| Title |
A discriminated conditioned punishment model of phobia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s49886 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher Bloom, Ryan Post, Joshua Mazick, Brittany Blumenthal, Caroline Doyle, Jeff Dyche, D. Gene Davenport, Brenna Peters |
| Abstract |
Traditionally, the signaled avoidance (SA) paradigm has been used in an attempt to better understand human phobia. Animal models of this type have been criticized for ineffectively representing phobia. The SA model characterizes phobia as an avoidance behavior by presenting environmental cues, which act as warning signals to an aversive stimulus (ie, shock). Discriminated conditioned punishment (DCP) is an alternative paradigm that characterizes phobia as a choice behavior in which fear serves to punish an otherwise adaptive behavior. The present study quantifies the differences between the paradigms and suggests that DCP offers an alternative paradigm for phobia. Rats trained on either SA or DCP were compared on a number of behavioral variables relevant to human phobia. Results indicate that rats in the DCP paradigm responded significantly earlier to warning signals and were more effective at preventing shocks than rats in the SA paradigm. Implications of this alternative paradigm are discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 26% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 57% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 December 2013.
All research outputs
#14,180,180
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,470
of 2,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,618
of 198,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#34
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,977 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 198,405 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.