Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Badia

Publications and source records attributed to P Badia.

67 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1975

Choice for signalled over unsignalled shock as a function of shock intensity.

Choice between a signalled shock schedule and an unsignalled one was examined at various shock intensities. Three rats were given the opportunity to change from the unsignalled schedule to the signalled one at intensity values between 0.15 mA and 1.0 mA. Steps were usually 0.15 mA and both ascending and descending series were given. For two other rats, shock intensity increased from 0.20 mA to 1.0 mA in 0.20-mA increments; for two additional rats, shock intensity was first 3.0 mA and was then reduced to 1.0 mA. Subjects tended to remain in the unsignalled schedule at the lower shock intensities, but spent most of each session under the signalled schedule at the higher intensities (1.0 mA and 3.0 mA). In addition, the time spent in the signalled schedule tended to vary systematically with shock intensity over at least part of the range of intensity values. It was concluded that the relationship between shock intensity and choice behavior is similar to the relationship between intensity and behavior in procedures involving avoidance, escape, and punishment.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1973

Choice of longer or stronger signalled shock over shorter or weaker unsignalled shock.

Unsignalled, inescapable shocks were presented to four albino rats in one study and to six rats in a second study. By pressing a lever, subjects could change the condition to signalled shock for 3 min after which unsignalled shock was automatically reinstated. All subjects changed frequently to the signalled shock schedule. After a minimum of three 6-hr sessions or after changeover responding stabilized at the previous values, higher values of signalled shock intensity or duration were introduced. In the first study, the duration of signalled shock was increased in increments of 0.5 sec. In the second study, the intensity of signalled shock was increased in increments of either 0.2 or 0.4 mA. Duration subjects chose signalled shock four (2.0 sec) to nine times (4.5 sec) longer than unsignalled shock (0.5 sec). Intensity subjects chose signalled shock two (2.0 mA) to three times (3.0 mA) more intense than unsignalled shock (1.0 mA).

Journal Article↗
PubMed1973

Choice of a terminating over a non-terminating signal in free-operant avoidance.

Rats chose between two signalled avoidance schedules. Under one schedule, responses in the presence of the signal terminated it and resulted in avoidance of shock; in the other, responses in the presence of the signal resulted in shock avoidance but signal termination was delayed for 10 sec. Pressing a second (changeover) lever produced change from one schedule to the other for 1 min. Once this 1-min period timed out, subjects could remain under the schedule in effect or could reinstate the other schedule for another 1-min period. All four subjects continuously changed over from the non-terminating to the terminating signal schedule. Changeover responding was not maintained when the termination contingency was removed. When changeover responding resulted in a change from a terminating to a non-terminating signal schedule, changeover responding did not occur.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1973

Choice of higher density signalled shock over lower density unsignalled shock.

Unsignalled, inescapable shocks were presented to four albino rats in Experiment 1. By pressing a lever subjects could change the condition to signalled shock for 3-min periods after which unsignalled shock was automatically reinstated. All subjects changed from unsignalled to signalled shock when shock density was the same or when the density of signalled shock was two times greater than unsignalled shock. When the density of signalled shock was four times that of unsignalled shock, three subjects changed to the higher density schedule. One subject changed to a density of signalled shock eight times that of unsignalled shock. The second study showed that the two shock schedules most similar in Experiment 1 were discriminably different because subjects chose lower over higher shock densities when both densities were unsignalled. An analysis stressing safe (signal absent) and unsafe (signal present) periods was discussed.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1972

The relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled escapable and inescapable shock.

In the first study, subjects escaped shock by pressing on a lever under an unsignalled condition. By pressing a different lever they changed the condition to signalled escape for three minute periods. The second study used the changeover procedure to study inescapable-unavoidable shock. Seven rats were used in each study. All subjects in both studies changed over from unsignalled to signalled conditions. Once contact with the signal condition was made, subjects responded to remain in that condition. The three different extinction conditions showed that the correlated stimulus without the signal had greater control over responding than the signal without the correlated stimulus. An analysis based upon shock and shock-free periods was presented.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1971

The relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled avoidance.

Subjects avoided shock by pressing on one lever under an unsignalled condition, but by pressing a separate lever they changed the condition to signalled avoidance for 1-min periods. Signalled avoidance periods were identified by a correlated stimulus. All eight subjects responded to change the unsignalled schedule to a signalled one. Once contact with signalled avoidance was made, subjects continued responding to remain in that condition. Other tests showed that changeover responding was greater when the correlated stimulus was presented without the signal than when the signal was presented without the correlated stimulus. An analysis based upon shock and shock-free periods is presented.

Journal Article↗