reinforcement sensitivity
TRANSCRIPT
Symposium
Jeffrey Gray’s Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST)
of Personality: How Successful is the Revised Gray and
McNaughton (2000) Theory?
Philip J. Corr, UKCharles S. Carver, USA
ECP13, Athens, Greece
The Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) of Personality: Past, Present and Future
Philip J. Corr
Department of PsychologyUniversity of Wales Swansea
ECP13, Athens, Greece
Structure of Presentation
1. Summarise pre-2000 (1982) model
2. Statement of current problem in RST
3. Describe Gray & McNaughton’s (2000) revision
4. Propose experimental assays of revised theory
5. Future directions in RST research
RST: PAST
Two Complementary Approaches:
1. Conceptual Nervous System (cns): Learning Theory
Mowrer’s (1960) - two-factor theory
Self-stimulation (e.g., James Olds, 1960s) – reinforcement processes
2. Central (Real) Nervous System (CNS): Neurophysiology
Neurophysiology: lesions
Anxiolytics: behavioural analysis derived from effects of drugs
RST: PAST
Anxiolytics affect responses to:
Conditioned punishment Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS): (Suppression of ongoing operant,
Omission/termination of reward appetitive, response)
Conditioned frustration
Not:
‘Reward’ stimuli: conditioned or unconditioned appetitive stimuli, and the omission/termination of expected punishment (and active avoidance with safety signals)
Introversion Extraversion
Neuroticism
Stability
Anxiety: Punishment: PUN
Impulsivity: Reward: REW
30o
Anxiolytics reduce N & increase E, in ratio of 2:1
RST: The Problem
Smillie, Pickering & Jackson (2006):
• RST is ‘more accurately identified as a neuropsychology ofemotion, motivation and learning – it was born of basic animal learning research, initially unconcerned with personality’.
• RST developments have extended beyond Gray’s proposal that the BIS and BAS relate to anxiety and impulsivity.
• But BIS and BAS scales were influenced by Gray’s originalthinking and do not reflect more developments in the basic theory.
RST: The Problem
Smillie, Pickering & Jackson (2006):
• Thus, RST research represents two distinct bodies of knowledge: the first concerned with neural processes, the second with personality measurement:
‘as if it were frozen in time, Gray’s ‘personality model’ is a relatively discrete slice of an otherwise continuous and ongoing field of knowledge’
Two versions of Jeffrey Gray’s personality theory: 1982 and 2000
RST: Present
Gray & McNaughton (2004) revised theory:
• Ethoexperimental analysis of effects of anxiolytics and panciolytics by the Blanchards
• Ethologically-valid specific (rodent) behaviour (e.g., freezing)
• BIS inputs turn out to be conflict stimuli
• Categorical distinction between fear (avoidance) and anxiety (cautious approach)
Two-dimensional model (McNaughton & Corr, 2004)
• Defensive intensity• Defensive direction
Defensive Intensity: Fear
DANGER
TO AVOID: FFFS
avoidable
phobiaflightescapeavoidance
unavoidable
panicfightfreeze
TO APPROACH: BIS
avoidable
anxietyrisk assessmentbehaviouralinhibition
unavoidable
depressionbehaviouralsuppression
Defensive Direction: Fear vs. Anxiety
Gray & McNaughton (2000):Three Systems Theory
1. Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS): “Get me out of here!” • sensitive to aversive stimuli
• associated with defensive avoidance (fear) and escape (panic)
2. Behavioural Approach System (BAS): “Let’s go for it!” • sensitive to appetitive stimuli • associated with approach and ‘anticipatory pleasure’ (hope)
3. Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS): “Be careful!” • sensitive to goal conflict (e.g., approach-avoidance): ‘defensive approach’ • associated with rumination, risk-assessment and anxiety
FFFS
Pun+
CS-Pun+
IS-Pun+
Rew-
CS-Rew-
IS-Rew-
BAS
Rew+
CS-Rew+
IS-Rew+
Pun-
CS-Pun-
IS-Pun-
BIS
AVOID
APPROACH
ATTEND
+
+
AROUSE+
+
-
-
Conflict detected if inputs similar
1. environmental scanning increased spread of attention2. external scanning risk assessment/exploration3. internal scanning memory
1. potentiated startle
2. displacement activity
5HT
PREFRONTAL “GAD” -DORSAL STREAM drug resistant
POSTERIOR GAD -CINGULATE cognition
SEPTO-HIPPO- GAD -CAMPAL SYSTEM cognition
defensiveapproach:Anxiety
AMYGDALA GAD -arousal
PREFRONTAL - OCD VENTRAL STREAM
ANTERIOR OCDCINGULATE
AMYGDALA Phobia - avoid
MEDIAL Phobia -HYPOTHALAMUS escape
PERIAQUEDUCTALPanic -GRAY explode/freeze
Defensiveavoidance:Fear
AMYGDALA Phobia- arousal
Personality traits
Leaving dangerous situation
Entering dangerous situation
Gray & McNaughton (200). The Neuropsychology
of Anxiety. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Defensive Direction
RST: Experimental Assays
1. Development ‘pure measures of functioning of (a) neural modules and(b) integrated defensive systems.
• Threshold measures for specific neural modules (e.g., panic)
• Co-activation measures for whole system (e.g., fear)
2. Determine relationship between (a) system’s activation and (b) personality
• Dimensional levels (e.g., punishment and reward sensitivity)
• Oblique levels (fear and anxiety)
• Clinical levels (e.g., PAG-related) panic disorder
Introversion Extraversion
Neuroticism
Stability
Punishment:
Fear and/or anxiety?
Impulsivity: Reward
30o
defensivedistance
5HT
PREFRONTAL Complex anxiety: DORSAL STREAM e.g., social
POSTERIOR GAD -CINGULATE anxiety/rumination
SEPTO-HIPPO- GAD -CAMPAL SYSTEM cognition/aversion
defensiveapproach
AMYGDALA GAD -arousal/
startle
PREFRONTAL - OCD: deepVENTRAL STREAMcomplex fear
ANTERIOR OCD: shallowCINGULATE simple obsession
AMYGDALA Phobia - avoid
MEDIAL Phobia -HYPOTHALAMUS escape
PERIAQUEDUCTALPanic -GRAY explode/freeze
defensiveavoidance
AMYGDALA Phobia- arousal
+
+
-
+ +
+
CO2 threshold: super-sensitivity
‘fear’-potentiated startle
Delayed matching to sample
Personality
RST: Fossils and Evolution
‘Gray’s personality theory’ is not a fossilised set of principles, hypotheses and findings, but rather a progressive science of
personality that changes with developments in basic brain-
behaviour sciences.
Personality description and explanation must follow these
developments in basic science because of the insurmountable
problems of the statistical approach to personality.
URL: http://www.swan.ac.uk/research/RST/
Sample of experimental assays to measure: (a) Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS), (b) Behavioural Approach System (BAS), and (c) Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS).
FFFS: One-way avoidanceConditioned freezing (no conflict) – electromyographicCold pressor test
BAS: Simple approach (e.g., CARROT task)Reaction time to appetitive cue (vs. neutral cue)Attentional bias to appetitive stimuli (e.g., dot probe)Error-free learning
BIS: Approach-avoidance conflict (classic test; e.g. interpersonal interaction)Avoidance-avoidance conflict (pure test; e.g., flight vs. freezing)Approach-approach conflict (frustration test)Counter-conditioningTwo-way avoidanceQ-task (behavioural inhibition)ExtinctionReversal learning
Carver & White (1994) BIS/BAS Scales
Even if something bad is about to happens to me, I rarely experience fear or nervousness. [FFFS]
Criticism or scolding hurts me a lot. [FFFS/BIS]
I feel pretty worried or upset when I think or know somebody is angry at me. [FFFS/BIS]
If I think something unpleasant is going to happen I usually get pretty “worked up”. [FFFS/BIS]
I feel worried when I think I have done poorly at something. [BIS]
I have few fears compared to my friends. [FFFS]
I worry about making mistakes. [BIS]
RST: Future Directions
1. The development of laboratory-based experimental tasks relevant to RST
• e.g., one-way (FFFS) and two-way (BIS) measures
2. New questionnaires to measure FFFS, BIS and BAS (BAS complexity?)
3. Clarifying the distinction between fear and anxiety in the new model using psychometric (e.g., threat scenarios), behavioural and genetic techniques
4. RST and problem gambling
5. Neural self-regulation of emotion
URL: http://www.swan.ac.uk/research/RST/