SOME EFFECTS OF PUNISHMENT ON PAIN‐ELICITED AGGRESSION<sup>1</sup>

Baenninger, Ronald; Grossman, Jan Carl

doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-1017

Cited by 26 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This suppression of attack behavior by punishment has also been obtained (Myer, 1966(Myer, , 1967(Myer, , 1968Myer and Baenninger, 1966) for rats during punishment of naturally occurring attacks and of attacks elicited by a tail pinch (Baenninger and Grossman, 1969). Similarly, Adler and Hogan (1963) found that punishment suppressed the natural aggressive display between male Siamese fighting fish.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Punishment of Elicited Aggression

Azrin¹

1970

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aversive shocks are known to produce aggression when the shocks are not dependent on behavior and to suppress behavior when the shocks are arranged as a dependent punisher. These two processes were studied by presenting non-dependent shock to monkeys at regular intervals, thereby producing biting attacks on a pneumatic tube. Immediate shock punishment was simultaneously delivered for each biting attack. The attacks were found to decrease as a function of increasing punishment intensity. These results show that aggression is eliminated by direct punishment of the aggression even when the stimulus that is used as a punisher otherwise causes the aggression.Aversive shock changes behavior in a direction that is determined by the temporal relation of the shock to the behavior. If the response terminates shock, the rate of that response increases and the process is called escape (see recent review by Dinsmoor, 1968). If the response produces the shock, the rate of that response decreases and the process is called punishment (see review by Church, 1963;Solomon, 1964;Azrin and Holz, 1966).In addition to these operant effects, shock also has eliciting effects. Shocks that are received by an animal independently of behavior will produce attack against other animals or objects (Ulrich and Azrin, 1962; Azrin, Hutchinson, and Azrin, Hutchinson, and Sallery, 1964(a); Azrin, Ulrich, Hutchinson, and Norman, 1964b; and see recent review by Azrin, 1967). The existence of this "painelicited" attack raises important theoretical and applied questions as to whether the usual operant effects of shock will occur if the response being punished is an attack response rather than a response that is not directly elicited by shock. Since shock elicits attack, the use of shock as a punisher might well increase the attacks rather than decrease them, a possibility that has been further considered

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Punishment of Elicited Aggression

Azrin¹

1970

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The present study does not indicate this to be the case; the punishment effects that were found utilizing these schedules provide a qualitatively and quantitatively accurate description of the effects produced by delivering shock after the autoshaped key peck. Since a number of studies have indicated that innate or reflexive behavioral patterns can be suppressed by shock and recovered by its removal (Adler and Hogan, 1963;Baenninger and Grossman, 1969;Baenninger and Ulm, 1969;Myer, 1967;Walters and Glazer, 1971), the generality of the effects of electric shock to the autoshaped key-peck response is not particularly surprising.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Punishment of Autoshaped Key‐peck Responses of Pigeons

Wesp

Lattal

Poling

1977

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of different voltages of response-dependent and response-independent electric shock on the frequency of key-peck responses engendered by an autoshaping procedure were studied. In Experiments I and II, each response produced a brief electric shock, and response frequency generally decreased more with higher-voltage shock. Preshock frequencies of responding were generally recovered across successive sessions of relatively lowvoltage shock delivery but not at higher shock voltages. The effects of response-dependent and response-independent shock were compared in Experiment III by using a yoked-control procedure in which each pigeon received each type of shock delivery at different times. Response-dependent shock generally produced greater decreases in response frequency. In the final experiment, one response-independent shock per autoshaping trial was scheduled. The number of autoshaped responses per trial was related to shock voltages. These results suggest that response-dependent and response-independent electric shock effectively decrease frequency of autoshaped responses.Key words: punishment, response-dependent electric shock, response-independent electric shock, autoshaping, fixed-trial procedure, key peck, pigeons Delivery of response-independent food after a response key is illuminated can result in key-peck responding in pigeons (Brown and Jenkins, 1968). This phenomenon has been called autoshaping and these autoshaped responses may persist for many sessions under such conditions (Brown and Jenkins, 1968;Ricci, 1973 Williams and Williams reported persistent key pecking under these contingencies. Other techniques of reducing response probability have been studied in relation to autoshaped responding. Schwartz and Williams (1972a) used a two-key procedure to suppress responding during a negative automaintenance procedure. After negative automaintenance was established with pigeons, a second response key, on which pecks had no scheduled consequence, was occasionally illuminated concurrently with the key associated with negative automaintenance. During trials on which both keys were illuminated, response rates on the negative automaintenance key were generally lower than during trials on which only the negative automaintenance key was illuminated. Eliminating food after the trial stimulus (Wasserman, 1972) and eliminating a positive correlation between occurrence of the trial stimulus and food presentation (Gamzu and Williams, 1971)

show abstract

“…Examples of elicited attacks are readily available. Pain elicits attacks in a variety of animal species (Scott, 1966;Hutchinson, 1971), whether produced by electric shock, intense heat (Ulrich and Azrin, 1961), or tail pinch (Baenninger and Grossman, 1969). Frustration was at one time held t o be the only source of aggressive behavior (Berkowitz, 1962) but is now seen as one of a number of sources.…”

Section: Procedures Which Produce Aggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SOME EFFECTS OF PUNISHMENT ON PAIN‐ELICITED AGGRESSION¹

Cited by 26 publications

References 7 publications

Punishment of Elicited Aggression

Punishment of Elicited Aggression

Punishment of Autoshaped Key‐peck Responses of Pigeons

Some consequences of aggressive behavior: A selective review of the literature on other animals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

SOME EFFECTS OF PUNISHMENT ON PAIN‐ELICITED AGGRESSION1

Cited by 26 publications

References 7 publications

Punishment of Elicited Aggression

Punishment of Elicited Aggression

Punishment of Autoshaped Key‐peck Responses of Pigeons

Some consequences of aggressive behavior: A selective review of the literature on other animals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

SOME EFFECTS OF PUNISHMENT ON PAIN‐ELICITED AGGRESSION¹