ESCAPE, AVOIDANCE, PUNISHMENT: WHERE DO WE STAND?
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorPublished 1 July 1977Open access
James A. Dinsmoor
Citations143
SJR quartileQ2
SJR score0.94
SNIP0.97
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveStudy objective
MethodsResearch methodology
PopulationPopulation studied
Sample sizeSample sizes
OutcomesStudy outcomes here
ResultsStudy results comes here
LimitationsResearch study limitations comes here
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
TL;DR
This paper reviews progress since the author's previous writings in three areas of escape training, avoidance and two-factor theory, and criticisms of the avoidance interpretation of punishment are answered.
Abstract
This paper reviews progress since the author's previous writings in three areas. In escape training, the preparatory-response explanation of bar holding still appears to be valid. In avoidance, the newer safety-signal version of two-factor theory has much to recommend it and readily incorporates Anger's conditioned aversive temporal stimuli formulation. Shock-density reduction is rejected as a substitute for two-factor theory. Finally, criticisms of the avoidance interpretation of punishment are answered and recent empirical data are cited in its support.
Keywords
PsychologyNeuroscience
Psychological ReviewMethod and theory in the study of avoidance.
491 Citations1969R. J. Herrnstein
It is suggested that the conditioned stimulus may function as a discriminative stimulus for the avoidance response, rather than as a stimulus whose removal is inherently reinforcing, as two-factor theory requires.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorNEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT AS SHOCK‐FREQUENCY REDUCTION<sup>1</sup>
320 Citations1966R. J. Herrnstein, Phillip N. Hineline
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorTHE ROLE OF TEMPORAL DISCRIMINATIONS IN THE REINFORCEMENT OF SIDMAN AVOIDANCE BEHAVIOR<sup>1</sup>
198 Citations1963Douglas Anger
Under some conditions the reinforcement in Sidman avoidance seems to be primarily due to the decrease in aversiveness of temporal stimuli, under other conditions there probably is reinforcement from the termination of conditioned aversive responses.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorNEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT WITHOUT SHOCK REDUCTION<sup>1</sup>
136 Citations1970Philip N. Hineline
Stable lever-press responding in rats was reliably produced and maintained by a procedure in which responses could delay shocks without affecting overall shock frequency and was not maintained when the delay-of-shock involved an increase in overallshock frequency.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorEFFECTS OF DELAYED REINFORCEMENT IN A CONCURRENT SITUATION<sup>1</sup>
106 Citations1965Shin‐Ho Chung
Pigeons were trained to peck either of two response keys for food reinforcement on equated aperiodic schedules and delays of reinforcement for pecks at one key reduced the relative frequency of pecking exponentially as a function of the delay interval.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorREDUCTION OF SHOCK FREQUENCY AS REINFORCEMENT FOR AVOIDANCE BEHAVIOR
104 Citations1962Murray Sidman
An avoidance technique was used in which rats had two levers available, with independent shock schedules associated with each, leading to the suggestion that reduction of shock density be considered an important variable in avoidance behavior.
Learning and MotivationControl of avoidance by a response-produced stimulus
66 Citations1973James A. Dinsmoor, Gary W. Sears
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorPARAMETERS AFFECTING THE ACQUISITION OF SIDMAN AVOIDANCE<sup>1</sup>
65 Citations1964Robert C. Bolles, Richard J. Popp
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorA CONDITIONED REINFORCER MAINTAINED BY TEMPORAL ASSOCIATION WITH THE TERMINATION OF SHOCK
59 Citations1966James A. Dinsmoor, Marilyn H. Clayton
It was found that the rate of pressing in the absence of noise depended on the contingency between the pressing and the noise, indicating that pressing was indeed maintained by the noise as a conditioned reinforcer.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorCHAINING AND SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT BASED ON ESCAPE FROM SHOCK<sup>1</sup>
58 Citations1963James A. Dinsmoor, Marilyn H. Clayton
Psychonomic ScienceThe non-operant nature of the bar-press escape response
33 Citations1968Robert C. Bolles, Daniel McGillis
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorTHE MEASUREMENT OF RESPONSE FORCE DURING A LEVER‐PRESS SHOCK‐ESCAPE PROCEDURE IN RATS<sup>1</sup>
24 Citations1974Hank Davis, Jo‐Ann Burton
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorIS BAR‐HOLDING WITH NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT PREPARATORY OR PERSEVERATIVE?
17 Citations1967J. D. Keehn
Cumulative bar-holding-time records showed that holding occurred frequently on the second bar but hardly ever on the first, indicating that bar- holding is more "perserverative" than "preparatory".
Learning and MotivationStimulus learning versus response learning in a discriminated punishment situation
16 Citations1975Robert C. Bolles, Charles N. Uhl +2 more
Animal Learning & BehaviorLever holding behavior during a leverlift shock escape procedure
7 Citations1973Hank Davis, Paul Hirschorn +1 more
While stable escape behavior can be obtained using either the press or lift responses, the use of a leverlift requirement allows for the separate observation of lever holding and freezing, a species-specific defense reaction.
Learning and MotivationAbortive responding during punishment of bar holding
7 Citations1975J. R. Millenson, A. St. C. Macmillan
A continuous chain of homogeneous responding was established in rats by training animals to hold a lever down for 10 sec or longer before releasing it for food reinforcement, and when criterion releases were subsequently punished, completed holding chains were greatly suppressed and aborted chains increased markedly.
Psychonomic ScienceLever-holding and the operant nature of escape responding
2 Citations1969Alan S. Marriott, I. Steele Russell
It is demonstrated that lever-holding behavior in the single-lever escape task is an acquired preparatory response and that escape responses, when lever-held is minimal, are operant in nature.