Choice for Signalled over Unsignalled Shock As a Function of Shock Intensity

Overview

Journal J Exp Anal Behav

Specialties Psychology
Social Sciences

Date 1975 May 1

PMID 16811850

Citations 8

Authors

J Harsh

P Badia

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Choice between a signalled shock schedule and an unsignalled one was examined at various shock intensities. Three rats were given the opportunity to change from the unsignalled schedule to the signalled one at intensity values between 0.15 mA and 1.0 mA. Steps were usually 0.15 mA and both ascending and descending series were given. For two other rats, shock intensity increased from 0.20 mA to 1.0 mA in 0.20-mA increments; for two additional rats, shock intensity was first 3.0 mA and was then reduced to 1.0 mA. Subjects tended to remain in the unsignalled schedule at the lower shock intensities, but spent most of each session under the signalled schedule at the higher intensities (1.0 mA and 3.0 mA). In addition, the time spent in the signalled schedule tended to vary systematically with shock intensity over at least part of the range of intensity values. It was concluded that the relationship between shock intensity and choice behavior is similar to the relationship between intensity and behavior in procedures involving avoidance, escape, and punishment.

Citing Articles

Prevention's technology.

Gullotta T J Prim Prev. 2013; 8(1-2):4-24.

PMID: 24272073 DOI: 10.1007/BF01695016.

Shock intensity and signaled avoidance responding.

Das Gracas De Souza D, Alves De Moraes A, Todorov J J Exp Anal Behav. 1984; 42(1):67-74.

PMID: 16812381 PMC: 1348045. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-67.

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

Badia P, Abbott B, Schoen L J Exp Anal Behav. 1984; 41(3):319-27.

PMID: 16812371 PMC: 1348062. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-319.

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

Abbott B, Badia P J Exp Anal Behav. 1984; 41(1):45-52.

PMID: 16812357 PMC: 1347955. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-45.

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

Badia P, Harsh J, Coker C, Abbott B J Exp Anal Behav. 1976; 26(1):95-111.

PMID: 16811934 PMC: 1333493. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-95.

References

DAmato M, Fazzaro J, Etkin M . Anticipatory responding and avoidance discrimination as factors in avoidance conditioning. J Exp Psychol. 1968; 77(1):41-7. DOI: 10.1037/h0025763. View

Rescorla R . Conditioned inhibition of fear resulting from negative CS-US contingencies. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1969; 67(4):504-9. DOI: 10.1037/h0027313. View

Hake D, Azrin N, Oxford R . The effects of punishment intensity on squirrel monkeys. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967; 10(1):95-107. PMC: 1338325. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-95. View

Rachlin H . The effect of shock intensity on concurrent and single-key responding in concurrent-chain schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967; 10(1):87-93. PMC: 1338322. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-87. View

Badia P, Coker C, Harsh J . Choice of higher density signalled shock over lower density unsignalled shock. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973; 20(1):47-55. PMC: 1334101. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-47. View

Badia P, Culbertson S, Harsh J . Choice of longer or stronger signalled shock over shorter or weaker unsignalled shock. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973; 19(1):25-32. PMC: 1334048. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-25. View

Badia P, Culbertson S . The relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled escapable and inescapable shock. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972; 17(3):463-71. PMC: 1333923. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-463. View

Badia P, Culbertson S, Lewis P . The relative aversiveness of signalled vs unsignalled avoidance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971; 16(1):113-21. PMC: 1333830. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-113. View

Dinsmoor J, Winograd E . Shock Intensity in Variable-interval Escape Schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1958; 1(2):145-8. PMC: 1403934. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1958.1-145. View

10.

Boren J, Sidman M, Herrnstein R . Avoidance, escape, and extinction as functions of shock intensity. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1959; 52:420-6. DOI: 10.1037/h0042727. View

11.

Azrin N . Effects of punishment intensity during variable-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1960; 3:123-42. PMC: 1403961. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1960.3-123. View

12.

Azrin N, HOLZ W . Punishment during fixed-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961; 4:343-7. PMC: 1404146. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-343. View

13.

Winograd E . ESCAPE BEHAVIOR UNDER DIFFERENT FIXED RATIOS AND SHOCK INTENSITIES. J Exp Anal Behav. 1965; 8:117-24. PMC: 1338373. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1965.8-117. View

14.

Verhave T . The functional properties of a time out from an avoidance schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962; 5:391-422. PMC: 1404212. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-391. View

15.

Lockard J . Choice of a warning signal or no warning signal in an unavoidable shock situation. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1963; 56:526-30. DOI: 10.1037/h0041552. View

16.

MILLER N . Learning resistance to pain and fear: effects of overlearning, exposure, and rewarded expsure in context. J Exp Psychol. 1960; 60:137-45. DOI: 10.1037/h0043321. View

17.

Annau Z, Kamin L . The conditioned emotional response as a function of intensity of the US. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1961; 54:428-32. DOI: 10.1037/h0042199. View

18.

PERKINS Jr C . An analysis of the concept of reinforcement. Psychol Rev. 1968; 75(2):155-72. DOI: 10.1037/h0025509. View

19.

Weisman R, Litner J . Role of the intertrial interval in Pavlovian differential conditioning of fear in rats. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1971; 74(2):211-8. DOI: 10.1037/h0030347. View

20.

Riess D . Sidman avoidance in rats as a function of shock intensity and duration. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1970; 73(3):481-5. DOI: 10.1037/h0030235. View