Abstract
The effects of CS duration during fear conditioning were assessed using a secondary punishing technique. CS duration was not found to be an influencing variable. Inadequacies of the secondary punishment procedure utilized by Mowrer and his colleagues were noted and it was suggestedthat more extensive comparisons be made of the CER technique with an improved secondary punishing procedure.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Brush, Elinor S. Traumatic avoidance learning: The effects of conditioned stimulus length in a free-responding situation. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1957, 50, 541–546.
Carlton, P. L., & Didamo, P. Some notes on the control of conditioned suppression. J. exp. Anal. Behav., 1960, 3, 255–258.
Kimble, G. A. Hilgard and Marquis’ conditioning and training. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1961.
Libby, A. Two variables in the acquisition of depressant properties of a stimulus. J. exp. Psychol., 1951, 42, 100–108.
Lyon, D. O. Frequency of reinforcement as a parameter of conditioned suppression. J. exp. Anal. Behav., 1963, 1, 95–98.
Mowrer, O. H., & Aiken, E. G. Continguity vs drive-reduction in conditioned fear: variation in conditioned and unconditioned stimuli. Amer. J. Psychol., 1954, 67, 26–38.
Mowrer, O. H., & Solomon, L. N. Continguity vs drive-reduction in conditioned fear: the proximity and abruptness of drive reduction. Amer. J. Psychol., 1954, 67, 15–25.
Stein, L., Sidman, M., & Brady, J. V. Some effects of two temporal variables of conditioned suppression. J. exp. Anal. Behav., 1958, 1, 153–162.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dyal, J.A., Goodman, E.D. Fear conditioning as a function of CS duration during acquisition and suppression tests. Psychon Sci 4, 249–250 (1966). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03342279
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03342279