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/