Literature DB >> 16811693

The relative aversiveness of signalled versus unsignalled shock-punishment.

L Macdonald.   

Abstract

Six rats were trained on a two-component multiple schedule with each component consisting of a two-link chain schedule. Differential response suppression in the two initial links, as well as in the two terminal links of the chain schedules, was used as a measure of the relative aversiveness of stimulus events in the two terminal links. When signalled and unsignalled shock-punishment (in addition to equal numbers of food reinforcers) were scheduled in the separate terminal links, subjects responded at lower rates in the initial link preceding unsignalled shock-punishment than in the initial link preceding signalled shock-punishment. Similarly, subjects responded at lower rates in the terminal link containing unsignalled shock-punishment than in the terminal link containing signalled shock-punishment. Reversing the terminal-link positions of signalled and unsignalled shock-punishment led to a reversal of the differential response suppression in the two initial and the two terminal links of the chain schedules. These results indicate that signalled punishment is relatively less aversive than unsignalled punishment and support an "information hypothesis", which assumes that a condition in which information is provided about the onset of environmental events, even negative events such as shock punishment, is more reinforcing than a condition in which such information is absent.

Entities:  

Year:  1973        PMID: 16811693      PMCID: PMC1334100          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-37

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  14 in total

1.  DELAYED PUNISHMENT OF A RUNWAY RESPONSE.

Authors:  A BARON
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1965-08

2.  Choice of a warning signal or no warning signal in an unavoidable shock situation.

Authors:  J S LOCKARD
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1963-06

3.  Producing either positive or negative tendencies to a stimulus associated with shock.

Authors:  W O EVANS
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1962-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  The stimulus conditions which follow learned responses.

Authors:  C C PERKINS
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1955-09       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  A rate measure of the relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled shock.

Authors:  L Macdonald; A Baron
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Delay of punishment gradients for the goldfish.

Authors:  J S Myer; D Ricci
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1968-10

7.  Chronic fear produced by unpredictable electric shock.

Authors:  M E Seligman
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1968-10

8.  Effect of delayed punishment on an immediately rewarded response in humans.

Authors:  R K Banks; M Vogel-Sprott
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1965-10

9.  A classical conditioning procedure to control suppression of a rewarded response punished after delay.

Authors:  M D Vogel-Sprott
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  1966-08

10.  Preference for warned shock: information and/or preparation.

Authors:  P Badia; S Suter; P Lewis
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  1967-02
View more
  3 in total

1.  Effects on responding of mixed and multiple schedules of signalled and unsignalled response-dependent electric-shock delivery.

Authors:  N Hymowitz
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-05       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Choice and the dependability of stimuli that predict shock and safety.

Authors:  P Badia; J Harsh; C C Coker; B Abbott
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-07       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  On the effectiveness of and preference for punishment and extinction components of function-based interventions.

Authors:  Gregory P Hanley; Cathleen C Piazza; Wayne W Fisher; Kristen A Maglieri
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2005
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.