Learned helplessness as a schedule-shift effect

The essentials of learned helplessness theory are described and supporting evidence surveyed. It is shown that two main empirical phenomena are associated with learned helplessness: a low rate of responding in laboratory animals following numerous discrete trials with continuous free relief and in human subjects following continuous nonrelief/reward or traditional extinction. The explanation Seligman and Maier give for these findings is critically analyzed and found to be unsupported at several critical points. The “patchwork” nature of the theory and observations is considered and it is contended that what is new in learned helplessness research is a schedule-shift effect like that observed when extinction follows partial reinforcement. A schedule-shift discrimination theory of “learned helplessness” effects is offered which is closely parallel to a widely accepted explanation of other schedule-shift effects, notably the partial reinforcement extinction effect. Although the behavioral effects of some schedule shifts resemble clinical depression, the latter is a more complex behavioral phenomena than the former which in turn has broader relevance to human behavior than just depression.     

Learned helplessness in groups

Group learned helplessness is demonstrated in Experiment I. Groups of 2 tried to turn off noise by their joint action. In the solvable group (S), noise offset was contingent on their sequence of button pushing. In the yoked, unsolvable group (U), noise offset was independent of all sequences of button pushes they produced. In a practice group (O). subjects practiced coordinated sequences of button pushes with their partners, but heard no noise. Later, all 3 groups were tested in pairs in a shuttlebox which required coordinated joint responding to turn off noise. The unsolvable group escaped more poorly than the other 2 groups, paralleling helplessness effects with individuals. Experiment 2 and 3 found no transfer from individual helplessness training to group testing and no transfer from group helplessness training to individual testing. We suggest that the same mechanism, the expectation of response ineffectiveness, may mediate both individual and group learned helplessness.     

Learned helplessness and the schedule-shift hypotheses

The critique of learned helplessness research and theory and the alternative schedule-shift discrimination hypothesis offered by McReynolds (Journal of Research and Personality, 1980,14, 139–157) are considered. Each point made by McReynolds is discussed and a variety of recent experimental evidence is reviewed. It is concluded that McReynolds' critique is without substance and that the schedule-shift discrimination explanation of the learned helplessness effect is contradicted by existing data.     

Learned helplessness in the rat.

Four experiments attempted to produce behavior in the rat parallel to the behavior characteristic of learned helplessness in the dog. When rats received escapable, inescapable, or no shock and were later tested in jump-up escape, both inescapable and no-shock controls failed to escape. When bar pressing, rather than jumping up, was used as the tested escape response, fixed ratio (FR) 3 was interfered with by inescapable shock, but not lesser ratios. With FR-3, the no-shock control escaped well. Interference with escape was shown to be a function of the inescapability of shock and not shock per se: Rats that were "put through" and learned a prior jump-up escape did not become passive, but their yoked, inescapable partners did. Rats, as well as dogs, fail to escape shock as a function of prior inescapability, exhibiting learned helplessness.     

Learned helplessness and IQ differences

Two groups of adult Ss differing in verbal IQ were compared in a learned helplessness experiment involving cognitive tasks and non-contingent rewards. The mean IQs for the two groups were 131 and 117. As predicted, the higher IQ Ss performed better overall and showed greater awareness of the response-outcome contingency. Their test-task performance was also more affected by the contingency manipulation although this occured only with success feedback. Implications of the results for cognitive accounts of human helplessness are discussed.     

Learned helplessness and judgments of control

One of the central hypotheses of learned helplessness theory is that exposure to noncontingency produces a reduced ability to perceive response-outcome relations (the postulated "cognitive deficit"). To test this hypothesis, subjects were exposed to a typical helplessness induction task and then asked to make judgments of the amount of control their responses exerted over a designated outcome (the onset of a light). Support for the postulated cognitive deficit would be found if subjects who experienced the induction underestimated the relation between their responses and outcomes. The results, however, demonstrated that induction subjects (n = 30) made higher and more accurate judgments of control than subjects in a no-treatment control group (n = 30). This finding clearly fails to support the postulated cognitive deficit and highlights the need for other direct tests of the basic hypotheses of helplessness theory.     

Learned helplessness in the cockroach (Periplaneta americana)

For 3 consecutive days cockroaches (Periplaneta americana) were exposed to either escapable, inescapable, or no shock in an escape task. Twenty-four hours later they were tested in a shuttlebox escape task. There were reliable differences between escapable and inescapable animals and between inescapable and control animals in both escape latencies and the number of failures to escape.     

Learned helplessness,depression and the perception of reinforcement

Depressed and nondepressed subjects were given escapable, inescapable, or no noise. Then, their perceptions of reinforcement contingencies in skill and chance tasks were assessed. Depressed-no noise and nondepressed-inescapable noise subjects exhibited smaller decreases in expectancy following failure in skill, but not in chance, than nondepressed-no noise subjects. So, depression and inescapable noise both produced perception of failure in skill as response-independent. Contrary to predictions, neither depression nor inescapable noise had a significant effect on increases in expectancy after success. These results partially support the learned helplessness model of depression which claims that a belief in independence between responding and reinforcement is central to the etiology and symptoms of depression in man.     

Learned helplessness in social situations and sociometric status

Learned helplessness theory may provide a framework within which the correlates of sociometric status in children can be fruitfully investigated. Several parallels between learned helplessness and the characteristics of sociometric status groups are noted. It is argued that children who are rejected, and especially neglected, by peers are likely to manifest learned helplessness in social situations. In addition, reanalysis of Goetz and Dweck's (1980) study on learned helplessness in social situations provides data to support this viewpoint as: (a) rejected and neglected children resembled learned helpless children in regard to both attributions and behaviour following social rejection; (b) neglected children showed greater behavioural deterioration following rejection than rejected children. The implications of the proposed integration of research on learned helplessness and sociometric status are outlined, especially in relation to clinical disorders in children.     

Thresholds for conditioned suppression using X-rays as the pre-aversive stimulus

Four male, 12-week-old Sprague-Dawley rats were used to determine the threshold for behavioral response to X-irradiation using the conditioned suppression technique. They were maintained at 80 per cent body weight and initially trained to stable performance on a VI 1 min schedule with 16 per cent sucrose solution as reinforcement. After a stable baseline was obtained, animals were placed in the instrumental conditioning box beneath the X-ray machine for a half-hour session each day. While subjects were actively pressing the lever for reinforcement, 15-sec X-ray exposures of 0.5 R/sec were administered, followed immediately by electric shock. After all animals had exhibited conditioned suppression, the dose-rate was decreased in subsequent sessions in an effort to establish threshold. The results indicate that X-rays at a dose-rate as low as 0.004 R/sec can be an effective pre-aversive stimulus for the rat.     

Learned helplessness and defensive strategies: A rejoinder

The results of experiments reported by Oakes and Curtis (1982), Tennen, Drum, Gillen and Stanton (1982), and Tennen, Gillen, and Drum (1982) are seen as inconsistent with the cognitive learned helplessness theory of Seligman and his associates (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978; Alloy & Seligman, 1979). Comments on the Oakes and Curtis studies by Alloy (1982) and by Silver, Wortman, and Klos (1982) are seen as employing three defensive strategies: (1) Declaring the research findings to be irrelevant to the theory; (2) declaring the experiments to be flawed; and (3) modifying the theory to accommodate the research findings. This rejoinder argues that the research findings are relevant and that the criticisms are of questionable validity. It is suggested that the questions of the validity of the theory raised by these findings not be declared to be resolved, but that additional data bearing on the questions be sought.     

Learned helplessness in humans: A developmental analysis

The investigation of learned helplessness (LH) in children is integrated with (a) research on LH in adults and (b) basic developmental research relating to the processes which theoretically mediate LH. It is concluded that developmental changes in perceptions of noncontingency, causal understanding, and expectations of future noncontingency are all likely to influence the process whereby children of different ages manifest LH. Several sets of hypotheses relating to each of these variables are presented. In addition, it is argued that developmental research on LH should examine the relationship between the components of the attributional reformulation of LH and should be explicit about the conceptual status of these variables. Finally, several approaches to understanding the origins of individual differences in LH are evaluated. It is proposed that exposure to noncontingency, performance feedback, modeling, and parental attributions may each contribute to the ontogenesis of individual differences in LH.     

Learned helplessness and immunization: sensitivity to response-reinforcer independence in immunized rats

In experiments 1 and 2, we examined the learned helplessness and immunization effects using a test in which appetitive responding was extinguished by delivering noncontingent reinforcers. Contrary to learned helplessness theory, "immunized" animals showed performance virtually identical to that of animals exposed only to inescapable shock, and different from nonshocked controls. Experiment 2 suggests that the helplessness effect and the lack of immunization are not due to direct response suppression resulting from shock. In Experiment 3, where the immunization effect was assessed by measuring the acquisition of a response to obtain food when there was a positive response-reinforcer contingency, immunization was observed. These results cannot be explained on the basis of proactive interference, but suggest that animals exposed to the immunization procedure acquire an expectancy of response-reinforcer independence during inescapable shock. Thus, immunization effects may reflect the differential expression of expectancies, rather than their differential acquisition as learned helplessness theory postulates.     

Learned helplessness and the detection of contingency: A direct test

Two studies tested a basic hypothesis of the learned helplessness model: That performance deficits associated with exposure to uncontrollable outcomes are directly mediated by an individual's perception of response-outcome independence. In the first experiment 48 subjects were exposed to noise bursts. For one experimental group, the termination of the noise was response-contingent. For five other groups, noise-burst termination was independent of subjects' responses. These five groups varied in the number of trials on which they received positive feedback: As predicted, subjects overestimated the amount of control they had over noise termination as a positive linear function of the amount of noncontingent positive feedback they received. Although subjects exposed to either noncontingent positive or negative feedback showed subsequent performance deficits on an anagrams task, the expected relation between perceived control and subsequent performance failed to emerge. These findings were replicated in a second experiment. In addition, subjects' locus, stability, and globality attributions failed to predict subsequent performance. These results call into question the central premises of helplessness theory: That perceived uncontrollability and causal attributions mediate learned helplessness.     

Learned helplessness, depression, and the attribution of failure.

Depressed and nondepressed college students received experience with solvable, unsolvable, or no discrimination problems. When later tested on a series of patterned anagrams, depressed groups performed worse than nondepressed groups, and unsolvable groups performed worse than solvable and control groups. As predicted by the learned helplessness model of depression, nondepressed subjects given unsolvable problems showed anagram deficits parallel to those found in naturally occurring depression. When depressed subjects attributed their failure to the difficulty of the problems rather than to their own incompetence, performance improved strikingly. So, failure in itself is apparently not sufficient to produce helplessness deficits in man, but failure that leads to a decreased belief in personal competence is sufficient.