Advertisement

The Effects of Response Contingent and Non-Contingent Shock on Drug Self-Administration in Rhesus Monkeys

  • David M. Mclendon
  • Robert T. Harris
Part of the Advances in Behavioral Biology book series (ABBI, volume 21)

Abstract

Suppression of ongoing positively reinforced behavior by the presentation of aversive stimuli has been reported in some cases while facilitation of such behavior has been noted in other instances. A major variable in these studies is the contingency of the aversive stimulus upon the response of the animal. The majority of these investigations have been concerned with the effects of aversive stimuli on food reinforced responding. Azrin (1956) found that response contingent punishment had a greater effect on responding than did shock delivered on a non-contingent basis. Hunt and Brady (1955) also demonstrated the importance of response contingency in a punishment situation. These investigations reported greater suppression of the punished response when the punishment was response contingent. In a review of the area, Church (1963) concluded that if the aversive stimulus is contingent upon the response of the animal, greater suppression, or less facilitation, will occur than if the shock is not contingent upon the response. Facilitation of responding has been found to occur under certain conditions. Holz and Azrin (1962) found that punishment can facilitate responding under conditions where low intensity punishment has been correlated with positive reinforcement.

Keywords

Aversive Stimulus Shock Intensity Response Contingent Access Period Aversive Threshold 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Azrin, N.H.: Some effects of two intermittent schedules of immediate and non-immediate punishment, J. Psychol. 42, 3–21 (1956).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azrin, N.H. and Holz, W.C.: Punishment. In: Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application. Honig, W.K., Ed., pp. 380–447. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.Google Scholar
  3. Azrin, N.H., Hutchinson and R.R., and Hake, D.F.: Attack, avoidance, and escape reactions to aversive shock, J. exp. Analysis Behay 10, 131–148 (1967).Google Scholar
  4. Church, R.M.: The varied effects of punishment on behavior, Psychol. Rev. 70, 369–402 (1963).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deneau, G., Yanagita, T., and Seevers, M.H.: Self-administration of psychoactive substances by the monkey, Psychopharmacologia (Berl.) 16, 30–48 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grove, R.N. and Schuster, C.R.: Suppression of cocaine self-administration by extinction and punishment, Pharmac. Biochem. Behay. 2, 199–208 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Holz, W.C. and Azrin, N.H.: Interactions between the discriminative and aversive properties of punishment, J. exp. Analysis Behay. 5, 229–234 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Houser, V.P. and Houser, F.L.: The alteration of aversive thresholds with cholinergic and adrenergic agents, Pharmac. Biochem. Behay. 1, 433–444 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hunt, H.F. and Brady, J.V.: Some effects of punishment and intercurrent “anxiety” on a simple operant, J. comp. Physiol. Psychol. 48, 305–310 (1955).Google Scholar
  10. Millo, K.C., Sobell, M.B., and Schaefer, H.H.: Training social drinking as an alternative to abstinence in alcoholics, Behay. Ther. 2, 18–27 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Powell, J.R. and Azrin, N.H.: The effects of shock as a punisher for cigarette smoking, J. appl. Behay. Analysis 1, 63–71 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rachlin, H.: Recovery of responses during mild punishment, J. exp. Analysis Behay. 9, 251–263 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Smith, S.G. and Davis, W.M.: Punishment of amphetamine and morphine self-administration behavior, Psychol. Rec. 24, 477–480 (1974).Google Scholar
  14. Weiss, K.M. and Strongman, K.T.: Shock-induced response bursts and suppression, Psychon. Sci. 15, 238–240 (1969).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • David M. Mclendon
    • 1
  • Robert T. Harris
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysiologyBaylor College of MedicineHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations