Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1965 Sep;8(5):279–293. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1965.8-279

Conditioned punishment1

D F Hake, N H Azrin
PMCID: PMC1338095  PMID: 14342363

Abstract

Responses of pigeons were maintained by a VI schedule of food reinforcement. Conditioned punishment was programmed by having these responses concurrently produce an originally neutral stimulus. The effectiveness of this response-contingent stimulus was maintained by infrequent and prearranged stimulus-shock pairings delivered independently of responses. This conditioned punishment procedure reduced the overall response rate as long as the procedure was in effect. The extent and durability of the reduction was a function of the intensity of the shock that was paired with the stimulus. Analysis of the reduction in the overall response rate revealed: (1) a reduction of responses occurring in the absence of the response-contingent stimulus, which was designated as a “punishing” effect, and (2) a reduction of responses during the response-contingent stimulus, which was designated as a “suppressive” effect.

Full text

PDF
279

Selected References

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

  1. ANNAU Z., KAMIN L. J. The conditioned emotional response as a function of intensity of the US. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1961 Aug;54:428–432. doi: 10.1037/h0042199. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. APPEL J. B. Punishment in the squirrel monkey Saimiri sciurea. Science. 1961 Jan 6;133(3445):36–36. doi: 10.1126/science.133.3445.36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. AZRIN N. H. A technique for delivering shock to pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1959 Apr;2:161–163. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1959.2-161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. AZRIN N. H. Effects of punishment intensity during variable-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1960 Apr;3:123–142. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1960.3-123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. AZRIN N. H., HOLZ W. C., HAKE D. F. Fixed-ratio punishment. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6:141–148. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. BARON A. Functions of CS and US in fear conditioning. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1959 Oct;52:591–593. doi: 10.1037/h0044913. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. DARDANO J. F., SAUERBRUNN D. SELECTIVE PUNISHMENT OF FIXED-RATIO PERFORMANCE. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 May;7:255–260. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. EVANS W. O. Producing either positive or negative tendencies to a stimulus associated with shock. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Jul;5:335–337. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. GUTTMAN N., KALISH H. I. Discriminability and stimulus generalization. J Exp Psychol. 1956 Jan;51(1):79–88. doi: 10.1037/h0046219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. HOLZ W. C., AZRIN N. H., ULRICH R. E. Punishment of temporally spaced responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Jan;6:115–122. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. HONIG W. K., SLIVKA R. M. STIMULUS GENERALIZATION OF THE EFFECTS OF PUNISHMENT. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Jan;7:21–25. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. KELLEHER R. T., GOLLUB L. R. A review of positive conditioned reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:543–597. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-s543. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. MOWRER O. H., AIKEN E. G. Contiguity vs. drive-reduction in conditioned fear: temporal variations in conditioned and unconditioned stimulus. Am J Psychol. 1954 Mar;67(1):26–38. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. MOWRER O. H., SOLOMON L. N. Contiguity vs. drive-reduction in conditioned fear: the proximity and abruptness of drive-reduction. Am J Psychol. 1954 Mar;67(1):15–25. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. MYERS J. L. Secondary reinforcement: a review of recent experimentation. Psychol Bull. 1958 Sep;55(5):284–301. doi: 10.1037/h0046125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Pierrel R. A generalization gradient for auditory intensity in the rat. J Exp Anal Behav. 1958 Oct;1(4):303–313. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1958.1-303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Stein L., Sidman M., Brady J. V. Some effects of Two Temporal Variables on Conditioned Suppression. J Exp Anal Behav. 1958 Apr;1(2):153–162. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1958.1-153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [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