Some effects of punishment shock intensity upon discriminative responding

Three pigeons received visual discrimination training under both multiple variable-ratio extinction and variable-interval extinction schedules. All birds developed nearly perfect discrimination. When punishment for every tenth response during food reinforcement was presented, responding decreased as shock intensity increased. At the same time, responding during extinction, which was not punished, increased at intermediate punishment intensities, but returned to low levels under severe punishment. A second procedure, in which punishment and no-punishment sessions alternated unsystematically, was employed with two of the birds. The results under this procedure essentially replicated the data obtained as punishment shock intensity increased gradually.     

Relative frequency of reinforcement and rate of punished behavior

After training on a multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedule of reinforcement, each response in one component of the schedule was followed by a brief electric shock. When the rate of punished responses stabilized, the frequency of reinforcement in the other component was first decreased and then increased from the baseline frequency. The effects of these manipulations were consistent with reports of interactions in multiple schedules involving only unpunished behavior, i.e., the rate of punished responses increased with a higher relative frequency of reinforcement in the punishment component and decreased with a lower relative frequency of reinforcement in that component. The relevance of such findings to a further generality of behavioral contrast effects is discussed.     

Frustration, preference and behavioural contrast

Pigeons' pecks on both a red (left-hand) and a striped (right-hand) response key were reinforced on a concurrent variable-interval 2-min. schedule until the proportion of responses given to each key had stabilized. In alternate sessions, the right-hand key was covered, while responding to a green stimulus on the left-hand key was reinforced on variable-interval 1-min. When responding to green was later extinguished, more responses were made to the striped key in reinforcement sessions, although the rate of responding to the other, red key increased. Replacing extinction during green by reinforcement returned the preference and the response rates to their previous levels. These results are compared with a previous experiment in which the striped key was not present, where a similar increase in response rate to red was observed after extinction on green. The shift in preference coupled with the usual contrast effect in the present experiment supports an interpretation of behavioural contrast in terms of the frustrative effects of extinction.     

Recovery of responses during mild punishment

Pigeons were punished with mild shock for pecking during one of two components of a multiple schedule. They eventually recovered so that they pecked at the same rate during both components. In one experiment they were extinguished after recovering. When punishment was maintained during extinction, they extinguished faster during the punished, than during the unpunished component. When punishment was stopped during extinction, they extinguished faster during the unpunished than during the previously punished component. In another experiment, punishment was programmed first during neither of the two components, then during one, then during both, and finally during the other component. The extent of recovery decreased with each successive cycle. It is concluded that, if transient emotional states are ignored, reward and punishment are symmetrical in their effects.     

Fixed-ratio punishment by timeout of concurrent variable-interval behavior

Pigeons' responding was maintained by two concurrently available variable-interval reinforcement schedules. A fixed-ratio punishment schedule of timeout periods from the concurrent reinforcement schedules was arranged for responding during one of the variable-interval schedules. The greater the probability of a timeout after a response on the punished variable-interval schedule (the smaller the fixed ratio that produced timeout), the greater the decline in the relative punished response rates. Relative reinforcement rates remained invariant when relative response rates declined. Both behavioral contrast and induction effects were observed on the unpunished variable-interval schedule as a function of timeout punishment of the other schedule.     

Concurrent performances: stimulus-control gradients during schedules of signalled and unsignalled concurrent reinforcement

On one key, pigeons' pecks were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule in the presence of vertical lines, and were not reinforced in the presence of oblique lines. On a second key, pecks were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule in the presence of blue, according to a signalled variable-interval schedule in the presence of red, and were not reinforced in the presence of white. Subsequently, during extinction, stimulus-control gradients were obtained by presenting eight different line orientations on the first key concurrent with each of the three colors on the second key. On the first key, line-orientation gradients tended to be lower, narrower, and less shifted in peak or area when the second-key stimulus was blue or red, the stimuli respectively correlated with unsignalled and signalled reinforcement, than when it was white, the stimulus correlated with extinction. Thus, the effect on first-key line-orientation gradients depended on second-key stimuli correlated with concurrent reinforcement, whether or not these stimuli were also correlated with concurrent responding. As a function of first-key line orientation, an inverted gradient was obtained on the second key during blue; during both red and white, rates of pecking on the second key were near zero.     

The relative law of effect: effects of shock intensity on response strength in multiple schedules

Key pecking of four birds was reinforced with food according to a two-component multiple variable-interval 1-minute variable-interval 4-minute schedule. In addition, key pecking was punished by a brief shock according to a variable-interval 30-second schedule during both components of the multiple schedule. The intensity of the shock was varied. For all birds, punishment had a stronger suppressive effect on the responding maintained by the leaner food schedule, and the ratio of responding during the two components of the multiple schedule became closer to the ratio of reinforcement as shock intensity was increased, as the relative law of effect predicts. At the higher shock intensity, there was some evidence that the ratio of responses overmatched the ratio of reinforcements.     

Chained and tandem fixed-interval schedules of punishment

Pigeons' key pecks were both punished with electric shock on four-component chained and tandem fixed-interval schedules and reinforced on a variable-interval schedule of food presentation. Pecking was suppressed less in the early components of the chained schedule than in the early components of the tandem schedule. Related multiple and mixed schedules of punishment were also presented; these schedules were identical to the chained and tandem schedules, respectively, except that components changed independently of responding. Similar effects were obtained, in that responding was suppressed in all components of the mixed schedule and only in the fourth component of the multiple schedule of punishment. The performances maintained on the chained and tandem schedules of punishment were generally symmetrical to those found in analogous chained and tandem schedules of food reinforcement.     

Suppression of operant behavior and schedule-induced licking in rats

The first experiment studied the effects of punishment on rats' lever pressing maintained by a fixed-interval schedule of food reinforcement and on the associated schedule-induced licking. When licking was followed by shock, licking was suppressed but lever pressing was largely unaffected. When lever pressing was followed by shock, lever pressing was suppressed but licking was unaffected. In both cases, the punished behavior recovered its previous unpunished level when the shocks were discontinued. In a second experiment, the rats' lever pressing was maintained by a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement under which polydipsic licking also developed. Both lever pressing and licking were partially suppressed during a stimulus correlated with occasional unavoidable electric shocks. With a higher shock intensity, both behaviors were suppressed further. Both lever pressing and licking recovered their previous levels when shocks were discontinued. These results show that schedule-induced licking, which has been described as adjunctive behavior, can be suppressed by procedures that suppress reinforced lever pressing, an operant behavior.     

Punishment by noise in an alternative response situation

Operant responses of human subjects were conditioned according to a variable-interval schedule of positive reinforcement. A brief noise was delivered as punishment for each of the responses. The noise suppressed the punished responses more when an alternative unpunished response was concurrently available than when only a single punished response was available. This finding extends the generality of a previous study that had used a period of extinction rather than the brief noise as the punishing stimulus.     

Immediate and delayed punishment of human behavior by loss of reinforcement

Young adult humans pressed a key to obtain money. When responding was punished by presentation of a stimulus signifying that money was lost, response frequencies decreased and response latencies increased. Since these changes did not increase relative earnings, the aversive properties of loss of reinforcement were manifested independently or reinforcement gain. When loss punishment was delayed for either 10, 20, or 40 sec the extent of suppression was found to vary inversely with the response-punishment interval. Subsequent manipulations indicated that the effectiveness of delayed punishment was increased when the response also produced immediate conditioned punishment, i.e., a stimulus paired with the delayed loss stimulus. Instructions about the response-punishment contingency had similar effects. The findings were consistent with animal studies of delayed shock punishment, insofar as a similar delay-of-punishment gradient was observed, and with studies of delayed positive reinforcement, insofar as mediation through conditioned punishment (or instructions) increased the effectiveness of delayed punishment.     

Drug effects on responding maintained by stimulus-reinforcer and response-reinforcer contingencies.

The effects of pentobarbital and d-amphetamine were assessed on key pecking by pigeons under conventional single-key multiple schedules and under two-key multiple schedules in which discriminative stimuli appeared on one key (stimulus key) while pecks on a second key (constant key) produced food. Pecks on the stimulus key had no scheduled consequences. A 60-second variable-interval schedule operated in one component of each multiple schedule: either extinction or a 60-second variable-time schedule operated in the alternate component. When the alternate-component schedule was extinction, a high rate of responding was maintained in the variable-interval component of the single-key schedule; responding on both keys was maintained in the variable-interval component of the two-key schedule. Pentobarbital increased responding in the variable-interval component of the single-key schedule and increased stimulus-key, but not constant-key responding in that component of the two-key schedule. When the alternate-component schedule was changed to variable time, responding declined in the variable-interval component of the single-key schedule; stimulus-key responding was no longer maintained under the two-key schedule. Pentobarbital decreased responding in the variable-interval component of both schedules. With an exception, d-amphetamine only decreased responding in the variable-interval component of the single- and two-key schedules both when the alternate-component schedule was extinction and when it was variable time. The results suggest that the effects of pentobarbital, but not d-amphetamine, depend on the nature of the contingency (stimulus-reinforcer, response-reinforcer) that maintains responding.     

Stimulus generalization and delay of reinforcement during one component of a multiple schedule

The key pecking of six pigeons was reinforced according to a variable-interval 1-min schedule during each of two successively presented stimuli. When the key was illuminated by a black line on a white background, reinforcement was delayed for 10 sec. When the key was illuminated by a plain white light, reinforcement was not delayed. All subjects responded at a lower rate during the presentation of the black line. A subsequent generalization test along the line-orientation dimension produced a U-shaped gradient, with the nadir located at or near the training stimulus, for each subject. These gradients suggested that the lower rate of response during the stimulus associated with delayed reinforcement may have been due to an inhibition of responding.     

Drugs and punished responding I: rate-dependent effects under multiple schedules

The effects of drugs were studied in pigeons whose responses were punished with electric shock during one component of a multiple fixed-interval 5-min fixed-interval 5-min schedule of food presentation. Most of the drugs analyzed for rate-dependent effects increased low rates of both punished and unpunished responding, while increasing higher rates less, or decreasing them; however, low rates of punished responding sometimes were increased more by pentobarbital, diazepam, and chlordiazepoxide than were matched rates of unpunished responding. In contrast, d-amphetamine and chlorpromazine usually increased low rates of unpunished responding more than matched rates of punished responding. These two drugs also decreased high rates of unpunished responding less than they decreased high rates of punished responding. Thus, the effects of drugs on punished responding depend on the control rate of punished responding; however, the rate-dependent effects of drugs on punished responding are not always the same as they are for unpunished responding.     

Concurrent schedules of primary and conditioned reinforcement in rats

Rats responded on a fixed-interval schedule during which a 3-sec stimulus preceded each water reinforcement. The stimulus was then scheduled concurrently for responses on the same lever according to either a variable ratio. Although water reinforcement continued on a fixed-interval schedule, the pattern of responding became typical of a variable-interval or variable-ratio schedule. When the 3-sec stimulus was presented on a variable-interval or variable-ratio schedule, but was omitted on the fixed-interval schedule, the response rate decreased. When the stimulus occurred after the same time periods as those of the variable-interval schedule, but at least 7-sec after the last response, the rate decreased. The rate became higher when the fixed-interval schedule was discontinued and each presentation of the 3-sec stimulus was followed by water on a variable-interval schedule. When both water and the 3-sec stimulus were discontinued for a period of time, resulting in extinction of the lever response, and the 3-sec stimulus alone then presented on a variable-interval or variable-ratio schedule after lever responses, rate increased and then gradually decreased.     

Response rate, reinforcement frequency, and behavioral contrast

Pigeons responded for food on a multiple schedule in which periods of green-key illumination alternated with periods of red-key illumination. When behavior had stabilized with a variable-interval 2-min schedule of reinforcement operating during both stimuli, low rates of responding (interresponse times greater than 2 sec) were differentially reinforced during the green component. Conditions during the red stimulus were unchanged. Response rates during the green component fell without changing the frequency of reinforcement but there were no unequivocal contrast effects during the red stimulus. The frequency of reinforcement during the green component was then reduced by changing to a variable-interval 8-min schedule without reducing the response rates in that component, which were held at a low level by the spacing requirement. Again, the conditions during the red stimulus were unchanged but response rates during that stimulus increased. These results show that reductions in reinforcement frequency, independently of response rate, can produce interactions in multiple schedules.     

Punishment of observing by the negative discriminative stimulus

To determine the effect of a negative discriminative stimulus on the response producing it, two pigeons were each studied in a three-key conditioning chamber. During alternating periods of unpredictable duration, pecking the center (food) key either was reinforced with grain on a variable-interval schedule or was never reinforced. On equal but independent variable-interval schedules, pecking either of the side (observing) keys changed the color of all keys for 30 sec from yellow to either green or red. When the schedule on the center key was variable-interval reinforcement, the color was green (positive discriminative stimulus); when no reinforcements were scheduled, the color was red (negative discriminative stimulus). Since pecking the side keys did not affect grain deliveries, changes in the rate of pecking could not be ascribed to changes in the frequency of primary reinforcement. In subsequent sessions, red was withheld as one of the possible consequences of pecking a given side key. When red was omitted, the rate on that key increased, and when red was restored, the rate decreased. It was concluded that red illumination of the keys, the negative discriminative stimulus, had a suppressive effect on the response that produced it.     

Punishment contras during free-operant avoidance

Punishment of bar-pressing responses of rhesus monkeys with electric shock in one component of a multiple free-operant avoidance schedule suppressed responding in that component. These decreases were concomitant with response rate increases in the unpunished component (punishment contrast). Response rates in both components increased when punishment was removed and decreased in successive sessions. These effects of punishment on unpunished responding were similar to those obtained during single and multiple schedules of positive reinforcement and they suggest a further similarity in the development of discriminations during positive and negative reinforcement schedules.     

Punishment-specific effects of pentobarbital: dependency on the type of punisher.

Pigeons were trained to peck a key under a multiple random-interval 1-minute, random-interval 6-minute schedule of food presentation. Subsequently, over three phases, additions were made during the random-interval 1-minute component as follows: pecks during the component occasionally were punished by timeout presentation (Phase 1), timeouts were presented independently of responding during the component (Phase 2), pecks during the component occasionally were punished by electric-shock presentation (Phase 3). In Phases 1 and 3, response-dependent timeout and shock suppressed responding and established equivalent rates in both components of the multiple schedule. Intermediate doses of pentobarbital increased responding suppressed by electric-shock punishment but had little or no effect on responding suppressed by timeout punishment. Response-independent presentation of timeouts did not result in suppression of responding (thus showing that response-dependent timeout acted as a punisher), and pentobarbital did not reliably increase unpunished responding. Pentobarbital's selective "punishment-attenuating" properties depend on the nature of the punisher.     

Some determinants of inhibitory stimulus control

Interspersed reinforcement and extinction during discrimination learning generate a U-shaped gradient of inhibition about the stimulus correlated with extinction. The present work showed that extinction is not a necessary determinant of inhibitory stimulus control. In Exp. I, a reduction in the rate of reinforcement, through a shift from a multiple variable-interval 1-min variable-interval 1-min schedule to a multiple variable-interval 1-min variable-interval 5-min schedule, resulted in a post-discrimination line orientation gradient of inhibition about the stimulus correlated with the variable-interval 5-min schedule. In Exp. II, the rates of reinforcement, correlated with a pair of stimuli, were held constant during a shift from a multiple variable-interval 1-min variable-interval 1-min schedule to a multiple variable-interval 1-min differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule. Inhibitory stimulus control about the stimulus correlated with the differential reinforcement of low rate was obtained. In both experiments, a reduction in the rate of responding during one stimulus and behavioral contrast during the other stimulus preceded the observation of inhibitory stimulus control.