Literature DB >> 16811916

A temporal parameter influencing choice between signalled and unsignalled shock schedules.

J Harsh, P Badia.   

Abstract

The present study investigated whether choice of a signalled variable-time shock schedule over an unsignalled one was influenced by the average intershock interval. Eight rats were given a choice between signalled and unsignalled shock schedules in a series of conditions with average intershock intervals of 510, 270, 150, 90, 60, and 45 sec. Each test condition was preceded by a training-baseline condition, and schedule values were arranged in an ascending (four subjects) or descending (four subjects) order. Choice of the signalled conditions was directly related to the average intershock interval of the variable-time schedule for six of the eight subjects. The per cent of time in the signalled condition was highest when the average intershock interval was 150 sec or longer and lowest when the average intershock interval was 45 sec. The findings were interpreted as being due to changes in the safety features of the signalled schedule, rather than to changes in the average intershock interval per se.

Entities:  

Year:  1976        PMID: 16811916      PMCID: PMC1333471          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1976.25-327

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


  7 in total

1.  The relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled avoidance.

Authors:  P Badia; S Culbertson; P Lewis
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1971-07       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Punishment of observing by the negative discriminative stimulus.

Authors:  D E Mulvaney; J A Dinsmoor; A R Jwaideh; L H Hughes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  The relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled escapable and inescapable shock.

Authors:  P Badia; S Culbertson
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-05       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Choice for signalled over unsignalled shock as a function of shock intensity.

Authors:  J Harsh; P Badia
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1975-05       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Choice of longer or stronger signalled shock over shorter or weaker unsignalled shock.

Authors:  P Badia; S Culbertson; J Harsh
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Choice of higher density signalled shock over lower density unsignalled shock.

Authors:  P Badia; C Coker; J Harsh
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-07       Impact factor: 2.468

Review 7.  An analysis of the concept of reinforcement.

Authors:  C C Perkins
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1968-03       Impact factor: 8.934

  7 in total
  4 in total

1.  Responding maintained under intermittent schedules of electric-shock presentation: "Safety" or schedule effects?

Authors:  E F Malagodi; M L Gardner; S E Ward; R L Magyar
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Preference for signaled over unsignaled shock schedules: Ruling out asymmetry and response fixation as factors.

Authors:  B B Abbott; P Badia
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Choosing between predictable shock schedules: Long- versus short-duration signals.

Authors:  P Badia; B Abbott; L Schoen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-05       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Choice for signaled over unsignaled shock as a function of signal length.

Authors:  B Abbott; P Badia
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1979-11       Impact factor: 2.468

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.