Abstract
A series of experiments was conducted to establish free-operant escape-avoidance responding in rats using noise as the stimulus. Naive rats did not acquire a bar-press response on an escape-avoidance of noise schedule. Similarly, free-operant responding established using escape-avoidance of shock was not maintained when noise was substituted for shock. Noise stimuli of 110 dB did maintain responding, but at a lower level than during training, when the noise stimuli had first been paired with shock. Noise stimuli of 97 dB and 87 dB were not effective under those same conditions. Additional rats were trained on a free-operant escape-avoidance schedule of shock and then exposed to a delayed conditioning procedure in which noise was the conditioned stimulus and shock was the unconditioned stimulus. When these subjects were then tested with noise alone, two of the three subjects conditioned and tested with 105-dB noise displayed escape-avoidance of noise, but none of the rats conditioned and tested at 97 dB displayed escape-avoidance of noise. The results suggest that free-operant escape-avoidance of noise can be demonstrated; however, only higher intensity noise stimuli that have been paired with shock are effective.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- ANGER D. The role of temporal discriminations in the reinforcement of Sidman avoidance behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Jul;6(3):477–506. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-s477. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- BARNES G. W., KISH G. B. Reinforcing properties of the termination of intense auditory stimulation. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1957 Feb;50(1):40–43. doi: 10.1037/h0048682. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- CAMPBELL B. A. Auditory and aversion thresholds of rats for bands of noise. Science. 1957 Mar 29;125(3248):596–597. doi: 10.1126/science.125.3248.596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Campbell B. A., Bloom J. M. Relative aversiveness of noise and shock. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1965 Dec;60(3):440–442. doi: 10.1037/h0022572. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- D'Andrea T. Avoidance of timeout from response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 May;15(3):319–325. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- FLESHLER M., HOFFMAN H. S. A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:529–530. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Halpern M., Lyon M. The stability and control of conditioned noise aversion in the tilt cage. J Exp Anal Behav. 1966 Jul;9(4):357–367. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-357. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Harrison J. M., Abelson R. M. The maintenance of behavior by the termination and onset of intense noise. J Exp Anal Behav. 1959 Jan;2(1):23–42. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1959.2-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Herrnstein R. J., Hineline P. N. Negative reinforcement as shock-frequency reduction. J Exp Anal Behav. 1966 Jul;9(4):421–430. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Myers A. K. Contradictory evidence for aversion to auditory stimuli resulting from different test methods. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1967 Aug;64(1):171–175. doi: 10.1037/h0024815. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- SIDMAN M. Avoidance conditioning with brief shock and no exteroceptive warning signal. Science. 1953 Aug 7;118(3058):157–158. doi: 10.1126/science.118.3058.157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]