Abstract
In a test of safety signal and preparatory response explanations of the preference for signaled vs. unsignaled shock, three groups of rats were exposed to a different light-tone-shock contingency on each of the two sides of a shuttlebox. One contingency (S/P) provided both a safety signal and a warning stimulus, another (NS/NP) provided neither, and a third (S/NP) provided a safety period but no warning stimulus. Rats preferred either the S/P or the S/NP side of the shuttlebox when the alternate side provided neither safety signal nor warning stimulus. When the safety signal was available on both sides, the side without the warning stimulus was preferred. Results are interpreted as supporting the safety signal hypothesis.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Badia, P., & Culbertson, S. The relative aversiveness of signalled vs. unsignalled escapable and inescapable shock. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1972, 17, 463–471.
Badia, P., Culbertson, S., & Lewis, P. The relative aversiveness of signalled vs. unsignalled avoidance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1971, 16, 113–121.
Badia, P., DeFran, R. H., & Lewis, P. CS-US interval and suppression of unconditioned vocalization to shock: Associative or nonassociative. Psychonomic Science, 1968, 13, 269–270.
Kalish, H. I. Strength of fear as a function of the number of acquisition and extinction trials. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1954, 47, 1–9.
Lanzetta, J. T., & Driscoll, J. M. Preference for information about an uncertain but unavoidable outcome. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 3, 96–102.
Lockard, J. R. Choice of a warning signal or no warning signal in an unavoidable shock situation. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 1963, 56, 526–530.
McAllister, W. R., & McAllister, D. E. Postconditioning delay and intensity of shock as factors in the measurement of acquired fear. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1962, 64, 110–116.
Perkins, C. C., Jr. An analysis of the concept of reinforcement. Psychological Review, 1968, 75, 155–172.
Perkins, C. C., Jr., Seymann, R. G., Levis, D. J., & Spencer, H. R., Jr. Factors affecting preference for signal-shock over shock-signal. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 72, 190–196.
Seligman, M. E. P. Chronic fear produced by unpredictable electric shock. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1968, 66, 402–411.
Weiss, J. M. Somatic effects of predictable and unpredictable shock. Psychosomatic Medicine, 1970, 32, 397–408.
Weiss, J. M. Effects of punishing the coping response (conflict) on stress pathology in rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1971, 77, 14–21.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was completed while the first author was an undergraduate participant in the NSF Research Participation Program at Connecticut College.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arabian, J.M., Desiderato, O. Preference for signaled shock: A test of two hypotheses. Animal Learning & Behavior 3, 191–195 (1975). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213429
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213429