression paradigms.
    • The findings suggest differences in the underlying learning processes or response mechanisms.
    • Bar pressing may represent a more robust and sensitive measure for studying certain aspects of conditioned suppression.