Effects of serial CS presentation on shuttlebox avoidance responding

Levis, Donald J.; Stampfl, Thomas G.

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(72)90049-5

Cited by 26 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results suggest that component training of SI is an effective procedure for enhancing associative strength of a serial CS, and they are consistent with data obtained from human subjects (Levis & Levin, 1972). The above findings are in agreement with the generalization hypothesis of fear acquisition outlined by Levis and Stampfl (1972). The separate training of SI before sequencing should result in the attachment of a higher level of associative strength to this stimulus segment, which, in turn, should result in a greater portion of avoidance responding to this segment when sequenced into a serial CS procedure.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of component training and subsequent sequencing of stimuli on shuttlebox avoidance responding of rats

Levis

Dubin²,

Holzman

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The serial presentation of two different CSs, with each stimulus having an 8-sec duration (S1 8/S28 ) , consistently has resulted in most of the shuttlebox avoidance responses being recorded to the S2 component. Experiment 1 attempted to attenuate this serial CS, delayedresponse effect by conditioning the separate components of a serial CS prior to ordering them sequentially. Ten component-training trials were administered, with subjects receiving CS-US pairing to Sl only, S2 only, or to both Sl and S2 presented on separate trials. Two CS durations (8 or 16 sec) during this phase also were compared. Subjects were then given 100 avoidance test trials using the standard serial procedure. The 10 best avoidance responders in each group were selected for analysis. Shorter avoidance latencies were obtained only for subjects receiving component conditioning to S1. CS duration was not a factor in establishing the shorter latencies. Component conditioning to S2 resulted in increasing the total avoidances. Experiment 2 increased the number of component-training trials and the generality of the findings by using a different strain of rats and by extending the testing phase of the study so that all subjects could be included in the analysis. Comparable results were obtained. The theoretical implications of these data were discussed.In the quest to enhance our knowledge of the laws of S-R connections as they apply to complex environments, various attempts have been made to determine the functional role of individual components comprising a stimulus compound. One strategy sought to enhance the associative strength of individual components by conditioning them separately prior to combining them into a compound (Kamin, 1969;Wagner, 1971). Another approach attempted to provide a careful analysis of response topographies during training to determine whether differential responding to components could be detected (Brahlek, 1968;Levis, 1970). The intent of the present research was to determine the effects of a component-training procedure on modifying the topography of avoidance responding elicited by stimuli ordered in a serial sequence.Interest in this problem was stimulated by previous research which analyzed the effects of a Reprint requests should be sent to Donald J. Levis,

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Levis serial-CS procedure upon shuttlebox-avoidance responding using rats as subjects (Levis, 1970;Levis & Stampfl, 1972). It was found that when two different CS components (e.g., tone followed by flashing lights) were ordered serially (S1/S2) during training, responding occurred to the CS component closest to the UCS onset.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of component training and subsequent sequencing of stimuli on shuttlebox avoidance responding of rats

Levis

Dubin²,

Holzman

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Levis, Stampfl, and their colleagues (Levis & Stampfl 1972;Boyd & Levis 1976;Levis & Boyd 1979) further investigated procedural parameters that promote rapid acquisition and prolonged resistance to extinction of avoidance responding and offered the serial-CS hypothesis as an extension of two-factor theory. It has been demonstrated that having a chain of CSs (e.g.…”

Section: Implosive Therapy Imaginal Flooding In Vivo Exposure and Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure Therapy in the Treatment of Anxiety Disorders

Cahill¹,

Foa²

2002

Anxiety Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For one of the serial conditions, a two-component serial CS procedure (S I ISz) was used, in which the first stimulus (S d terminated at the midpoint of the CS-US interval and the onset of the second stimulus (Sz) immediately followed the termination of SI. For the other serial condition, a two-component serial compound procedure (SI lSI Sz) was used, in which a single stimulus (Sd was presented for the first half of the CS-US interval and two stimuli (S 1 + Sz) for the latter half of the CS-US interval.Previous shuttlebox work (Levis, 1970; Levis & Dubin, in press;Levis & Stampfl, 1972) has determined that, when the above serial procedures are compared to nonserial procedures in which the CS pattern does not change during the CS-US interval, the serial procedures produce longer mean avoidance latencies, with the majority of avoidance occurring after the onset of the last stimulus introduced into the sequence, while nonserial CS procedures result in most of the avoidance responses occurring in the early portion of the CS-US interval. This delayed avoidance-responding effect noted for Ss presented serial CS conditions was interpreted from a generalization hypothesis of fear transference…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous shuttlebox work (Levis, 1970; Levis & Dubin, in press;Levis & Stampfl, 1972) has determined that, when the above serial procedures are compared to nonserial procedures in which the CS pattern does not change during the CS-US interval, the serial procedures produce longer mean avoidance latencies, with the majority of avoidance occurring after the onset of the last stimulus introduced into the sequence, while nonserial CS procedures result in most of the avoidance responses occurring in the early portion of the CS-US interval. This delayed avoidance-responding effect noted for Ss presented serial CS conditions was interpreted from a generalization hypothesis of fear transference…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of shock intensity on avoidance responding in a shuttlebox to serial CS procedures

Levis

Boyd

1973

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous work with a shuttle box avoidance task has found that when serial CS procedures (e.g., tone followed by lights) are compared to nonserial CS procedures (e.g., tone), the serial procedures result in a longer mean avoidance response latency, with most of the avoidance responses occurring to the last stimulus introduced into the sequence (S2). The present study was an attempt to determine whether this serial CS delayed-responding effect could be altered by manipulating the shock intensity. Two serial CS procedures (S, IS 2 , 8. 18.8 2 ) were tested at three shock levels (0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 rnA). Shock level was not found to have a reliable effect on any of the avoidance response indices analyzed. An important difference, however, did emerge between the two serial CS procedures tested. The theoretical implications of the finding were discussed.The purpose of this paper is to describe an experiment which compared two serial CS procedures across different shock intensities. The shuttlebox avoidance situation, using rats as Ss, served as the learning task. For one of the serial conditions, a two-component serial CS procedure (S I ISz) was used, in which the first stimulus (S d terminated at the midpoint of the CS-US interval and the onset of the second stimulus (Sz) immediately followed the termination of SI. For the other serial condition, a two-component serial compound procedure (SI lSI Sz) was used, in which a single stimulus (Sd was presented for the first half of the CS-US interval and two stimuli (S 1 + Sz) for the latter half of the CS-US interval.Previous shuttlebox work (Levis, 1970; Levis & Dubin, in press;Levis & Stampfl, 1972) has determined that, when the above serial procedures are compared to nonserial procedures in which the CS pattern does not change during the CS-US interval, the serial procedures produce longer mean avoidance latencies, with the majority of avoidance occurring after the onset of the last stimulus introduced into the sequence, while nonserial CS procedures result in most of the avoidance responses occurring in the early portion of the CS-US interval. This delayed avoidance-responding effect noted for Ss presented serial CS conditions was interpreted from a generalization hypothesis of fear transference

show abstract

Effects of serial CS presentation on shuttlebox avoidance responding

Cited by 26 publications

References 14 publications

Effects of component training and subsequent sequencing of stimuli on shuttlebox avoidance responding of rats

Effects of component training and subsequent sequencing of stimuli on shuttlebox avoidance responding of rats

Exposure Therapy in the Treatment of Anxiety Disorders

Effects of shock intensity on avoidance responding in a shuttlebox to serial CS procedures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About