Schlund Michael W, Treacher Kay, Preston Oli, Magee Sandy K, Richman David M, Brewer Adam T, Cameron Gemma, Dymond Simon
Department of Behavior Analysis, University of North Texas.
Department of Psychology, Swansea University, United Kingdom.
J Exp Anal Behav. 2017 Jan;107(1):101-122. doi: 10.1002/jeab.238.
Approach-avoidance paradigms create a competition between appetitive and aversive contingencies and are widely used in nonhuman research on anxiety. Here, we examined how instructions about threat and avoidance impact control by competing contingencies over human approach-avoidance behavior. Additionally, Experiment 1 examined the effects of threat magnitude (money loss amount) and avoidance cost (fixed ratio requirements), whereas Experiment 2 examined the effects of threat information (available, unavailable and inaccurate) on approach-avoidance. During the task, approach responding was modeled by reinforcing responding with money on a FR schedule. By performing an observing response, participants produced an escalating "threat meter". Instructions stated that the threat meter levels displayed the current probability of losing money, when in fact loss only occurred when the level reached the maximum. Instructions also stated pressing an avoidance button lowered the threat level. Overall, instructions produced cycles of approach and avoidance responding with transitions from approach to avoidance when threat was high and transitions back to approach after avoidance reduced threat. Experiment 1 revealed increasing avoidance cost, but not threat magnitude, shifted approach-avoidance transitions to higher threat levels and increased anxiety ratings, but did not influence the frequency of approach-avoidance cycles. Experiment 2 revealed when threat level information was available or absent earnings were high, but earnings decreased when inaccurate threat information was incompatible with contingencies. Our findings build on prior nonhuman and human approach-avoidance research by highlighting how instructed threat and avoidance can impact human AA behavior and self-reported anxiety.
趋避范式在追求奖励和规避惩罚之间制造了一种竞争，并且在非人类焦虑研究中被广泛应用。在此，我们研究了关于威胁和回避的指示如何通过竞争性意外事件影响人类趋避行为的控制。此外，实验1研究了威胁程度（金钱损失量）和回避成本（固定比率要求）的影响，而实验2研究了威胁信息（可用、不可用和不准确）对趋避行为的影响。在任务过程中，通过按固定比率计划用金钱强化反应来模拟趋近反应。通过执行观察反应，参与者生成了一个不断升级的“威胁量表”。指示说明威胁量表水平显示了当前赔钱的概率，但实际上只有当水平达到最大值时才会发生损失。指示还说明按下回避按钮会降低威胁水平。总体而言，指示产生了趋近和回避反应的循环，当威胁较高时从趋近过渡到回避，而在回避降低威胁后又回到趋近。实验1表明，增加回避成本而非威胁程度，会使趋避转换转向更高的威胁水平，并增加焦虑评分，但不影响趋避循环的频率。实验2表明，当威胁水平信息可用或不存在时收益较高，但当不准确的威胁信息与意外事件不匹配时收益会下降。我们的研究结果基于先前的非人类和人类趋避研究，强调了指示性威胁和回避如何影响人类的趋避行为和自我报告的焦虑。
