CONTINUOUS PUNISHMENT OF FREE‐OPERANT AVOIDANCE IN THE RAT<sup>1</sup>

Powell, Robert; Morris, Grant L.

doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-149

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Powell and Morris (1969) showed that responses maintained by a shock-postponement procedure were immediately suppressed by the introduction of punishment shock of equal intensity to avoidance shock. When punishment shock was introduced at intensities lower than avoidance shock, all rats showed systematic decreases in response rate and increases in avoidance shocks as punishment shock intensity was gradually increased.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE¹

Powell

Peck

1969

J Exper Analysis Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A procedure in which responses reduced intermittently presented electric shocks to one quarter of their originally scheduled intensity, effectively engendered and maintained lever pressing in hooded rats. This contingency also markedly increased the response rates of rats initially trained under an unsignaled avoidance procedure. The responding of all animals extinguished rapidly when shock was withdrawn. Subsequently, it was discovered that high response rates could be maintained solely through presentation of shocks that were not affected by responses. Variations in the interval between shocks and changes in shock intensity over a wide range did not attenuate responding. Terminal performance was characterized by a consistent pattern of shock-elicited responses. Responses were also elicited by a tone following repeated tone-shock pairings. Finally, responding that was maintained by response-independent shocks was quickly suppressed by response-contingent shocks of the same intensity. CONTENTS Method Experiment I. Unsignaled avoidance (Sidman) compared with response-produced reduction in the intensity of intermittent shocks Experiment 11. Extinction of responding through a shock withdrawal procedure Experiment III. The effect of increases in the intensity of the response-reduced shocks with eventual maintenance of responding through non-contingent shock presentations Experiment IV. Modulation of responding through variations in the shock-shock interval Experiment V. Effects of non-contingent shock intensity and response-contingent shock upon responding maintained by non-contingent shock Experiment VI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE¹

Powell

Peck

1969

J Exper Analysis Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies of punishment have shown that the rate of a punished response decreases as the intensity of the punishing stimulus increases (Azrin, 1960;Appel and Peterson, 1965;Hake, Azrin, and Oxford, 1967;Powell and Morris, 1969). It has also been found that the effects of a punishing stimulus are influenced by the schedule of reinforcement maintaining the response.…”

Section: University Of South Floridamentioning

confidence: 99%

THE EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT SHOCK INTENSITY UPON RESPONDING UNDER MULTIPLE SCHEDULES¹

Powell

1970

J Exper Analysis Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the first of two experiments, responses of two pigeons were maintained by multiple variable-interval, variable-ratio schedules of food reinforcement. Concurrent punishment was introduced, which consisted of a brief electric shock after each tenth response. The initial punishment intensities had no lasting effect upon responding. Then, as shock intensity increased, variable-ratio response rates were suppressed more quickly than variable-interval response rates. When shock intensity decreased, variable-interval responding recovered more quickly, but the rates under both schedules eventually returned to their pre-punishment levels. In the second experiment, the following conditions were studied in three additional pigeons: (1) With each shock intensity in effect for a number of sessions, punishment shock intensity was gradually increased and decreased and responding was maintained by multiple variable-ratio, fixed-ratio schedules of food reinforcement; (2) Changes in punishment shock intensity as described above with responding maintained by either a variable-ratio or a fixed-ratio schedule, which were presented on alternate days; (3) Session-to-session changes in shock intensity with responding maintained by multiple variable-ratio, fixed-ratio schedules. Responding under the two schedules was suppressed to approximately the same extent by a particular shock intensity. Also, post-reinforcement pauses under the fixed-ratio schedule increased as response suppression increased.

show abstract

“…Sei., 1970, Vol. 21 (3) punishment of avoidance, one could predict either acceleration (Brown, 1969;Sandler, 1964) from the discrete trial literature, or suppression (McCullough, Shuman, & McIntire, 1969;McIntire, Davis, Cohen, & Franch, 1968;Powell & Morris, 1969) from the free operant literature. If the analogy were drawn with secondary punishment of appetitive behavior, suppression should result (Hake & Azrin, 1965).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Secondary self-punitive behavior: Effects of periodic punishment of Sidman avoidance by a Pavlovian CS+

Riess

1970

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seven naive rats were trained on Sidman avoidance. Following adaptation to 3-sec response-contingent light presentations, Ss reeeived alternate days of VI 3-sec classical conditioning in which the light was paired with shock. During testing, the unreinforced light es was response produced during short periods of the avoidance sessions. Acceleration of avoidance ("secondary" self-punitive behavior) resulted during these periods, Pavlovian extinction resulted in its rapid attenuation, and Pavlovian reconditioning produced immediate recovery. An interresponse time analysis of the secondary punishment periods revealed that mean IRTs increase linearly as a function of the number of previously punished responses, suggesting that the phenomenon is sufficiently delicate that response suppression would probably result if the punishment periods were prolonged.

show abstract

CONTINUOUS PUNISHMENT OF FREE‐OPERANT AVOIDANCE IN THE RAT¹

Cited by 13 publications

References 13 publications

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE¹

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE¹

THE EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT SHOCK INTENSITY UPON RESPONDING UNDER MULTIPLE SCHEDULES¹

Secondary self-punitive behavior: Effects of periodic punishment of Sidman avoidance by a Pavlovian CS+

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

CONTINUOUS PUNISHMENT OF FREE‐OPERANT AVOIDANCE IN THE RAT1

Cited by 13 publications

References 13 publications

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE1

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE1

THE EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT SHOCK INTENSITY UPON RESPONDING UNDER MULTIPLE SCHEDULES1

Secondary self-punitive behavior: Effects of periodic punishment of Sidman avoidance by a Pavlovian CS+

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

CONTINUOUS PUNISHMENT OF FREE‐OPERANT AVOIDANCE IN THE RAT¹

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE¹

PERSISTENT SHOCK‐ELICITED RESPONDING ENGENDERED BY A NEGATIVE‐REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURE¹

THE EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT SHOCK INTENSITY UPON RESPONDING UNDER MULTIPLE SCHEDULES¹