PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

W C HOLZ

Publications and source records attributed to W C HOLZ.

16 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1965

MOTIVATIONAL ASPECTS OF ESCAPE FROM PUNISHMENT.

Punishment and escape were studied simultaneously by allowing a subject to escape from a stimulus situation in which responses were punished, into a stimulus situation in which responses were not punished. The frequency of the punished responses was found to be an inverse function of the intensity of punishment, whereas the frequency of the escape response was a direct function of the intensity of punishment. Both of these functions were obtained under three different schedules of food reinforcement. The strength of the escape behavior was evidenced by (1) the emergence of the escape response even when the frequency of food reinforcement decreased as a consequence of the escape response, (2) the maintenance of the escape response by fixed-interval and fixed-ratio schedules of escape reinforcement, and (3) the occurrence of escape responses at intensities of punishment that otherwise produced only mild suppression of the punished response when no escape was possible. This last finding indicates that a subject may be driven out of a situation involving punishment even though the punishment is relatively ineffective in suppressing the punished responses when no escape is possible.

Animals↗
PubMed1964

STIMULUS CONTROL OF AVOIDANCE BEHAVIOR.

The introduction of a warning signal preceding shocks greatly increased the effectiveness of avoidance responding. Periods of "warm-up" at the beginning of the session were eliminated, and the number of shocks received by the subjects was greatly reduced. With response-shock interval constant, response rate increased as the interval between the response and the onset of the warning signal was shortened. The response tended to occur shortly after the onset of the warning signal regardless of the duration of these "safe" periods. A greatly elevated response rate was maintained even when the duration of the safe period was reduced to 0.3 sec. Thus, the pre-shock signal obtained nearly exclusive control of the responding and overrode the usual "temporal discrimination" of the response-shock interval.

Avoidance Learning↗
PubMed1963

Punishment of temporally spaced responding.

The responses of pigeons were maintained by a DRL schedule of food reinforcement. With this schedule, responses were reinforced only when a fixed period of time elapsed without an intervening response. Punishment of all responses reduced the frequency of these responses as a direct function of the punishment intensity. As a consequence of the increased temporal spacing of responses, more reinforcements resulted during punishment. Under progressively higher intensities of punishment, the reinforcement frequency increased to a maximum value and then decreased at the highest intensities. The increased frequency of reinforcement which resulted during punishment did not counteract the suppressive effect of punishment, nor did it lead to a low response rate after punishment was removed. Punishment did not reduce the inter-response time distribution uniformly, but rather especially reduced the number of short inter-response times. Even at the low punishment intensities, the number of short inter-response times was considerably reduced. After punishment was discontinued, performance recovered almost completely after a compensatory burst. The number as well as the temporal pattern of responses returned to normal.

Animals↗
PubMed1963

Fixed-ratio punishment.

Responses were maintained by a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement. At the same time, punishment was delivered following every nth response (fixed-ratio punishment). The introduction of fixed-ratio punishment produced an initial phase during which the emission of responses was positively accelerated between punishments. Eventually, the degree of positive acceleration was reduced and a uniform but reduced rate of responding emerged. Large changes in the over-all level of responding were produced by the intensity of punishment, the value of the punishment ratio, and the level of food deprivation. The uniformity of response rate between punishments was invariant in spite of these changes in over-all rate and contrary to some plausible a priori theoretical considerations. Fixed-ratio punishment also produced phenomena previously observed under continuous punishment: warm-up effect and a compensatory increase. This type of intermittent punishment produced less rapid and less complete suppression than did continuous punishment.

Punishment↗
PubMed1963

A comparison of several procedures for eliminating behavior.

The pecking response of pigeons was reinforced when a minimum period of time had elapsed since the last response (DRL schedule of food-reinforcement). Punishment, satiation, extinction, and stimulus change were employed separately to reduce responding. When the effects of the four procedures were compared, punishment was found capable of producing a more immediate, complete and long lasting response reduction than the others. Punishment had its maximum effect on the responses that were least relevant to reinforcement. The punishment reduced the frequency of the short inter-response times to a greater extent than did either extinction or satiation. In this way, punishment actually increased the efficiency of the DRL responding.

Animals↗
PubMed1963

Elimination of behavior of mental patients by response-produced extinction.

Mental hospital patients were conditioned to respond at a high rate. Then an attempt was made to eliminate the response by means of a mild punishment consisting of a period of timeout from reinforcement (response-produced extinction). When only one response was available for obtaining the reinforcement, the mild punishment was not effective in eliminating that response. When an alternative response was also made available for obtaining the reinforcement, the mild punishment was completely effective. It appears that even very mild punishment may be effective if the over-all frequency of reinforcement can be maintained by means of an alternative unpunished response.

Conditioning, Operant↗
PubMed1963

Fixed-ratio escape reinforcement.

Escape responses of squirrel monkeys were reinforced according to a fixed-ratio schedule. The reinforcement was a period of safety from a stimulus that signalled the delivery of intermittent pain-shocks. When the frequency of shock was gradually reduced, the performance remained at a high level until the shocks were quite infrequent. Similarly, the duration of the period of safety could be reduced to a few seconds with little loss of behavior. Thus, the responses appeared to be reinforced by even a brief period of safety, the actual degree of shock reduction being fairly slight. The changes in responding during this fixed-ratio escape procedure were comparable to the response changes typically obtained during fixed-ratio food procedures.

Animals↗
PubMed1962

Intermittent reinforcement by removal of a conditioned aversive stimulus.

Brief electric shocks were delivered at irregular time intervals but only while a light was on. A response was reinforced on a ratio schedule by the termination of the light. This method produced a high rate of response quite similar to that produced by a comparable schedule of food reinforcement.

Behavior↗
PubMed1962

Interactions between the discriminative and aversive properties of punishment.

Punishment acquires a discriminative property when it is selectively paired with either reinforcement or extinction. At the milder punishment intensities, the discriminative control exerted by punishment is similar to the discriminative control exerted by a response-produced neutral (nonaversive) stimulus. However, the effect of the aversive property is apparent as the intensity of the punishment is increased. The aversive property of the punishment acts to enhance the discriminative control when the punishment is selectively applied during extinction periods, and to attenuate the discriminative control when the punishment is selectively applied during reinforcement periods. One major difference was found between the control exerted by the punishment and the response-produced neutral simulus: Responding greatly increased after the S(Delta) punishment but not after the S(Delta) neutral stimulus; this increase in responding was independent of the punishment intensities studied.

Learning↗