The puzzle of responding maintained by response-contingent shock.
Four squirrel monkeys were first exposed to a sequence of procedures that reliably generate responding maintained by brief response-contingent electric shocks arranged according to a fixed-interval schedule. After responding had become stable on the fixed-interval schedule, additional contingencies were added in tandem, whereby after completion of the interval, the spacing of responses affected shock delivery. In one procedure, responses had to be spaced more widely than their previous median value if shock were to be delivered. In the other procedure, responses had to be spaced more closely to produce shock. On the first of these procedures, decreased but stable responses rates would indicate that shock functioned as a positive reinforcer; on the second, increased response rates would indicate the positively reinforcing function. Instead, response rates accelerated on the procedure that targeted more widely spaced responses for shock delivery, and decelerated or ceased on the procedure that arranged for shocks to be produced by more closely spaced responses. Consistent with other recent findings, these results question the interpretation of performances maintained by response-contingent shock as engendered by positive reinforcement and are consistent with aversive-control interpretations. The details of that aversive control are not entirely clear, however, and these same procedures would be informative if applied to shock-maintained behavior that is generated in other ways.
Laurence
M T
MT
Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122.
Hineline
P N
PN
Bersh
P J
PJ
D000818:Animals; D001070:Appetitive Behavior; D001362:Avoidance Learning; D001522:Behavior, Animal; D004193:Discrimination Learning; D004558:Electric Stimulation; D008297:Male; D011930:Reaction Time; D012055:Reinforcement Schedule; D012453:Saimiri; D012769:Shock; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis