Panlilio L V, Weiss S J
Department of Psychology, American University, Washington, DC 20016.
J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Jul;60(1):85-104. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.60-85.
Rats were trained to press a lever in the presence of a tone-light compound stimulus and not to press in its absence. In each of two experiments, schedules were designed to make the compound a conditioned punisher for one group and a conditioned reinforcer for the other. In Experiment 1, one group's responding produced food in the presence of the compound but not in its absence. The other group's responding terminated the compound stimulus, and food was presented only in its absence. When tone and light were later presented separately, light controlled more responding than did tone in the former group, but tone gained substantial control in the latter. The same effects were also observed within subjects when the training schedules were switched over groups. In Experiment 2, two groups avoided shock in the presence of the compound stimulus. In the absence of the compound, one group was not shocked, and the other received both response-independent and response-produced shock. When tone and light were presented separately, the former group's responding was mainly controlled by tone, but the latter group's responding was almost exclusively controlled by light. These effects were also observed within subjects when the training schedules were switched over groups. Thus, these single-incentive selective association effects (appetitive in Experiment 1 and aversive in Experiment 2) were completely reversible. The schedules in which the compound should have been a conditioned reinforcer consistently produced visual control, and auditory control increased when the compound should have become a conditioned punisher. Currently accepted accounts of selective associations based on affinities between shock and auditory stimuli and between food and visual stimuli (i.e., stimulus-reinforcer interactions) do not adequately address these results. The contingencies of reinforcement most recently associated with the compound and with its absence, rather than the nature of the reinforcer, determined whether auditory or visual stimulus control developed.
训练大鼠在有音调 - 灯光复合刺激时按压杠杆,在无该复合刺激时不按压。在两个实验中,每个实验的程序设计都是让复合刺激对一组成为条件性惩罚物,而对另一组成为条件性强化物。在实验1中,一组大鼠在复合刺激出现时做出反应会得到食物,在复合刺激不出现时则得不到。另一组大鼠的反应会终止复合刺激,且只有在复合刺激不出现时才会呈现食物。后来分别呈现音调和灯光时,在前者那组中,灯光比音调能控制更多的反应,但在后者那组中音调获得了显著的控制作用。当训练程序在两组之间切换时,在个体内部也观察到了相同的效果。在实验2中,两组大鼠在复合刺激出现时避免电击。在没有复合刺激时,一组不接受电击,另一组既接受与反应无关的电击,也接受由反应产生的电击。当分别呈现音调和灯光时,前一组的反应主要由音调控制,但后一组的反应几乎完全由灯光控制。当训练程序在两组之间切换时,在个体内部也观察到了这些效果。因此,这些单一激励选择性关联效应(实验1中是奖赏性的,实验2中是惩罚性的)是完全可逆的。复合刺激本应作为条件性强化物的程序始终产生视觉控制,而当复合刺激本应成为条件性惩罚物时,听觉控制则增强。目前基于电击与听觉刺激之间以及食物与视觉刺激之间的亲和性(即刺激 - 强化物相互作用)对选择性关联的解释并不能充分说明这些结果。与复合刺激及其缺失最近相关的强化偶然性,而非强化物的性质,决定了是发展出听觉还是视觉刺激控制。