フラストレーション効果について

スポンサーリンク

概要

• 論文の詳細を見る

• The purpose of the present note is to clarify the frustrative effect (FE) defined by Amsel and to point out the controversial issues in some theoretical interpretations to the frustrative nonreward phenomena. Training rats in a double-runway situation with a pellet in each section and then withholding the first pellet, we would find that rats run faster to the second pellet. By Amsel (1954, 1958, 1962), this response facilitation (e.g. an increased running speed) resulting from nonreward in the first goal section (G-1) was defined as the FE and explained theoretically in terms of an increase in the generalized drive of frustrative nonreward trials. According to his hypothesis, the strength of this effect depends upon the strength of fractional anticipatory reward (γ_G) generated in the first runway (R-1). Although Amsel conceived frustrative nonreward as a new motivating condition, there have been some alternative interpretations refusing to postulate that motivating mechanism. Seward et al. (1957) proposed the drive-reduction hypothesis (or the de-motivation hypothesis) in opposition to the Amsel's drive-increment notion. They assumed that the FE could be attributed to a reduction of the incentive motivational variable on reward trials rather than frustration on nonreward trials. A second alternative account of the FE phenomena is due to the Bower's (1962) r_g-perseveration hypothesis. The principal assumption in his proposal is that when the r_g is aroused in the R-1 and then not satisfied by reward in the G-1, this r_g and its consequent excitement persist for some amount of time. If during this time a second response is emitted, the persisting r_g and its excitement add in to increase the net incentive motivation for this second response. One of the striking controversies among the interpretations on the FE is, as above-mentioned, the drive-increment vs. the drive-reduction. In order to reconcile such an opposition, we need to examine strictly the FE phenomena, considering the following questions. (1) How is the FE related to the secondary reinforcement effect and to the partial reinforcement effect? (2) How is the FE related to responses which precede the frustrative nonreward? (3) Is the FE produced by the nonreward under the conditions of other drives than hunger? (4) And again, is the FE produced by the nonreward under the conditions of other situations than a two-section runway? (5) Is the FE observed in the experiments using other animals? (6) How are the aforesaid hypotheses placed in the general behavior theories? And it is also concluded that we must consider other experimental variables such as the quality of reward, the effort of R-1 response, early experiences, drugs, and brain-stimulations.

• 横浜国立大学の論文
• 1970-03-20

著者

• 平出 彦仁

  心理学教室

関連論文

• 比喩理解に関する一研究
• ある女子大学生の自我同一性確立の過程に関する事例研究
• 知識・概念研究のための方法論的検討(III) : 同一被験者集団に対するカテゴリー内容の分析
• 知識・概念研究のための方法論的検討(II) : 尺度化されたカテゴリー内容の分析について
• 知識・概念研究のための方法論的検討(I) : カテゴリー内容の分析について
• 漢字の情報処理に関する一研究
• 知識の心理的研究における二・三の問題
• 児童・生徒におけるlearned helplessnessに関する研究(2) : learned helplessnessに及ぼすpersonal factorsについて
• 児童・生徒におけるlearned helplessnessに関する研究
• 発育と発達におけるCatch-up現象について
• 行動療法における学習理論的背景に関する一考察 : 主として行動療法の定義において
• フラストレーション効果について

もっと見る 閉じる

スポンサーリンク