Factors affecting rats' location during conditioned suppression training

Rick A. Bevins, John J.B. Ayres

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

If freezing underlies barpress conditioned suppression, then it seems odd that auditory cues paired with shock evoke more freezing than do visual cues, yet evoke similar suppression. Bevins and Ayres (1992) found that auditory and visual cues also evoked similar withdrawal from the bar and dipper areas and suggested that such withdrawal could explain the similar suppression. Seeking to understand that withdrawal, we found evidence in the present study that it was due either to adventitious punishment or to place-aversion learning. The cue for shock seemed to set the occasion for such learning. For example, we found that, as training progressed, rats' tendency to leave the bar area during the cue first increased, then decreased, then increased again, reflecting, presumably, shock occurrence first inside, then outside, then inside the bar area again. Despite these changes in the rats' location, barpress suppression remained stable, implying that leaving the bar area, though sufficient for barpress suppression, is unnecessary.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)302-308
Number of pages7
JournalAnimal Learning & Behavior
Volume22
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 1994

Fingerprint

Cues
freezing
learning
rats
Shock
Freezing
Learning
Punishment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Psychology(all)
  • Behavioral Neuroscience

Cite this

Factors affecting rats' location during conditioned suppression training. / Bevins, Rick A.; Ayres, John J.B.

In: Animal Learning & Behavior, Vol. 22, No. 3, 01.09.1994, p. 302-308.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{01a7dc75e3bb4323aaf8871db8ba9e79,
title = "Factors affecting rats' location during conditioned suppression training",
abstract = "If freezing underlies barpress conditioned suppression, then it seems odd that auditory cues paired with shock evoke more freezing than do visual cues, yet evoke similar suppression. Bevins and Ayres (1992) found that auditory and visual cues also evoked similar withdrawal from the bar and dipper areas and suggested that such withdrawal could explain the similar suppression. Seeking to understand that withdrawal, we found evidence in the present study that it was due either to adventitious punishment or to place-aversion learning. The cue for shock seemed to set the occasion for such learning. For example, we found that, as training progressed, rats' tendency to leave the bar area during the cue first increased, then decreased, then increased again, reflecting, presumably, shock occurrence first inside, then outside, then inside the bar area again. Despite these changes in the rats' location, barpress suppression remained stable, implying that leaving the bar area, though sufficient for barpress suppression, is unnecessary.",
author = "Bevins, {Rick A.} and Ayres, {John J.B.}",
year = "1994",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3758/BF03209838",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "302--308",
journal = "Animal Learning and Behavior",
issn = "0090-4996",
publisher = "Psychonomic Society Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Factors affecting rats' location during conditioned suppression training

AU - Bevins, Rick A.

AU - Ayres, John J.B.

PY - 1994/9/1

Y1 - 1994/9/1

N2 - If freezing underlies barpress conditioned suppression, then it seems odd that auditory cues paired with shock evoke more freezing than do visual cues, yet evoke similar suppression. Bevins and Ayres (1992) found that auditory and visual cues also evoked similar withdrawal from the bar and dipper areas and suggested that such withdrawal could explain the similar suppression. Seeking to understand that withdrawal, we found evidence in the present study that it was due either to adventitious punishment or to place-aversion learning. The cue for shock seemed to set the occasion for such learning. For example, we found that, as training progressed, rats' tendency to leave the bar area during the cue first increased, then decreased, then increased again, reflecting, presumably, shock occurrence first inside, then outside, then inside the bar area again. Despite these changes in the rats' location, barpress suppression remained stable, implying that leaving the bar area, though sufficient for barpress suppression, is unnecessary.

AB - If freezing underlies barpress conditioned suppression, then it seems odd that auditory cues paired with shock evoke more freezing than do visual cues, yet evoke similar suppression. Bevins and Ayres (1992) found that auditory and visual cues also evoked similar withdrawal from the bar and dipper areas and suggested that such withdrawal could explain the similar suppression. Seeking to understand that withdrawal, we found evidence in the present study that it was due either to adventitious punishment or to place-aversion learning. The cue for shock seemed to set the occasion for such learning. For example, we found that, as training progressed, rats' tendency to leave the bar area during the cue first increased, then decreased, then increased again, reflecting, presumably, shock occurrence first inside, then outside, then inside the bar area again. Despite these changes in the rats' location, barpress suppression remained stable, implying that leaving the bar area, though sufficient for barpress suppression, is unnecessary.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028038013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028038013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3758/BF03209838

DO - 10.3758/BF03209838

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0028038013

VL - 22

SP - 302

EP - 308

JO - Animal Learning and Behavior

JF - Animal Learning and Behavior

SN - 0090-4996

IS - 3

ER -