Psychology Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Reinforcement sensitivity: Reinforcement sensitivity in psychology refers to individual differences in the responsiveness of brain systems that mediate reactions to reward and punishment. It is based on Jeffrey Gray's biopsychological theory, which proposes two main systems the Behavioral Activation System (BAS), sensitive to rewards, and the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS), sensitive to punishment. These systems influence personality, affecting motivation and emotional responses. See also Jeffrey A. Grey, Reinforcement, Punishment, Behavior, Motivation, Emotion system, Fear, Learning theory, Animal studies._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Philip J. Corr on Reinforcement Sensitivity - Dictionary of Arguments
Corr I 348 Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory/Corr: The Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) of personality represents a bold attempt to account for the neuropsychological regulation of behaviour, and how individual differences in neuropsychological systems give rise to what we commonly label ‘personality’. RST is based upon notions of central states of emotion and motivation that mediate the relations between stimulus input and behavioural response: here ‘stimulus’ and ‘response’ can be internal processes, processes, and only inferred from ingenious behavioural experiments (e.g., sensory preconditioning; see McNaughton and Corr 2008)(1). Corr I 349 RST encompasses a number of approaches that move at different paces. This point is well made by Smillie, Pickering and Jackson (2006, p. 320)(2), who note that, although RST is often seen as a theory of personality, it is ‘more accurately identified as a neuropsychology of emotion, motivation and learning. In fact, RST was born of basic animal learning research, initially not at all concerned with personality’. An (…) important aspect of RST is the distinction between those parts that belong to the conceptual nervous system (cns) and those parts that belong to the central nervous system (CNS) (a distinction advanced by Hebb 1955)(3). Def cns/conceptual nervous system/Hebb: The cns component of RST provides the behavioural scaffolding, formalized within some theoretical framework (e.g., learning theory; see Gray 1975(4); or, ethoexperimental analysis; see Gray and McNaughton 2000)(5); Def CNS/Central Nervous System/Hebb: the CNS component specifies the brain systems involved, couched in terms of the latest knowledge of the neuroendocrine system (see McNaughton and Corr 2008)(1). As noted by Gray (1972a)(6), these two levels of explanation must be compatible. Corr I 360 Post-2000 RST: see >Terminology/Corr, Anxiety/Corr. Corr I 371 RST/Corr:Of importance is the translational nature of this research: we can now go from basic non-human animal studies to human ones, armed with a rigorous theory to guide the difficult process of understanding the neuropsychology of human personality. As an example of such translational research, Perkins and Corr (2006)(7) confirmed that the basic defensive reactions of rodents to cats in ethologically-valid situations are found in human defensive reactions to a range of threatening situations. Remaining problems: a) how best to characterize BAS processes and how to measure them by questionnaire (Corr 2008a(8); Pickering and Smillie 2008)(9); b) what is the relationship between conscious awareness, its functions and emotion/motivation (Gray 2004(10); Corr 2006(11), 2008a)(12); c) how best to operationalize reward and punishment variables in the laboratory and what predictions we should make about their possible interaction (Corr 2002a(13), 2008a(12)); d) what is the most appropriate way to measure FFFS (Fight–Flight–Freeze System;>Terminology/Gray) , BIS (Behavioral Inhibition System, >Terminology/Corr) and BAS (Behavioral Approach system, >Terminology/Corr) in human beings, and how such measures can be validated; and e) are the principles of frustrative non-reward and relief of non-punishment useful in explaining counter-productive and paradoxical behaviour (McNaughton and Corr in press). On top of these problems are wider ones, ranging from the role of ‘free will’ in behaviour, and how individual behaviour is regulated by society (e.g., effective penal systems). 1. Corr, P. J. and McNaughton, N. 2008. Reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality, in P. J. Corr (ed). The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality, pp. 155–87. Cambridge University Press 2. Smillie, L. D., Pickering, A. D. and Jackson, C. J. 2006. The new reinforcement sensitivity theory: implications for personality measurement, Personality and Social Psychology Review 10: 320–35 3. Hebb, D. O. 1955. Drives and the C. N. S. (Conceptual Nervous System), Psychological Review 62: 243–54 4. Gray, J. A. 1975. Elements of a two-process theory of learning. London: Academic Press 5. Gray, J. A. and McNaughton, N. 2000. The neuropsychology of anxiety: an enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxford University Press 6. Gray, J. A., 1972a. Learning theory, the conceptual nervous system and personality, in V. D. Nebylitsyn and J. A. Gray (eds.), The biological bases of individual behaviour, pp. 372–99. New York: Academic Press 7. Perkins, A. M. and Corr, P. J. 2006. Reactions to threat and personality: psychometric differentiation of intensity and direction dimensions of human defensive behaviour, Behavioural Brain Research 169: 21–8 8. Corr, P. J. 2008a. Reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST): Introduction, in P. J. Corr (ed). The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality, pp. 1–43. Cambridge University Press 9. Pickering, A. D. and Smillie, L. D. 2008. The behavioural activation system: challenges and opportunities, in P. J. Corr (ed). The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality, pp. 120–54. Cambridge University Press 10. Gray, J. A. 2004. Consciousness: creeping up on the Hard Problem. Oxford University Press 11. Corr, P. J. 2006. Understanding biological psychology. Oxford: Blackwell 12. Corr, P. J. 2008a. Reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST): Introduction, in P. J. Corr (ed). The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality, pp. 1–43. Cambridge University Press 13. Corr, P. J. 2002a. J. A. Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity theory: tests of the joint subsystem hypothesis of anxiety and impulsivity, Personality and Individual Differences 33: 511–32 Philip J. Corr, „ The Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality“, in: Corr, Ph. J. & Matthews, G. (eds.) 2009. The Cambridge handbook of Personality Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press_____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Corr I Philip J. Corr Gerald Matthews The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology New York 2009 Corr II Philip J. Corr (Ed.) Personality and Individual Differences - Revisiting the classical studies Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne 2018 |
||
> Counter arguments against Corr
> Counter arguments in relation to Reinforcement Sensitivity
