Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1994 Mar;61(2):135–153. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-135

The puzzle of responding maintained by response-contingent shock.

M T Laurence 1, P N Hineline 1, P J Bersh 1
PMCID: PMC1334403  PMID: 8169566

Abstract

Four squirrel monkeys were first exposed to a sequence of procedures that reliably generate responding maintained by brief response-contingent electric shocks arranged according to a fixed-interval schedule. After responding had become stable on the fixed-interval schedule, additional contingencies were added in tandem, whereby after completion of the interval, the spacing of responses affected shock delivery. In one procedure, responses had to be spaced more widely than their previous median value if shock were to be delivered. In the other procedure, responses had to be spaced more closely to produce shock. On the first of these procedures, decreased but stable responses rates would indicate that shock functioned as a positive reinforcer; on the second, increased response rates would indicate the positively reinforcing function. Instead, response rates accelerated on the procedure that targeted more widely spaced responses for shock delivery, and decelerated or ceased on the procedure that arranged for shocks to be produced by more closely spaced responses. Consistent with other recent findings, these results question the interpretation of performances maintained by response-contingent shock as engendered by positive reinforcement and are consistent with aversive-control interpretations. The details of that aversive control are not entirely clear, however, and these same procedures would be informative if applied to shock-maintained behavior that is generated in other ways.

Full text

PDF
135

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. 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]
  2. Baum W. M. Time allocation and negative reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Nov;20(3):313–322. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Branch M. N., Dworkin S. I. Effects of ratio contingencies on responding maintained by schedules of electric-shock presentation (response-produced shock). J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Sep;36(2):191–205. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.36-191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Byrd L. D. Responding in the squirrel monkey under second-order schedules of shock delivery. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Jul;18(1):155–167. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Galbicka G., Branch M. N. Selective punishment of interresponse times. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 May;35(3):311–322. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Galbicka G., Platt J. R. Interresponse-time punishment: a basis for shock-maintained behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 May;41(3):291–308. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. HAKE D. F., AZRIN N. H. An apparatus for delivering pain shock to monkevs. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6:297–298. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-297. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. 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]
  9. Hineline P. N., Herrnstein R. J. Timing in free-operant and discrete-trial avoidance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):113–126. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hutchinson R. R., Renfrew J. W., Young G. A. Effects of long-term shock and associated stimuli on aggressive and manual responses. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Mar;15(2):141–166. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. McKearney J. W. Fixed-interval schedules of electric shock presentation: extinction and recovery of performance under different shock intensities and fixed-interval durations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Mar;12(2):301–313. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. McKearney J. W. Maintenance of responding under a fixed-interval schedule of electric shock-presentation. Science. 1968 Jun 14;160(3833):1249–1251. doi: 10.1126/science.160.3833.1249. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Pitts R. C., Malagodi E. F. Preference for less frequent shock under fixed-interval schedules of electric-shock presentation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Jul;56(1):21–32. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. SIDMAN M. Two temporal parameters of the maintenance of avoidance behavior by the white rat. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1953 Aug;46(4):253–261. doi: 10.1037/h0060730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES