Resurgence is often defined as the recurrence of an extinguished behavior when a more recently reinforced alternative behavior is also extinguished. Resurgence has also been observed when the alternative behavior is devalued by other means (e.g., reinforcement rate or magnitude reductions). The present study investigated whether punishment of an alternative behavior would generate resurgence. A target response was reinforced during Phase 1 and then extinguished in Phase 2 while an alternative response was reinforced. During Phase 3, response-dependent foot shocks were superimposed on the schedule of reinforcement for the alternative response and shock intensity was escalated gradually across sessions. Resurgence of the target response was reliably observed, mostly at higher intensities. The effect was replicated in two subsequent exposures to the sequence of conditions, with resurgence tending to occur at the lowest foot shock intensity. These results suggest that devaluation of an alternative behavior via punishment can generate resurgence. Although it is difficult to reconcile the overall pattern of results with Bouton's context account, these findings are consistent with the suggestion that resurgence results from a "worsening of conditions" for the alternative behavior and with the formalization of that suggestion in terms of a choice-based matching-law account (i.e., Resurgence as Choice).
In his book Coercion and Its Fallout Murray Sidman argued against the use of punishment based on concerns about its shortcomings and side effects. Among his concerns were the temporary nature of response suppression produced by punishment, the dangers of conditioned punishment, increases in escape and avoidance responses, punishment‐induced aggression, and the development of countercontrol. This paper revisits Sidman's arguments about these putative shortcomings and side effects by examining the available data. Although Sidman's concerns are reasonable and should be considered when using any form of behavioral control, there appears to be a lack of strong empirical support for the notion that these potential problems with punishment are necessarily ubiquitous, long‐lasting, or specific to punishment. We describe the need for additional research on punishment in general, and especially on its putative shortcomings and side effects. We also suggest the need for more effective formal theories of punishment that provide a principled account of how, why, and when lasting effects of punishment and its potential side effects might be expected to occur or not. In addition to being necessary for a complete account of behavior, such data and theories might contribute to improved interventions for problems of human concern.
The present experiment investigated the effects of 1) repeated exposures to escalating punishment intensities and 2) repeated exposure to punishment after periods of vacation on response allocation between punished and unpunished responding in three groups of rats. The first group (intensity + vacation) experienced repeated exposures to escalating punishment intensities after a period of vacation (i.e., return to baseline) from punishment. The second group (intensity‐only) experienced repeated exposures to escalating punishment intensities without vacation from punishment. The third group (vacation‐only) experienced repeated exposures to a constant punishment intensity after a period of vacation from punishment. Results showed that superimposition of punishment on one of two concurrently available responses decreased allocation toward the punished response and increased allocation toward the unpunished response. Furthermore, greater changes in allocation were observed with the introduction of a moderate constant intensity than with the introduction of a low intensity that increased across sessions. Reexposure to punishment had different effects between the groups. Although there was evidence that high shock intensities can enhance the efficacy of lower intensities to shift allocation away from the punished response and toward the unpunished response, there was little evidence of changes in response allocation with reintroduction of punishment after a period of vacation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.