A FACILITATIVE EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT ON UNPUNISHED BEHAVIOR¹

Abstract

The key pecking of two pigeons was reinforced on a variable-interval schedule of reinforcement during the presentation of each of two stimuli. In various phases of the experiment, punishment followed every response emitted in the presence of one of the stimuli. In general, when the rate of punished responding changed during the presentation of one stimulus, the rate of unpunished responding during the other stimulus changed in the opposite direction. This sort of change in rate is an example of behavioral contrast. When punishment was introduced, the rate of punished responding decreased and the rate of unpunished responding increased as functions of shock intensity. When the rate of previously punished responding increased after the termination of the shock, the rate of the always unpunished responding decreased. When the procedure correlated with a red key was changed from variable-interval reinforcement and punishment for each response to extinction and no punishment, the rate of reinforced responding during presentations of a green key decreased and then increased while the rate of the previously punished responding during red first increased and then decreased during extinction.

Effects of Punishment Proportion and Condition Sequence on Contrast and Induction with Humans

“…If that proposition is correct, then contrast is most likely to occur with pigeons. Experimental findings support that assumption (Brethower & Reynolds, 1962, Crosbie et aI. , 1997Reynolds, 1963;Reynolds & Catania, 1961;Terrace, 1968).…”

“…For each subject the pattern of responding across punishment conditions was induction, then less induction or contrast, then induction. These results are similar to those of previous studies (e.g ., Brethower & Reynolds, 1962;Crosbie et aL, 1997, Experiment 1) in wh ich the pattern found in the first punishment condition was different from those found in subsequent punishment conditions. There also are differences between present results and those of previous studies.…”

“…Only a few studies have investigated the effects of punishment on schedule interactions (Brethower & Reynolds, 1962;Crosbie et aI. , 1997;Honig & Slivka, 1964, O'Donnell & Crosbie, 1998, and results have been mixed.…”

“…, 1997;Honig & Slivka, 1964, O'Donnell & Crosbie, 1998, and results have been mixed. For example, in one study (Brethower & Reynolds, 1962), pigeons received food on a multiple variable interval variable interval (VI VI) schedule, then a 3.6-mA electric shock followed every response in one component. Responding was completely suppressed in both components.…”

“…In a recent systematic replication of Brethower and Reynolds (1962) , electric-shock intensity was increased gradually until key pecking was suppressed to a criterion rate (50%) such that virtually all scheduled reinforcers were obtained (Crosbie et aI. , 1997, Experiment 1).…”