PUNISHMENT BY NOISE IN AN ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE SITUATION<sup>1</sup>

Herman, Rosalind; Azrin, Nathan H.

doi:10.1901/jeab.1964.7-185

Cited by 60 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to conditions of actual control, preference for control extends to circumstances in which control is potential, that is, to situations in which sub· jects believe that they have the ability to modify an event, even though the control is never exercised (see Miller, 1980, for a review). Not surprisingly, subjects also express a preference for reward over punishment when both are available (Herman & Azrin, 1964), even if the amount of reward for the reinforced response is substantially reduced from previoull levels (Fantino, 1973).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of control on choice of reward or punishment

Thomson

1983

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has indicated that, in choice situations, subjects prefer control to lack of control, and also that reward is preferred over punishment. The present study utilized 64 adult human subjects who were given t!'!o concept identification tasks to solve. The problems were either solvable (S) or unsolvable (S), and subjects were given feedback in the form of poker· chip reward (C) for correct responses or noise punishment (N) for errors. Four groups were given varied combinations o!"problem solvability and feedback on the initial two probl~s: (1) S problem + C feedback and S problem + N feedback, (2) S problem + N feedback and S problem + C feedback, (3) S problem + C feedback and S problem + N feedback, (4) S problem + C feedback and S problem + N feedback. All groups were then given a third unsolvable problem and al· lowed to choose either chip reward or noise punishment as feedback. It was found that subjects increase their probability of choosing noise over chips when the noise has been associated with control (S problems) and chips have been associated with a lack of control (S problems). The results were interpreted in terms of the properties of the noise as a signal for the existence of an Sproblem.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of control on choice of reward or punishment

Thomson

1983

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These behavioral effects are extremely senb . .ive to the duration of each ply of the multiple schedule since as the duration increases, behavioral deceleratiC:.l decreases.Using a mild punishment with human Ss, suppression of the punished response was possible only after an alternative response was made available (Holz, Azrin, & Ayllon, 1963;Herman & Azrin, 1964). These authors concluded that mild punishment is ineffective in reducing the frequency of responding if the punished response constitutes the only means of obtaining a reinforcer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ply durations in a multiple punishment schedule

Edwards

Dart

1966

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A parametric experiment was performed to test how long behavioral deceleration could be maintained in one ply of a multiple punishment schedule. The results indicated that the duration of plys could be increased up to alternate days of two hour sessions before complete recovery of pre-punishment rates occurred. Functional differences between punishment programmed alone and in a multiple schedule were systematically replicated.When differential punishment contingencies are programmed in a multiple schedule, different effects occur as compared to each contingency alone (DeArmond, 1966). More specifically, when punishment of each response is programmed as one ply of a multiple fixed-ratio schedule and plUlishment of the first response of each ratio in the other ply, complete suppression of responding occurs in the ply where continuous punishment is delivered. In the data reported by DeArmond (1966) the plys of the multiple schedule alternated every 2 min. The present study assessed the degree of behavioral suppression as a function of increased durations in the alternating plys ofamultiple punishment schedule. MethodThree White Carneaux pigeons were used as Ss. Each was maintained at 80% of its ad lib feeding weight. Each had an experimental history of fixed-ratio reinforcement and punishment schedules similar to those of the present study.The experimental chamber was a Lehigh Valley 1519C pigeon chamber. Mixed grain served as the reinforcer throughout the experiment and was presented for a constant duration per reinforcer. House-light and key light illumination were present except for the period of time during which reinforcers were available. A relay click provided responsefeedbackfollowingeach peck of the response key.Punishment was a 60 cycleac shock delivered through 10,000 ohms in series with the bird. Using a procedure developed by Azrin (1959), the shock was delivered through electrodes implanted arolUld the pubis bone of the pigeon. Intensity of the shock was regulated by a variac and measured by means of a voltmeter. All electrical manipulations were designed by Lehigh Valley and Grason-Stadler Electronics Companies.A multi-element baseline of responding was established using a variable-interval schedule of 2 min. A reinforcer was delivered on the average of every 2 min. During baseline conditions, red and green key lights were alternated every 15 min. Each experimental session was 2 hr. in length. Baseline conditions Psycbon. Sci .• 1966. Vol. 6 (7) DIANE D. EDWARDS AND GAIL A. DART UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITYwere maintained lUltil a stability criterion of not more than 5% deviation in rate of response over six consecutive days was met (Sidman, 1960).When stable baseline responding had been established, two plUlishment contingenCies were introduced, one lUlder each ply of the multiple schedule. The different key colors now served as discriminative stimuli for the punishment contingency present in each ply. Continuous punishment (shock contingent on each response) was introduced in one ply while...

show abstract

“…Porém, esses dados não permitem afirmar se este reforço foi positivo ou negativo. O que sabe-se é que, o som que já teve demonstrado seus efeitos como estímulo punidor (Azrin, 1958;Flanagan, Goldiamond & Azrin, 1958;Herman & Azrin, 1964;Ayllon & Azrin, 1966;Katz, 1973;Romanczyk, 1976). Portanto, com humanos, é provável que a imunização venha sendo mensurada sob controle de uma mesma contingência, porém, sem poder afirmar se a mesma é aversiva ou positiva.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Quanto aos níveis sonoros, é permitido a um indivíduo uma exposição contínua de 4 horas em um nível sonoro de 90 decibéis sem que isso implique prejuízo para sua saúde (Russo, 1999). Azrin e Holz (1966/1975 Nos estudos com humanos, o estímulo sonoro é utilizado como aversivo, já tendo sido comprovados seus efeitos como punidor (Azrin, 1958;Flanagan, Goldiamond & Azrin, 1958;Herman & Azrin, 1964;Ayllon & Azrin, 1966;Katz, 1973;Romanczyk, 1976). A gagueira foi suprimida após 2 segundos de som (95 decibéis) contingente (Flanagan et al, 1958 Concluindo, essas variáveis apontam que, embora a incontrolabilidade do estímulo tenha sido demonstrada como a variável determinante do efeito desamparo, alguns parâmetros, como a natureza do estímulo e da resposta, podem ser relevantes (Hunziker, 1982).…”

Section: Atureza Do Estímulounclassified

“…Na literatura, ainda não se sabe ao certo quão aversivo o som é comparativamente ao choque elétrico usado em animais. Sabe-se que parâmetros do choque, tais como intensidade/magnitude, frequência, duração e densidade, são muito relevantes na produção do desamparo em animais (Hunziker, 2005 Nos estudos com humanos, o estímulo sonoro é utilizado como aversivo já tendo sido comprovados seus efeitos como punidor (Azrin, 1958;Flanagan, Goldiamond & Azrin, 1958;Herman & Azrin, 1964;Ayllon & Azrin, 1966;Katz, 1973;Romanczyk, 1976). Os resultados aqui apresentados demonstram que as respostas emitidas pelos participantes a fim de eliminar o som, foram reforçadas, já que ao longo das tentativas houve aumento da frequência do responder e diminuição das latências (com exceção do Grupo I).…”

Section: Grupo Ipunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Desamparo aprendido e imunização em humanos: avaliação metodológica/conceitual e uma proposta experimental

Samelo¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PUNISHMENT BY NOISE IN AN ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE SITUATION¹

Cited by 60 publications

References 4 publications

Effects of control on choice of reward or punishment

Effects of control on choice of reward or punishment

Ply durations in a multiple punishment schedule

Desamparo aprendido e imunização em humanos: avaliação metodológica/conceitual e uma proposta experimental

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

PUNISHMENT BY NOISE IN AN ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE SITUATION1

Cited by 60 publications

References 4 publications

Effects of control on choice of reward or punishment

Effects of control on choice of reward or punishment

Ply durations in a multiple punishment schedule

Desamparo aprendido e imunização em humanos: avaliação metodológica/conceitual e uma proposta experimental

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

PUNISHMENT BY NOISE IN AN ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE SITUATION¹