Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Thirty-six albino rats, 92 to 97 days old, were used to investigate some of the determiners of classically conditioned fear R. Three shock intensities, 0, 50, and 90 μamp., were paired with a 4-cps blinking light either 2, 6, or 12 times. The strength of the conditioned fear R was tested on 4 successive days at one trial/day and measured in terms of running speeds in an alley in which the CS was present as an obstruction. Following are the findings and conclusions: (a) The stronger the shock, within the limits of the experiment, the stronger the conditioned fear R. (b) Variations in the number of CS-UCS pairings did not yield significant differences. (c) The data strongly suggest that classically conditioned fear Rs extinguish rapidly. (d) Finally, the technique for measuring conditioned fear R strength proved to be very sensitive. It was indicated that its versatility might render it appropriate in studies of fear as well as other acquired drives.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gwinn

G. T.

Resistance to extinction of learned fear drives. J. exp. Psychol., 1951, 42, 6–12.

Hull

C. L.

Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century, 1943.

Hull

C. L.

A behavior system. New Haven: Yale Univer. Press, 1952.

Kalish

H. I.

Strength of fear as a function of the number of acquisition and extinction trials. J. exp. Psychol., 1954, 47, 1–9.

Libby

Two variables in the acquisition of depressant properties by a stimulus. J. exp. Psychol., 1951, 42, 100–107.

Mathers

B. L.

The effect of certain parameters on the acquisition of fear. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1957, 50, 329–333.

Miller

N. E.

Lawrence

D. H.

Studies of fear as an acquirable drive: III. Effect of strength of electric shock as a primary drive and of number of trials with the primary drive on the strength of fear. In Stevens

S. S.

(Ed.), Handbook of experimental psychology. New York: Wiley, 1931. Pp. 447–449.

Mowrer

O. H.

Aiken

E. G.

Contiguity vs drive-reduction in conditioned fear: temporal variations in conditioned and unconditioned stimulus. Amer. J. Psychol., 1954, 67, 26–38.

Page

H. A.

The facilitation of experimental prevention as a function of the acquisition of a new response. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1955, 48, 14–16.

10.

Passey

G. E.

The influence of intensity of unconditioned stimulus upon acquisition of a conditioned response. J. exp. Psychol., 1948, 38, 420–428.

11.

Solomon

R. L.

Wynne

L. C.

Traumatic avoidance learning: the principles of anxiety conservation and partial irreversibility. Psychol. Rev., 1954, 61, 353–385.

12.

Spence

K. W.

Learning and performance in eyelid conditioning as a function of the intensity of the UCS. J. exp. Psychol., 1953, 45, 57–63.

13.

Strouthes

The effect of CS-onset UCS-termination delay, UCS duration, CS-onset UCS-onset interval, and number of CS-UCS pairings on conditioned fear R. J. exp. Psychol., 1964, in press.

14.

Strouthes

Hamilton

H. C.

Fear conditioning as a function of the number and timing of reinforcements. J. Psychol., 1959, 48, 131–139.

UCS Intensity and Number of CS-UCS Pairings as Determiners of Conditioned Fear r

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References