Performance of rats under concurrent variable-interval schedules of negative reinforcement

The behavior of rats under concurrent variable-interval schedules of negative reinforcement was examined. A single one-minute variable-interval programmer determined the availability of 30-second timeouts from electric shock. These were assigned to one or the other of the two component schedules with a probability of 0 to 1.0. The response requirement for the component schedules was standing to the right or left of the center of the experimental chamber. With a six-second changeover delay, the relative time spent under one component schedule varied directly and linearly with the relative number of timeouts earned under that component schedule. The absolute number of changeovers was highest when a similar number of timeouts was earned under each component schedule, and lowest when all or nearly all timeouts were earned under one component schedule. In general, these relations are similar to those reported with concurrent variable-interval schedules of positive reinforcement.     

Acceleration and suppression of rats' responding to avoid foot shock and tail shock

Signalled response-independent shocks were superimposed on rats' wheel-turn responding to avoid shock administered to their feet through a grid floor or to their tails through fixed electrodes. In Experiment I, a tone paired with response-independent foot shock increased responding in three of four rats; a tone paired with tail shock increased responding in only one of four rats and suppressed responding in two rats. In Experiment II, a tone presented randomly with respect to response-independent shock had no reliable effect on responding to avoid foot shock or tail shock. In Experiment III, tail shock and foot shock were compared in a within-subject design while the temporal pattern of responding during conditioned stimuli was recorded. Responding during the conditioned stimulus preceding foot shock was characterized by initial suppression of responding at tone onset, followed by increased responding just before response-independent shock. Responding was suppressed throughout the conditioned stimulus preceding tail shock. Foot shock elicited bursts of responding, but tail shock did not.     

RESPONDING MAINTAINED UNDER INTERMITTENT SCHEDULES OF ELECTRIC-SHOCK PRESENTATION: “SAFETY” OR SCHEDULE EFFCTS?

Four experiments were conducted in which lever pressing by squirrel monkeys was maintained under multiple, mixed, or chained schedules of electric-shock presentation. In the first two experiments, a multiple schedule was employed in which a fixed-interval schedule of shock presentation alternated with a signaled two-minute component. Initially, no events were scheduled during the two-minute component (a safety period). In the first experiment, the safety period was “degraded” by introducing and systematically increasing the frequency of periodic shocks presented during that component. In the second experiment, the proportion of overall safe time to unsafe time was decreased by decreasing the value of the fixed-interval schedule while holding constant shock frequency during the two-minute component. In the third experiment, the overall arrangement was changed from a multiple to a mixed schedule in an attempt to determine whether fixed-interval responding would be maintained when a single exteroceptive stimulus was associated with both components. In the fourth experiment, the overall arrangement was changed from a multiple to a chained schedule in an effort to determine whether fixed-interval responding would be maintained when its consequence was presentation of a signaled “unsafe” period. Fixed-interval responding was well maintained under all experimental conditions; the varied relationships obtained lend more support to conceptualizations of shock-maintained behavior as exemplifying schedule-controlled behavior than to suggestions that such behavior may be readily accounted for by “safety theory.”     

Effects of ratio contingencies on responding maintained by schedules of electric-shock presentation (response-produced shock)

Squirrel monkeys' lever pressing was established under fixed-interval schedules of electric-shock presentation (response-produced shock). After appropriate temporal patterns of lever pressing were engendered, either fixed-ratio schedules of shock presentation were added to the fixed interval, or yoked variable-ratio schedules were substituted for the fixed-interval schedules. When fixed-ratio schedules were added, there was an initial rise in response rate and schedule-appropriate patterns of responding developed. After many sessions, however, responding ceased abruptly, in some cases with remarkable quickness. When variable-ratio schedules were substituted, responded declined gradually and eventually was poorly maintained. Ratio contingencies may not support responding as well as interval contingencies when electric shock is the maintaining event.     

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.     

Parameters affecting the maintenance of negatively reinforced key pecking

Three negative reinforcement experiments employing a key-peck response are described. In Experiment I, pigeons shocked on the average of twice per minute (imposed condition) could produce, by pecking a key, an alternate condition with correlated stimuli. Delayed shocks were added, across sessions, to the alternate condition until pecking stopped. Two of three pigeons continued to peck despite a 100% increase in shock frequency. In Experiment II, pigeons were shocked in the imposed condition four times per minute. The postresponse delay to shock was held constant by delivering, in the alternate condition, the next shock, or the next two, three, or four shocks from the imposed-condition shock schedule. All three subjects continued to peck with no change in delay to the first two postresponse shocks but with a 75% reduction in shock frequency. In Experiment III, a response produced an immediate shock followed by a shock-free period. Three of four subjects continued to respond despite reduced delay to shock. Delay-to-shock or shock-frequency reduction was sufficient to maintain key pecking, but neither was necessary. The conditions that negatively reinforce the pigeon's key peck were similar to conditions that negatively reinforce the rat's bar press.     

Interresponse-time punishment: a basis for shock-maintained behavior.

Lever pressing of squirrel monkeys postponed brief electric shock according to a free-operant shock-postponement procedure. Pressing also produced shock with a probability proportional to the duration of the current interresponse time in some conditions, or to the fifth ordinally-preceding interresponse time in others. These conditions provided equal frequencies and temporal distributions of response-produced shocks either contingent on or independent of the current interresponse-time duration, respectively. Shock delivered contingent on the current interresponse-time duration resulted in shorter mean interresponse times and higher overall response rates that shock delivered independent of the current interresponse time. In subsequent conditions, response-produced shocks were sufficient to maintain responding following suspension of the postponement procedure only when those shocks were contingent on the current interresponse time. Presenting shock independent of the current interresponse time, conversely, suppressed response rate and ultimately led to cessation of responding in the absence of a conjoint shock-postponement procedure. These results demonstrate interresponse-time punishment in the absence of any indirect avoidance contingencies based on overall shock-frequency reduction, and strongly support similar interpretation at the more local level of shock-frequency reduction correlated with particular interresponse times. Differential punishment of long interresponse times also provides both an a priori basis for predicting whether a schedule of shock presentation will maintain or suppress responding and a framework for interpreting many of the functional relations between overall response rate and parameters of consequent shock presentation. Finally, these results and others indicate the importance of response-consequence contiguity above and beyong any notion of noncontiguous contingency in the control of behavior.     

The double-alternative, double-start experimental apparatus: A new procedure for measuring preference

A new experimental chamber is described that permits rats to demonstrate behavioral preference for one of two conditions by running towards a goal chamber by one of two routes that are correlated with the different conditions. In a preliminary study, rats chose a route correlated with relatively lower shock, demonstrating the sensitivity of the apparatus. We also report evidence using this device that, of 10 rats tested, all preferred unsignaled rather than signaled, inescapable, unavoidable shock.     

Safe periods both explain and need explaining.

Dinsmoor's (2001) stress on the response‐produced safe period as a reinforcer for avoidance behavior is a positive contribution, even though several questions about such safe periods remain to be answered.     

Beyond the molar-molecular distinction: we need multiscaled analyses.

Dinsmoor's (2001) adherence to molecular analyses may require him to assert that molar and molecular principles are mutually exclusive, but to instead analyze the phenomena of avoidance as inherently multiscaled is to follow a well-established practice in the natural sciences. Besides the issue of scale, two-factor theory, which Dinsmoor advocates, has little to say about some important and longstanding results in experiments that qualify as avoidance.