Methods of deconditioning persisting avoidance: Response prevention and counterconditioning after extensive training

Abstract

R ats were fixed with a chronically indwelling electrode fo r in tracranial stimulation (ICS) of a site of stimulation that elicited posit ive affect. After recovery from surge ry, ea ch ra t was forced to avo id or escape footshock for 100 tr ials/day for 10 days in an au toma ted one-wa y avo ida nc e chamber. After 1,000 trials, footshock Was discontinued and trials measured to extinction. Between shock discontinuance and extinction trials, one group received time on the grid with the ledge removed, a response prevention treatment. Another group spent the sam e time in response prevention and also received periodic ICS , a counterconditioning treat m en t. A t h ird group sp e nt time outside t he chamber , a no-treatment control. The group of counterconditioning responded re liably less during extinc tio n. T h ese data confirm the conclusion drawn from similar studies using only limited avo ida nce training that counterconditioning is a superior treatment for reducing persisting avoidance.Avoidance responding, norm ally highly resist ant to ext inct ion , can be redu ced by forcing the organism to remain in the situ ation which pr eviously elicited active a voi d a nc e (response p revention) (Baum , 1970). Cha nging th e affec tive state of th e anim al through the intro duction of a positive affec tive stim ulus duri ng respons e prevention (c ou ntercond itioning) attenua tes per sistent avoida nce even more (Wilson & Davison, 1971 ; Reid , 197 3). Posit ive in tracran ial stimulation (ICS) of th e lat eral hypotha lam us has been used in some of th e studies dem onstrati ng the effective ness o f cou nte rcondit ioning (Buss & Reid , 1973 ; G ordon & Baum , 1971 ;Hunsicker, Nelson , & Reid , 1973 ; Prad o-Alcala, Bush , Steele , & Reid , 197 3).In nearly all lab oratory studies test ing vario us ways t o redu ce persisting avoidance, Ss are tested after o nly minim al training (in th is paradigm, usually after 25 or so tra ining tri als) . Baum (196 8) gave rats eit her 50 or 100 additional trials afte r the avoidance was acquired. Th is overtraining increased persistence of responding only if the rat failed to avoid and therefore received a fo otshock during th e additional training. Th is study was designed to t est th e effi ciency of treatme n ts kn own to redu ce avoida nce resp ond ing aft er minim al training with rats in which the avoida nce was well esta blished ( after over 1,000 traini ng tri als). METHOD Subjects and ApparatusFifteen adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were each fixed with chronically indwelling bipolar electro des or received sham surge r ies. Electro de tips were aimed for the lateral hypothalamus-medial forebrain bundl e. Subsequent histological inspection verified that sites of ICS, the activation of which were " Thi s stud y wa s su p ported b y Bradley Uni versity's Bo ard for Res earch w hic h adm in ist ers NSF G rant G U 3320. We t ha nk Cindy Ro yer , Angela Sp ears, and Fred eric Sautter fo r assist ance with the d ail y testing of Ss. This study is p art o f a resea...

Inhibitory interactions between appetitive and aversive stimuli.

“…These rats then exhibited more rapid extinction of the avoidance response than did subjects just experiencing confinement. The phenomenon has been shown to depend upon administering the ICS in the presence of the danger signals (Gordon & Baum, 1971;Paxton, Mejta, & Reid, 1974;Voss, Mejta, & Reid, 1974) and upon being given sufficient exposure to the CS-ICS association (Buss & Reid, 1973). A comparable effect has also been reported for a discrete-trial lever-press avoidance response by both Monico and Stone (cited in Reid, 1973).…”

Methods of deconditioning persisting avoidance: Diazepam as an adjunct to response prevention

“…Yet the drugged group showed more anxiety/fear/avoidance than the group given RP alone. Analogues of behavioral treatments in this paradigm have led to marked reduction in persisting avoidance even with rats trained over 1,000 trials Voss, Mejta, & Reid, 1974). Clinical trials of the behavioral strategies have also been highly successful (Franks & Wilson, 1973;Wolpe, 1973).…”

Testing a novelty-based extinction procedure for the reduction of conditioned avoidance

“…Fear extinction entails the presentation of an initially innocuous stimulus (e.g., a picture of a spider; Conditioned Stimulus or CS) that was previously paired with an evolutionary dangerous stimulus (e.g., a shock; Unconditioned Stimulus or US), without the US. To reduce fear and avoidance, extinction is often combined with response prevention (ExtRP; Voss, Mejta, & Reid, 1974), so as to make sure that the participant is confronted with the fearful stimulus (see Rachman, Radomsky, & Shafran, 2008 for the role of avoidance is extinction therapy). However, avoidance behavior can persist after extinction (Lovibond, Chen, Mitchell, & Weidemann, 2013) and causes a return of fear (Uijen, Leer, & Engelhard, in press;Vervliet & Indekeu, 2015).…”