Presentation on theme: "Compensatory-Response Model"— Presentation transcript:
1 Compensatory-Response Model The compensatory-response model is one version of preparatory-response theoryIn this model of classical conditioning, the compensatory after-effects to a US are what come to be elicited by the CSBased on the opponent-process theory of emotion / motivation
2 Opponent-Process Theory of Emotion (Solomon & Corbit, 1974) Emotional events elicit two competing processes:The primary- or A-process that is immediately elicited by the evente.g., taking an exam elicits an unpleasant A-stateAn opponent- or B-process that is the opposite of the A-process and counteracts ite.g., the pain during the exam (A-state) creates a pleasant relief response (B-state) following the exam
3 Properties of the A and B processes A-processmagnitude & duration of the A-state are determined by the stimulus eventmagnitude & duration are fixed (no change with experience)B-processdynamic; changes with repeated exposurewith repeated exposure the B-state begins earlier, has greater magnitude, & lasts longerif time passes without exposure, the changes in the B-state reverseChanges due to repeated exposure depend upon short delays between presentations
4 Underlying Opponent Processes First few stimulationsAfter several stimulations
5 Opponent-Process Theory of Emotion The actual emotional state of the organism is determined by the difference in magnitude between the 2 states:The A-state minus the B-state = end emotional resultIf A-state > B-state, then the emotion experienced will be A-likeIf B-state > A-state, then the emotional result will be B-like
6 Resultant Emotional State First few stimulationsAfter many stimulations
7 Evidence for a Compensatory-Response Model Siegel (1972) gave rats repeated injections of InsulinInsulin’s effects are to reduce the level of glucose in the bloodTested by giving the rats an injection of saline (instead of insulin)Measured the CR (change in blood glucose levels)
8 Siegel (1972) ResultsThere was a strong CR that occurred, but it was an INCREASE in blood glucose levels(The opposite of Insulin’s direct effect)CR ≠ UR, and the CR was definitely compensatory
9 More Evidence in Support of the Compensatory-Response Model Conditioned morphine tolerance (Siegel, Hinson, & Frank, 1978)Experimental Group: CS (light change & noise reduction) paired with US (injection of morphine) for 9 daysUnpaired Control GroupPlacebo Control Group (CS paired with injection of saline)
10 Siegel et al. Results (Conditioned Drug Tolerance) Test: present CS, inject every rat with morphine, & place each rat on a moderately hot surfaceMeasure latency to lick their pawsThe faster they lick, the quicker they feel the pain
11 Challenges to the Compensatory-Response Model Eikelboom & Stewart (1982) found that the CR was much like the response to the drug itself (UR) with both opiates like morphine and with stimulants such as cocaine and d-amphetamine.It has been argued that conditioned tolerance effects could be due to habituation of the direct A-process rather than being due to classical conditioning of the opponent B-process.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.