Motivational properties of frustrative nonreward, conflict involving nonreward, and conflict unconfounded with nonreward
Date
1973
Authors
Lange, Donald Edward
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Similarities of the motivational properties of frustrative nonreward and conflict unconfounded with nonreward were evaluated in two different experiments. The purpose was to determine if conflict, unconfounded with primary aversive elements inherent in nonreward, was capable of eliciting "frustration-like" effects; thus allowing adoption of Brown and Farber's (1951) parsimonious explanation of frustration effects, in terms of conflict operations. The main hypothesis tested was that approach-approach conflict and nonreward following experience with reward (Amsel's frustrative-nonreward) would produce similar increments in the general level of motivation (as measured by an increase in Alley 2 running speed).
The general experimental procedures used in Experiments I and II extended traditional frustration methodology to a simultaneous discrimination task, employing as apparatus, a straight double runway maze in which the first goal box is divided into two parallel chambers. Light and dark chambers served as discriminative stimuli occasioning reward, nonreward, or partial reward. Acquisition of discrimination approximated differential conditioning with a guidance procedure of closing the entrance to one side of GB 1 with a Plexiglas door, thus forcing a response to the other side while maintaining simultaneous presentation of the discriminanda of both sides. The methodology provided experimental conditions which subjected different groups of adult male, Long-Evans strain rats to experiences of Conflict with Frustrative-nonreward (FC), Conflict without Frustrative-nonreward (C) , and the equivalent of Frustrative nonreward (F) and Continuous Reward (0) within a simultaneous discrimination task . The designs of Experiments I and II differed in the procedures used to establish stimulus control, equated practice to both GB 1 sides, and sequential placement of experimental trials in relation to training trials. Both experiments equated groups in terms of acquisition trials, amount of reward, and other motivational and associated variables known to affect running speed. In both experiments, the Conflict-only (C) Ss were trained to an S+ discriminandum, and then made to choose between two S+ GB 1 boxes, being rewarded regardless of which one was chosen. Steps were taken to reduce spatial-positional preferences and odor cues.
Results of overall mixed-design analyses of Experiment I Alley 2 data did not confirm the main hypothesis. However, differential effects supporting the main hypothesis were found within-Ss for the C, FC, and F groups when rewarded training trials and criterion trials were compared. In addition, within-i frustration effects were found when rewarded and nonrewarded training trials were compared. It was concluded that procedures were not effective in producing differential effects at a magnitude sufficient for between-S comparisons. Moreover, effects of stimulus generalization may have created more complex operations than conceptualized, such that inherent approach-avoidance conflict, may have been created in each group through the experience of nonreward associated with undiscriminated S-. Experiment II tested this assumption and eliminated experience with nonreward by consistently guiding Ss' training trial responses to the correct, S+, discriminandum.
Results of overall mixed-design analyses of Experiment II supported the main hypothesis. However, the increment in Alley 2 speed developed with practice, rather than occurring immediately upon the institution of nonreward or conflict. The within-S analyses comparing experimental and control (acquisition) trials added further support for the confirmation of the main hypothesis.
Results from post hoc discrimination tests immediately following the two experiments, and an examination of the choice behavior of Ss during the course of experimentation , led to two conclusions: (1) the procedure of consistently guiding an S's response to one stimulus where two stimuli were simultaneously presented was successful in establishing stimulus control; (2) subjects tend to adopt positional habits as a conflict-reducing solution to a situation involving a choice between two relatively equal alternatives, but not all of the effects of conflict were thereby removed . Experiment I provided data suggesting that positional preferences may be learned in such choice situations.