Skip to main content
Log in

The Geller-Seifter conflict paradigm with incremental shock

  • Original Investigations
  • Published:
Psychopharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The typical Geller-Seifter conflict paradigm for predicting clinical efficacy of anxiolytics is a mult VI/CRF schedule in which response rates in the CRF (conflict) portion are depressed by response-contingent electric shock. In 1-h sessions, anxiolytics raise the depressed conflict rates. Recently it was shown that replacing the single shock level with an arrangement whereby shock begins at zero and is increased with each response in the conflict portion produced more orderly data and facilitated training and maintenance of experimental subjects; chlordiazepoxide was the test drug. In the present study, those results are replicated in 30-min sessions, and the incremental paradigm is demonstrated to be as specific for anxiolytics as the standard Geller-Seifter paradigm. The possibility of very short sessions is suggested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barry, H. III, Miller, N. E.: Effects of drugs on approach-avoidance conflict tested repeatedly by means of a “telescope alley”. J. Comp. and Physiol. Psychol. 55, 201–210 (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, H. III, Wagner, S. A., Miller, N. E.: Effects of several drugs on performance in an approach-avoidance conflict. Psychol. Rep. 12, 215–221 (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  • Billingsley, M. L., Kubena, R. K.: The effects of naloxone and picrotoxin on the sedative and anticonflict effects of benzodiazepines. Life Sci. 22, 897–906 (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, L., Davidson, A. B.: Effects of behaviorally active drugs in a conflict-punishment procedure in rats. In: The benzodiazepines, S. E. Garattini, S. E. Mussini, and L. O. Randall, eds., pp. 327–345. New York, Raven Press 1973

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, A. B., Cook, L.: Effects of combined treatment with trifluoperazine-HCl and amobarbital on punished behavior in rats. Psychopharmacologia 15, 159–168 (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, I.: Use of approach avoidance behavior (conflict) for evaluating depressant drugs. In: First Hahnemann symposium: On psychosomatic medicine, J. H. Nodine and J. H. Moyer, eds. New York: Lea & Febinger 1962

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, I.: Relative potencies of benzodiazepines as measured by their effects on conflict behavior. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 149, 243–247 (1964)

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, I., Bachman, E., Seifter J.: Effects of reserpine and morphine on behavior suppressed by punishment. Life Sci. 2, 226–231 (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, I., Kulak, J. T., Seifter, J.: The effects of chlordiazepoxide and chlorpromazine on a punishment discrimination. Psychopharmacologia 3, 374–385 (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, I., Seifter, J.: The effects of meprobamate, barbiturates, d-amphetamine and promazine on experimentally induced conflict in the rat. Psychopharmacologia 1, 482–492 (1960)

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, I., Seifter, J.: A systematic evaluation of the effects of monourethanes, di-urethanes, and barbiturates on experimentally induced conflict. Pharmacologist 3, 60 (1961) (abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, I., Seifter, J.: The effect of mono-urethans, di-urethans and barbiturates on a punishment discrimination. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 136, 284–288 (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V., Stanley, J. C.: Statistical methods in education and psychology, pp. 297–300, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall 1970

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J. L., Pollard, G. T.: The Geller conflict test: A model of anxiety and a screening procedure for anxiolytics. In: Animal models in psychiatry and neurology, I. Hanin and E. Usdin, eds., pp. 269–278. New York: Pergamon Press 1977

    Google Scholar 

  • Leaf, R. C., Muller, S. A.: Effects of shock intensity, deprivation, and morphine in a simple approach-avoidance conflict situation. Pschol. Rep. 17, 819–823 (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, D. E.: Determinants of drug effects on punished responding. Fed. Proc. 34, 1870–1879 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, D. E., Leander, J. D.: Drugs and punished responding. V: Effects of drugs on responding suppressed by response-dependent and response-independent electric shock. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 213, 22–27 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N. E.: Some recent studies of conflict behavior and drugs. Am. Psychol. 16, 12–24 (1961)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, G. T., Harto, N. E., Rohrbach, K. W., Howard, J. L.: Two self-shaping methods for intracranial self-stimulation in rats. Physiol. Behav. 18, 721–723 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  • Robichaud, R. C., Sledge, K. L., Hefner, M. A., Goldberg, M. E.: Propranolol and chlordiazepoxide on experimentally induced conflict and shuttle box performance in rodents. Psychopharmacologia 32, 157–160 (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ts'o, T. O. T., Chenoweth, M. B.: Comparison between chronic chlordiazepoxide treatment and shock removal in a conflict situation in rats. Neuropharmacology 15, 99–101 (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, J. R., Beer, B., Clody, D. E.: A simple and reliable conflict procedure for testing anti-anxiety agents. Psychopharmacologia 21, 1–7 (1971)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pollard, G.T., Howard, J.L. The Geller-Seifter conflict paradigm with incremental shock. Psychopharmacology 62, 117–121 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00427123

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00427123

Key words

Navigation