Abstract
Social avoidance is a common characteristic of many clinical psychopathologies and is often triggered by social stress. Our lab uses Syrian hamsters to model stress-induced social avoidance, and we have previously established that both inescapable and escapable social defeat result in increased social avoidance when compared with no-defeat controls. Our previous work suggested, however, that social avoidance was significantly greater after inescapable defeat. The goal of this study was to determine if this difference in behavior after the two types of defeat was due to experimental differences in the controllability (i.e., escapability) of the defeat or simply to differences in the overall duration of the defeat. In Experiment 1, we used a yoked design to hold constant the duration of defeat between escapable and inescapable defeat conditions. This design resulted in only a very brief social defeat, yet when comparing defeated animals with no-defeat controls, a significant increase in social avoidance was still observed. In Experiment 2, we also used the yoked design, but the escape task was made more difficult to ensure a longer defeat experience. Again, we observed no effect of controllability. Together, these data suggest that the ability to escape a social stressor does not reduce the impact of the stressful experience. These results emphasize that social stressors need not be prolonged or uncontrollable to produce marked effects on subsequent behavior.