Skinner Box, the

Author(s):  
Ioulia Papageorgi
Keyword(s):  
1968 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 211-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calvin M. Leung ◽  
Glen D. Jensen ◽  
Richard P. Tapley

2 groups of 60 rats received either 75 or 285 runs in a runway before being given a choice between freeloading from a dish of pellets in the start box or running the maze for a single pellet. The 285-trial Ss showed less willingness to perform the operant than the 75-trial Ss. This is opposite to what Jensen (1963) had found in the Skinner box. Schedule of reinforcement (100 vs 50%) during training did not significantly affect freeloading scores.


Behaviour sequences commonly consist of highly variable appetitive phases leading to rather fixed consummatory acts. Action-pattern rigidity is typical of the terminal moments of a reaction chain. This basic fact is all too often obscured by the artificial conditions of behaviour studies. Observations on laboratory or captive animals tend to conceal the degree of variability of the earlier phases of each sequence. The simplicity and sterility of the unnatural environment offered to the animal causes differential damage to its motoric performance, attacking the early stages more and the later stages less. A caged animal will feed, drink, nest and copulate, but it cannot set off on lengthy quests for food, water, nest material or a mate. Notorious laboratory devices such as the Skinner-box have served to eliminate totally any possibility for motoric variability. The emphasis in laboratory studies of this kind has been steadfastly concentrated on the variability in the relationship between simple stimuli and an artificially rigidified response. Although the study of this (SR) relationship is an important aspect of animal psychology, it is extremely misleading to overstress its importance as has been done so often in the past. To equate it with the whole topic of animal behaviour is like claiming that the gaming rooms of Las Vegas reflect the whole of human endeavour.


1963 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon M. Harrington

Three groups of hooded rats were tested in a Skinner box with light reinforcement, using two intensity levels and both fixed and variable light locations after dark operant pretests. The results lend support both to a stimulus satiation hypothesis and to an optimal stimulation hypothesis. It is suggested that intensity and light location are potent variables which have opposite effects on response level, intensity showing relatively more rapid effects.


Author(s):  
Jörg-Peter Ewert
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Abigail Burns ◽  
Maddie Sparks ◽  
David A. Washburn
Keyword(s):  

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 327-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masayo Ohyama ◽  
Maho Kondo ◽  
Miki Yamauchi ◽  
Taiichiro Imanishi ◽  
Tsukasa Koyama

ObjectiveAsenapine is an atypical antipsychotic that is currently available for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder. Although the atypical antipsychotics clozapine and olanzapine are effective for depression and anxiety in schizophrenia, as demonstrated by animal model studies, this has not been clarified for asenapine. Therefore, we compared the effects of asenapine in the conditioned fear stress model with those of clozapine and olanzapine.MethodRats were individually fear conditioned using electrical foot shock in a Skinner box. Approximately 24 h later, individual animals were returned to the same Skinner box (without electrical shock) and their freezing behaviour was observed for 5 min. Animals were treated with asenapine, clozapine, olanzapine, the 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist buspirone, or the 5-HT2C receptor antagonist SB242084 at 30 min before freezing behaviour assessment. The 5-HT1A receptor antagonist WAY100635 or the 5-HT2C receptor agonist Ro60-0175 was also used concomitantly with asenapine. The effects of asenapine, clozapine, and olanzapine on serotonin release in the rat hippocampus were also measured using in vivo microdialysis.ResultsAsenapine reduced freezing behaviour, while neither clozapine nor olanzapine reduced freezing behaviour. Buspirone and SB242084 also reduced freezing behaviour. The effect of asenapine in reducing freezing behaviour was not altered by the concomitant administration of WAY100635 or Ro60-0175. Both asenapine and clozapine, but not olanzapine, increased serotonin release in the rat hippocampus.ConclusionAsenapine may have superior therapeutic effect on anxiety symptoms than other agents, although the underlying mechanism of its anxiolytic activity remains unknown.


1960 ◽  
Vol 199 (6) ◽  
pp. 965-968 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Olds

Two electrode pairs were implanted in each rat, one in dorso-medial tegmentum or medial hypothalamus and one in lateral hypothalamus. Four sequential tests were repeatedly administered in a two-pedal Skinner box: hypothalamic self-stimulation, tegmental self-stimulation, hypothalamic escape, and tegmental escape. Results indicate that with electrodes in medial forebrain bundle regions of hypothalamus, there is self-stimulation but no escape; with electrodes in dorso-medial tegmentum, there is escape but no self-stimulation. In both cases, this holds for all suprathreshold stimulus levels. With electrodes placed more medially in hypothalamus, or lower in tegmentum, the same electrode may yield both self-stimulation and escape depending on the nature of the test.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document