Human defensive behaviors to threat scenarios show parallels to fear- and anxiety-related defense patterns of non-human mammals
Section snippets
Hypotheses from the animal literature
The virtual absence of systematic information on normal human defensive behaviors suggests that any description and analysis of these might be helpful. However, the existence of detailed descriptive and experimental data on defensive behaviors in rats and mice also provides a set of specific hypotheses against which such human data can be evaluated [2]. These data suggest that a major factor in the organization of defense in infrahuman mammals is the ambiguity of the threat stimulus. Discrete
Materials
Twelve very brief scenarios were constructed. Each of these sets up a potential threat situation involving a threatening individual, cues of potential threat from an individual, or, (for the ‘bomb’ scenario) a threatening human-constructed device. The scenarios were designed to vary along dimensions of dangerousness; escapability; distance between threat and subject; ambiguity of threat; and availability of a place of concealment or protection. In order to quantify the position of each scenario
Ratings of scenarios
Dangerousness. Scenarios received ratings between 2.91 and 4.77 on the 1–5 dangerousness scale. The scenario rated as least dangerous was item (6) ‘acquaintance’. The scenario rated most dangerous was item (7) ‘park’.
Escapability. Escapability ratings ranged from 1.4—item (3) ‘traffic signal’ to 4.5—item (2) ‘elevator’.
Distant. Distance ratings were from 1 (a tie between the elevator scenario and item (8) grab) and 3.3, item (12) whisper.
Ambiguity. Ambiguity ratings varied between 2.2 (a tie
Sex differences
Sex differences in defensiveness began with higher female ratings of dangerousness of the scenarios. An additional difference was that for seven of the 12 scenarios, the overall pattern (i.e. proportion of each response selected as first choice) was different for men and women. These seven scenarios (bush, elevator, stoplight, corner, grab, phone, or whisper) all involve a present, or highly predictable, malicious conspecific, without any apparent weapon. Follow-up conversations with subjects
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Dr Reg Wood and his Psychology classes at Honolulu Community College. We particularly appreciate the enthusiasm of these students and their willingness to respond thoughtfully and carefully to a set of difficult and time-consuming tasks.
References (33)
Conditioned fear to environmental context: cardiovascular and behavioral components in the rat
Brain Res
(2000)- et al.
The cardiovascular and behavioral response to cat odor in rats: unconditioned and conditioned effects(1)
Brain Res
(2001) - et al.
Differentiation of anxiolytic and panicolytic drugs by effects on rat and mouse defense test batteries
Neurosci Biobehav Rev
(1997) - et al.
Mouse defensive behaviors: pharmacological and behavioral assays for anxiety and panic
Neurosci Biobehav Rev
(2001) - et al.
Further evidence that the mouse defense test battery is useful for screening anxiolytic and panicolytic drugs: effects of acute and chronic treatment with alprazolam
Neuropharmacology
(1995) Does long term potentiation in periacqueductal gray (PAG) mediate lasting changes in rodent anxiety-like behavior (ALB) produced by predator stress?—effects of low frequency stimulation (LFS) of PAG on place preference and changes in ALB produced by predator stress
Behav Brain Res
(2001)- et al.
Sodium lactate elicits anxiety in rats after repeated GABA receptor blockade in the basolateral amygdala
Eur J Pharmacol
(2000) - et al.
Low-dose midazolam attenuates predatory odor avoidance in rats
Pharmacol Biochem Behav
(1999) - et al.
Habituation and generalization of phobic responses to cat odor
Brain Res Bull
(1994) - et al.
Behavioral consequences in animal tests of anxiety and exploration of exposure to cat odor
Brain Res Bull
(1992)