Motivation in learning: XI. An analysis of electric shock for correct responses into its avoidance and accelerating components.

Muenzinger, Karl F.; Brown, William O.; Crow, Wayman J.; Powloski, Robert F.

doi:10.1037/h0058143

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More recently, and primarily on the basis of data obtained in a noncorrection situation, Muenzinger and his co-workers (Muenzinger et al, 1952;Muenzinger & Powloski, 1951) have acknowledged the primary avoidance function of shock. Nevertheless, they (Muenzinger & Powloski, 1951) continue to argue for the accelerating effect of shock for the correct response on the basis of findings, which show that the shock-right condition facilitates performance considerably with a correction procedure but only slightly with a noncorrection procedure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Muenzinger's original formulation appears to be generally accepted (e.g., Feldman, 1961;Young, 1961), despite more recent findings which question its generality (Muenzinger & Baxter, 1957;Muenzinger, Brown, Crow, & Powloski, 1952;Muenzinger & Powloski, 1951;Wischner, 1947). Wischner has shown that with a noncorrection procedure, as contrasted with the correction procedure typically em-ployed by Muenzinger, shock for the correct response retards, rather than facilitates discrimination learning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of strength of punishment for "correct" or "incorrect" responses on visual discrimination performance.

Wischner¹,

Fowler²,

Kushnick³

1963

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose was to investigate the effect of variation in shock intensity on the acquisition of a black-white discrimination by 56 white rats in a situation involving shock for the correct or incorrect response, a noncorrection procedure, and 2 different training methods (free-vs. forcedchoice). Differences in outcome between training methods were negligible. Shock intensity functions showed that errors increased with increasing intensities for shock-right groups, decreased with increasing intensities for shock-wrong groups. All shock-right groups were inferior to no-shock controls, a finding in opposition to the generalization that shock for the correct response facilitates performance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of strength of punishment for "correct" or "incorrect" responses on visual discrimination performance.

Wischner¹,

Fowler²,

Kushnick³

1963

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Muenzinger demonstrated such effects in a series of investigations stretching back to the early thirties. The initial finding (Muenzinger, 1934), that a shock which was twice the threshold value for young rats (Muenzinger & Mize, 1933) would actually facilitate the learning of a light-dark discrimination beyond the influence of reward alone, was confirmed in a number of subsequent investigations (Muenzinger & Baxter, 1957;Muenzinger, Bernstone, & Richards, 1938;Muenzinger, Brown, Crow, & Powloski, 1952;Muenzinger & Powlowski, 1951;Muenzinger & Wood, 1935). Likewise, Drew (1938) and Freeburne and Taylor (1952) found that shock enhanced discrimination learning in rats beyond the effects of reward alone.…”

Section: Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 89%

Masochism: An empirical analysis.

Sandler¹

1964

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Masochistic behavior is defined as a change in response to punishing stimuli which may take the form of simple desensitization at one extreme to continued, self-aversive stimulation at the other. Experimental findings reflecting such changes are cited and some of the conditions necessary for demonstrating these effects are analyzed. The manner in which the scheduling of events may be involved is also suggested. The approach which is advocated seems to offer a fruitful alternative to current popular conceptions of masochism.

show abstract

“…Muenzinger (1934;Muenzinger, Bernstone, & Richards, 1938) has found a facilitating effect of shock in S+ and has always employed a shock of low intensity (.10-.15 ma.). 3 Moreover, he has reported that facilitation is more pronounced if the aversive effects of shock are reduced through a pretraining adaptation procedure (Muenzinger, Brown, Crow, & Powloski, 1952). Wischner (1947), who found that shock in S+ hindered discrimination, used a shock of moderate intensity--.30 ma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of shock intensity and placement on the learning of a food-reinforced brightness discrimination.

Curlin¹,

Donahoe²

1965

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of shock intensity (.13 ma. or .30 ma.) and shock placement (S+ or S -) on the learning of a brightness discrimination were investigated. 30 albino rats served as Ss in a bar-pressing task. Lowintensity shock (.13 ma.) facilitated the rate of discrimination formation whether placed in S+ or S -. The omission of .13 ma. shock after the attainment of a stable discrimination left performance relatively unchanged. Moderate intensity shock (.30 ma.) facilitated discrimination performance when placed in S -and hindered performance when placed in S+. The omission of .30 ma. shock produced an immediate deterioration in the performance for those Ss shocked in S-and an improvement in performance for those Ss shocked in S+. It was concluded that low-intensity shock acts primarily as an additional stimulus to facilitate discrimination learning, whereas moderate intensity shock acts primarily as an aversive (motivational) stimulus to affect performance.

show abstract

Motivation in learning: XI. An analysis of electric shock for correct responses into its avoidance and accelerating components.

Cited by 16 publications

References 3 publications

Effect of strength of punishment for "correct" or "incorrect" responses on visual discrimination performance.

Effect of strength of punishment for "correct" or "incorrect" responses on visual discrimination performance.

Masochism: An empirical analysis.

Effects of shock intensity and placement on the learning of a food-reinforced brightness discrimination.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About