Abstract
Response cessation was studied as a function of 16 reinforcement conditions (nine reward-punishment combinations and seven nonrewarded and/or nonpunished controls). Responding was quickly suppressed when every response or every fourth response was punished. When only every 16th response was punished, rats took more shocks and earned a substantial number of pellets. However, infrequent punishment coupled with extinction (no reward) resulted in prompt suppression. The generalization that intermittent punishment suppresses behavior less than continuous punishment may hold only when responding is also currently rewarded.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
AZRIN, N. H., HOLZ, W. C., & HAKE, D. F. Fixed-ratio punishment. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963, 6, 141–148.
BEECROFT, R. S., & KRUGER, B. M. VR 2 interresponse times. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 9, 383–384.
CHURCH, R. M., & RAYMOND, G. A. Influence of the schedule of positive reinforcement on punished behavior. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 1967, 63, 329–332.
HOLZ, W. C. Punishment and rate of positive reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1968, 11, 285–293.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant MH 11734-02 from the National Institutes of Health to Judson S. Brown.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beecroft, R.S., Kruger, B.M. & Fisher, B.G. Reward-punishment relationships. Psychon Sci 14, 230 (1969). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03332809
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03332809