Active avoidance paradigm, probing choice behaviour (avoidance or
non-avoidance) in the face of stimuli associated with an aversive
reinforcer (e.g. painful electric shock; CS+s), stimuli associated with
the ommission of the aversive reinforcer (CS-), and, additionally,
generalization stimuli (GSs), that are individually generated for each
participant to be 75% reliably distinguishable from adjacent CS+s (on
the basis of a previous perceptual task), and that are not associated
with administration of the aversive reinforcer. On each trial, one
stimulus is presented, and the participant must decide whether to make
an avoidance response (press a key), or remain and face the consequences
of that stimulus. Critically, making an avoidance response is associated
with a small cost (e.g. one additional aversive reinforcer administered
at the end of each block for every 5 avoidance responses made during
that block, with total responses per block recorded on a counter at the
bottom of the screen). The optimal strategy (in order to minimise number
of aversive reinforcers received) is therefore to make an avoidance
response if the stimulus is a CS+, but not otherwise (participants must
learn the identity of each stimulus through trial and error).
Generalization of instrumental avoidance is operationalized as avoidance
responses made on GS+ trials.
Definition contributed by Anonymous
non-avoidance) in the face of stimuli associated with an aversive
reinforcer (e.g. painful electric shock; CS+s), stimuli associated with
the ommission of the aversive reinforcer (CS-), and, additionally,
generalization stimuli (GSs), that are individually generated for each
participant to be 75% reliably distinguishable from adjacent CS+s (on
the basis of a previous perceptual task), and that are not associated
with administration of the aversive reinforcer. On each trial, one
stimulus is presented, and the participant must decide whether to make
an avoidance response (press a key), or remain and face the consequences
of that stimulus. Critically, making an avoidance response is associated
with a small cost (e.g. one additional aversive reinforcer administered
at the end of each block for every 5 avoidance responses made during
that block, with total responses per block recorded on a counter at the
bottom of the screen). The optimal strategy (in order to minimise number
of aversive reinforcers received) is therefore to make an avoidance
response if the stimulus is a CS+, but not otherwise (participants must
learn the identity of each stimulus through trial and error).
Generalization of instrumental avoidance is operationalized as avoidance
responses made on GS+ trials.
Definition contributed by Anonymous
Generalization of Instrumental Avoidance Task has been asserted to measure the following CONCEPTS
No concepts assertions have been added.
Phenotypes associated with Generalization of Instrumental Avoidance Task
Disorders
No associations have been added.Traits
No associations have been added.Behaviors
No associations have been added.IMPLEMENTATIONS of Generalization of Instrumental Avoidance Task
No implementations have been added.
EXTERNAL DATASETS for Generalization of Instrumental Avoidance Task
Value generalization in human avoidance learning
CONDITIONS
Experimental conditions are the subsets of an experiment that define the relevant experimental manipulation.
CONTRASTS
In the Cognitive Atlas, we define a contrast as any function over experimental conditions. The simplest contrast is the indicator value for a specific condition; more complex contrasts include linear or nonlinear functions of the indicator across different experimental conditions.
INDICATORS
No indicators have yet been associated.
An indicator is a specific quantitative or qualitative variable that is recorded for analysis. These may include behavioral variables (such as response time, accuracy, or other measures of performance) or physiological variables (including genetics, psychophysiology, or brain imaging data).
Term BIBLIOGRAPHY
Email: contact@cognitiveatlas.org