The effects of water deprivation, shock level, and morphine on punishment-induced suppression of water drinking during a single conflict acquisition session were studied. Suppression of drinkometer-recorded licking was greatest with high levels of intermittent foot-shock for drinking, and suppression was reduced by morphine. Level of deprivation had no significant effect.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarryH.III.MillerN. E.Effects of drugs on approach-avoidance conflict tested repeatedly by means of a ‘telescope alley.’J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1962, 55, 201–210.
2.
BarryH.III.MillerN. E.TiddG. E.Control for stimulus change while testing effects of amobarbital on conflict. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1962, 55, 1071–1074.
3.
GellerI.Use of approach avoidance behavior (conflict) for evaluating depressant drugs. In NodineJ. H.MoyerJ. H. (Eds.), Psychomatic medicine. Philadelphia: Lea & Feabinger, 1962. Pp. 267–281.
4.
GellerI.BachmanE.SeifterJ.Effects of responding and morphine on behavior suppressed by punishment. Life Sciences, 1963, 1, 226–231.
5.
GellerI.SeifterJ.The effects of meprobamate, barbiturates, d-amphetamine, and promazine on experimentally induced conflict in the rat. Psychopharmacologia, 1960, 1, 482–492.
LeafR. C.MullerS. A.Simple method for CER conditioning and measurement. Psychol. Rep., 1965, 17, 211–215.
8.
MillerN. E.The analysis of motivational effects illustrated by experiments on amylobarbitone. In SteinbergH. (Ed.), Animal behavior and drug action. Boston: Little, Brown, 1964. Pp. 1–18.
9.
RayO. S.The effect of central nervous system depressants on discrete trial approach-avoidance behavior. Psychopharmacologia, 1964, 6, 96–111.
