Navegando por Autor "RODRIGUES, Bernardo Dutra"

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1

Acesso aberto (Open Access)
Efeitos da punição sobre respostas mantidas em diferentes sistemas econômicos (aberto e fechado) em Rattus norvegicus
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2010-01-08) RODRIGUES, Bernardo Dutra; CARVALHO NETO, Marcus Bentes de; http://lattes.cnpq.br/7613198431695463
The behaviors economics systems are defined as different relationships between consumption and the way the organism gets. There are typically two types of economic systems: a closed economy, where the subject’s daily food ration only could be acquired in the experimental session, and the open economy in which, the subject receive a complementary food after the session. This study aimed to investigate the effects of punishment on positive responses under different economic systems. Were performed two experiments. In Experiment 1 two Rattus norvegicus, Wistar, males, deprived of water for 24 hours, divided between the two economies: A1 (open) and F1 (closed). The aversive stimulus was a Hot air blast (HAB) for 5 seconds and contingent for each pressure response to the bar (RPB). Each subject went through the following phases: Operant Level, Modeling RPB, Conditioning in CRF, Punishment and Reconditioning. In Experiment 2 were used four Rattus norvegicus, Wistar, male, deprived of water for 24 hours, divided into two pairs: FAF (Closed / Open / Closed) and AFA (Open / Closed / Open). The aversive stimulus was a shock of 1.3mA for five seconds and contingent for each RPB. During the experiment, both passed by the following phases: Operant Level, Modeling RPB, Conditioning in FR10, Punishment (in one economy), Reconditioning, Punishment (in an economy different from above), another Reconditioning, finally, a session Punishment the initial economy. Data from two experiments showed an average suppression in responding during the phases of punishment compared to the stages of Conditioning/Reconditioning, in both economies and in all subjects: 48.7% (F1), 96.6% (A1 ), 99.9%, 99.9% and 89.8% (FAF1), 93.2%, 99.4% and 84.8% (FAF2), 99.8%, 83.6% and 95% (AFA1), 92.3%, 90.9% and 91.6% (AFA2). These results demonstrate that both the shock and the JAQ functioned as aversive stimuli, but the difference between the two economies was higher in subjects who had answered punished with the JAQ.