ライフサイエンスコーパス: electric shock

1 eneralization stimuli (GS; never paired with electric shock).

2 experience an intense tactile stimulus (mild electric shock).

3 and an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US, electric shock).

4 y following an unexpected negative stimulus, electric shock.

5 nset that closely matched that observed with electric shock.

6 ormed in the APL neuron by pairing odor with electric shock.

7 neural responses to waiting for a cutaneous electric shock.

8 , and the unconditioned stimulus (US) was an electric shock.

9 ce tasks are not a consequence of the use of electric shock.

10 with increasing association between CSs and electric shocks.

11 ts of money and different numbers of painful electric shocks.

12 i (CSs) became more strongly associated with electric shocks.

13 and brain activity in response to threat of electric shocks.

14 abilistic mapping between visual stimuli and electric shocks.

15 ty in coronary-perfused rabbit hearts during electric shocks (50 to 500 V).

16 sions combining monetary rewards and painful electric shocks, administered to the participants themse

17 ive stress, ethanol exposure, heat shock and electric shock, also induce NEMO SUMOylation, thus demon

18 e mutant lines to associate an odor cue with electric shock and then examined the memory of this cond

19 rol a stressor (i.e., avoid and/or escape an electric shock), and compared the changes with those obs

20 high-intensity radiant heat or reactivity to electric shock, and produce hyperalgesia as measured by

21 resentation of negative reinforcers, such as electric shock, and the omission of expected positive re

22 urbances observed experimentally after large electric shocks are delivered to excitable cells and tis

23 of 4-ms shock pulses were used to mimic the electric shock by a power-line frequency electric field.

24 e prospect of an unusual sensory experience (electric shock), compared with the opportunity to gain a

25 n; only the midsize one was paired with mild electric shock [conditioned stimulus (CS)], while the ot

26 a compound of interest and then received an electric shock delivered via corneal electrodes.

27 otential changes (DeltaVm) induced by strong electric shocks delivered during the action potential pl

28 gth and waveform on cardiac vulnerability to electric shocks have been extensively documented, the co

29 33 cm gray wooden cube and was given a mild electric shock if it did not jump up onto the box rim in

30 Cardiac death was induced by electric shock in 10 pigs.

31 cits caused by prior exposure to inescapable electric shock in rats (learned helplessness).

32 echanisms for the increased vulnerability to electric shocks in infarcted hearts.

33 eft and right ventricles in vulnerability to electric shocks in rabbit hearts.

34 Electric shock is the only effective therapy against ven

35 This result suggests that electric shock may indeed mimic at least one naturally o

36 h dumb alleles showed negligible learning in electric shock-mediated conditioning while they exhibite

37 t anticonvulsant activity in the rat maximal electric shock (MES) induced seizure assay.

38 this task, participants were threatened with electric shocks of uncertain intensity, which were unpre

39 rons respond when the fly is stimulated with electric shock or with any odor that was tested.

40 netary gain) and aversive (monetary loss and electric shock) outcomes during high-resolution function

41 le served as a conditioned stimulus (CS; 50% electric shock probability) and rectangles with widths o

42 multiple training sessions pairing odor and electric shock punishment with rest intervals.

43 ther insect species conditioned with salt or electric shock reinforcers [4-7], learned avoidances of

44 ed as conditioned stimuli paired with a mild electric shock serving as the unconditioned stimulus.

45 Pairing odor and electric-shock stimulation increases odor-evoked calcium

46 ond with axonal calcium influx when odors or electric shock stimuli are presented to the fly.

47 Pairing of odor and electric shock stimuli in a single training trial or mul

48 One pairing of odor and electric shock stimuli or multiple, massed pairings did

49 nctional optical imaging showed that odor or electric shock stimuli presented to the fly causes trans

50 at the APL neuron responded to both odor and electric-shock stimuli that was presented to the fly wit

51 hich infarcted hearts are more vulnerable to electric shocks than healthy hearts remain poorly unders

52 ubjects were told to expect mild but painful electric shocks; there was no possibility of receiving s

53 Indeed, the widespread use of strong electric shock to induce sensitization (an enhancement o

54 Delivery of a strong electric shock to the heart remains the only effective t

55 rdiac defibrillation) is to deliver a strong electric shock to the heart.

56 nimize the risk of accidental delivery of an electric shock to the rescuer.

57 g a tone-conditioned stimulus paired with an electric shock to the wrist and another tone not paired

58 er financial penalty or demonstrably painful electric shock to their co-participant, thereby increasi

59 flow and may adversely affect the ability of electric shocks to accomplish defibrillation.

60 rillator (ICD) leads are designed to deliver electric shocks to the heart for termination of ventricu

61 more, and that many preferred to administer electric shocks to themselves instead of being left alon

62 conditioned stimulus (CS) was paired with an electric shock unconditioned stimulus (US).

63 an auditory conditioned stimulus (CS) and an electric shock unconditioned stimulus (US).

64 of the odors (conditioned stimulus) and the electric shock (unconditioned stimulus) in mushroom body

65 ring of an odor-conditioned stimulus with an electric shock-unconditioned stimulus causes new project

66 Using Pavlovian fear conditioning (electric shock), we quantify generalization as the degre

67 ly changing values of cues signaling painful electric shocks, which predict behavioral suppression of