Negative Reinforcement and Positive Punishment

McConnell, James V.

doi:10.1207/s15328023top1704_10

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reinforcement is produced by denying the subject the opportunity to occupy a pleasant state as long as it would choose to, thus strengthening instrumental responding to approach or maintain that pleasant state; whereas punishment is produced by forcing the subject to occupy an unpleasant state longer than it would choose to, thus suppressing instrumental responding to avoid or escape from an unpleasant state (Estes, 1944;Solomon, 1964). A key insight arising from this distinction is that an aversive outcome can either reinforce (i.e., strengthen) or punish (i.e., weaken) an instrumentally conditioned response, depending on the context by which that outcome is presented (Crosbie, 1998;McConnell, 1990;Terhune & Premack, 1974). See Figure 1b for illustration.…”

Section: Motivational Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aversive motivation and cognitive control

Yee

Leng

Shenhav

et al. 2022

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aversive motivation plays a prominent role in driving individuals to exert cognitive control.However, the complexity of behavioral responses attributed to aversive incentives creates significant challenges for developing a clear understanding of the neural mechanisms of this motivation-control interaction. We review the animal learning, systems neuroscience, and computational literatures to highlight the importance of experimental paradigms that incorporate both motivational context manipulations and mixed motivational components (e.g., bundling of appetitive and aversive incentives). Specifically, we postulate that to understand aversive incentive effects on cognitive control allocation, a critical contextual factor is whether such incentives are associated with negative reinforcement or punishment. We further illustrate how the inclusion of mixed motivational components in experimental paradigms enables increased precision in the measurement of aversive influences on cognitive control. A sharpened experimental and theoretical focus regarding the manipulation and assessment of distinct motivational dimensions promises to advance understanding of the neural, monoaminergic, and computational mechanisms that underlie the interaction of motivation and cognitive control.

show abstract

Section: Motivational Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aversive motivation and cognitive control

Yee

Leng

Shenhav

et al. 2022

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, a classic rodent study found that the same aversive activity (i.e., forced running) strengthened leverpressing in one component of a multiple schedule, but suppressed drinking behavior in another component (Terhune & Premack, 1974). Importantly, this pivotal revelation demonstrates that the same aversive activity or outcome can reinforce (i.e., strengthen) or punish (i.e., weaken) an instrumental response, depending on the context by which the activity or outcome is presented (Crosbie, 1998;McConnell, 1990).…”

Section: Aversive Outcomes May Strengthen or Weaken Behavioral Responses Depending On The Motivational Contextmentioning

confidence: 97%

Aversive Motivation and Cognitive Control

Yee¹,

Leng²,

Shenhav³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aversive motivation plays a prominent role in motivating individuals to exert cognitive control. However, a significant obstacle has been the complexity of behavioral responses attributed to aversive incentives. In this review, we posit that incorporating motivational context and mixed motivation will enhance our current understanding of the neural and computational mechanisms underpinning these interactions. We highlight how delineating whether aversive incentives facilitate negative reinforcement or punishment can inform dissociable neural pathways and computational mechanisms for cognitive control allocation. Additionally, we demonstrate how including multiple bundled incentives in experimental paradigms enables precise measurement of aversive influences on cognitive control. The lateral habenula and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex are featured as part of a broader neural circuit for aversive motivational value, and dopaminergic and serotonergic projections may guide dissociable strategies for cognitive control allocation. Finally, these motivational dimensions help generate normative predictions for divergent strategies for control allocation. In sum, incorporating these motivational dimensions will facilitate more sophisticated understanding of the neural, monoaminergic, and computational mechanisms of aversive motivation and cognitive control.

show abstract

“…Terminology surrounding basic equine learning theory is commonly misconstrued, with positive and negative being taken with an emotional value either relating to the appropriateness of the stimulus or of the reaction (McConnell, 1990;Tauber, 1988).…”

Section: Knowledge and Application Of Learning Theory In Uk-based Equmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and Application of Learning Theory in UK-based Equestrians

Brown

Connor

2017

Anthrozoös

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning in equines occurs through a predictable chain of stimulus-responseconsequence processing. Whether the behavior persists will depend on the nature and timing of the consequence, whether it punishes or reinforces the response behavior. Knowledge and application of learning theory in UK-based equestrians was assessed by an online survey which probed three aspects of knowledge and understanding. Fifty-eight UK individuals (91% female) took part in the study and had an average of 12.4 years' equestrian experience. Almost one-third (31%) described themselves as professional equestrians. A questionnaire was used to assess participants' ability to identify and describe terminology associated with learning theory; self-report on their own knowledge and training methodology; and to express how they would respond in different training situations. Human-focused educational strategies were tested to assess their effectiveness and suitability for increasing understanding of learning theory. Professional equestrians expressed higher levels of subjective knowledge than amateurs (t(27) =-2.752, p = 0.018), with a moderate positive correlation between subjective knowledge and observer-scored knowledge (r = 0.443, p < 0.001).

show abstract

Negative Reinforcement and Positive Punishment

Cited by 13 publications

References 5 publications

Aversive motivation and cognitive control

Aversive motivation and cognitive control

Aversive Motivation and Cognitive Control

Understanding and Application of Learning Theory in UK-based Equestrians

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About