| Project/Area Number |
63510079
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for General Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Research Field |
Psychology
|
|---|
| Research Institution | KWANSEI GAKUIN UNIVERSITY |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
IMADA Hiroshi PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY, KWANSEI GAKUIN UNIVERSITY, 文学部, 教授 (60079613)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
1988 – 1989
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 1989)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥1,700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,700,000)
Fiscal Year 1989: ¥300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥300,000)
Fiscal Year 1988: ¥1,400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,400,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | AVERSIVE STIMULUS / AFTEREFFECTS / EMOTION / OPPONENT-PROCESS THEORY / RAT / CONDITIONED SUPPRESSION / DISSUPPRESSION / 摂水行動 |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
1. Experimental and theoretical research were conducted to test the adequacy of the opponent- process theory of emotion (Solomon & Corbit, 1974). Rat experiments were conducted using discrete- trial-type licking conditioned suppression situation. It was hypothesized that an aversive stimulus presented immediately preceding a conditioned suppression would attenuate the conditioned suppression.
2. Following specific hypotheses were tested in two experiments: (1) Conditioned suppression will be attenuated by an aversive stimulus presented before the suppression-inducing stimulus. (2) This dissuppression will be observed not only when the aversive stimulus is the primary one but also when it is the secondary one. (3) The amount of this dissuppression will be a positive function of the aversiveness of the stimulus. (4) The amount of this dissuppression will decrease as the temporal interval between the aversive stimulus and the suppression-inducing stimulus increases.
3. Hypotheses 1 and 4 were unconditionally confirmed. Hypothesis 2 was also supported, but the amount of dissuppression by the secondary aversive stimulus was surprisingly smaller than that by the primary aversive stimulus. The confirmation of Hypothesis 3 was difficult due to the fact that the increase of the aversive stimulus led to the overall suppression of the baseline responding, which interacted in a complex manner with the amount of dissuppression. The analysis using a dissuppression ratio led to the confirmation of Hypothesis 3 and hence the opponent-process theory. The opponent-process theory so far has stressed only the aftereffect of emotion-producing stimuli, but the fact that these stimuli also have effects upon the baseline emotion as described above have to be well incorporated in future studies of this theory.
|
