Retention of appetitive instrumental behavior: The Kamin effect

The Kamin effect as a function of time of training and associative-nonassociative processes

“…Such associations might also be thought of as learned motives (like incentive in appetitive situations, or fear in the present context) or S-S* expectancies , as Bolles (1972) has proposed . We have suggested previously (Seybert et al, 1979) that nonmonotonic retention functions, like the Kamin effects reported here, represent differential retrieval of these types of expectancies or learned motives, rather than of an association involving the instrumental response. The present data , we believe, provide further support/or such a contention.…”

“…Recently, Elson, Seybert, and Ghiselli (1977) and Seybert, Vandenberg, Harvey, Budd , and McClanahan (1979) have reported findings that support the hypothesis that a similar (or the same) underlying mechanism is responsible for both Kamin and multiphasic retention functions and that, in fact, both functions represent the same retention process sampled at different retention intervals. Further support for such a suggestion would be provided if it could be demonstrated that both are influenced or determined by a significant variable in the same way.…”

Optical biosensor studies on the productive complex formation between the components of cytochrome P450scc dependent monooxygenase system

“…There are some evidences for the formation of a functionally active ternary complex AdR/Ad/P450scc [16][17][18] or complexes of more higher order [29]. There are some indications supporting the shuttle mechanism according to which Ad sequentially forms binary complexes with AdR and cytochrome P450scc [9,10,30].…”

Retention following appetitive discrimination training: The Kamin effect

“…It has been suggested elsewhere (Kamin, 1957;Seybert, Vandenberg, Harvey, Budd, & McClanahan, 1979) that investigation of retention of appetitive responses might provide more definitive information regarding this associative/nonassociative controversy. Since the nonassociative hypotheses all rely on the effects of experience with an aversive stimulus (like shock), they encounter serious difficulty in explaining Kamin effects in situations in which no such stimulus is present (e.g., appetitive learning situations).…”

“…Since the nonassociative hypotheses all rely on the effects of experience with an aversive stimulus (like shock), they encounter serious difficulty in explaining Kamin effects in situations in which no such stimulus is present (e.g., appetitive learning situations). Although the Kamin effect has been demonstrated in a simple, nondifferential appetitive learning situation (Seybert et al, 1979), examination of retention in an appetitive discrimination paradigm might also prove very helpful in this regard. However, the results of the two studies that have examined retention of an appetitive discrimi-nation (Jaffard, Destrade, Soumireu-Mourat, & Cardo, 1974;Tribhowan, Rucker,& McDiarmid, 1971) are inconclusive because they used food-deprivation procedures.…”