Factors affecting the measurement of classically conditioned fear in rats following exposure to escapable versus inescapable signaled shock.
Three experiments are reported in which rats first received 50 escapable or inescapable signaled-shock trials. Experiment 1 (n = 22) employed an acquired-drive paradigm and found inescapable shock subjects learned a hurdle-jump response to escape the signal less rapidly than did escapable-shock subjects. Experiment 2 (n = 24) employed a conditioned emotional response paradigm and found inescapable-shock subjects suppressed more when the signal was introduced in the appetitive bar-pressing task. Both experiments measured spontaneous activity immediately following conditioning and found no group differences. Experiment 3 (n = 39) employed the same activity task and found no difference between escapable- and inescapable-shock groups when the signal was introduced into the activity task. Both groups displayed less activity than a nonshock control group during the signal. The results suggest that lack of control over the shock in the conditioning phase did not result in an increase of conditioned fear. The results are discussed in terms of a learned active-inactive predisposition to respond.
D000818:Animals; D001362:Avoidance Learning; D003214:Conditioning, Classical; D003216:Conditioning, Operant; D004597:Electroshock; D005239:Fear; D005793:Generalization, Psychological; D008297:Male; D009043:Motor Activity; D051381:Rats