Effect of contingent auditory stimuli on concurrent schedule performance: An alternative punisher to electric shock

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 78, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 421-428

  Reed, Phil ^a   Yoshino, Toshihiko ^b  

^a SWANSEA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b Kobe Shinwa Women's University   (Japan)

Author keywords

Auditory stimuli; Choice; Concurrent schedule; Matching law; Punishment; Rat

Indexed keywords

AUDITORY CUE; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; INDUCED RESPONSE; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; RODENT;

ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLICK; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRIC SHOCK; LOUDNESS; MALE; NONHUMAN; PUNISHMENT; RAT; REINFORCEMENT;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ANIMALS; APPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; EXTINCTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; MALE; RATS; REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE; SIGNAL DETECTION (PSYCHOLOGY);

RATTUS;

EID: 43049153266     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.02.013     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Andronico M.P., and Forgays D.G. Sensory stimulation and secondary reinforcement. The Journal of Psychology 54 (1962) 209-219
2. Azrin N.H., and Holz W.C. Punishment. In: Honig W.K. (Ed). Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application (1966), Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York 380-447
3. Baron A. Avoidance and punishment. In: Iversen I.H., and Lattal K.A. (Eds). Experimental Analysis of Behavior (Part1) (1991), Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam 173-217
4. Baum W.M. On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 22 (1974) 231-242
5. Cappaert N.L.M., Klis S.F.L., Muijser H., Kulig B.M., and Smoorenburg G.F. Noise induced hearing loss in rats. Noise and Health 3 (2000) 23-32
6. Davison M., and McCarthy D. The Matching Law: A Research Review (1988), Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
7. De Villiers P.A. Toward a quantitative theory of punishment. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 33 (1980) 15-25
8. Farley J. Reinforcement and punishment effects in concurrent schedules: a test of two models. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 33 (1980) 311-326
9. Howell D.C. Statistical Methods for Psychology. 2nd Ed. (1992), PWS-Kent Publishing, Boston, MA
10. McAdie T.M., Foster R.M., and Temple W. Concurrent schedules: qualifying the aversiveness of noise. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 65 (1996) 37-55
11. McAdie T.M., Foster R.M., Temple W., and Matthews L.R. A method for measuring the aversiveness of sounds to domestic hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 27 (1993) 223-238
12. Pierce W.D., and Epling W.F. Behavior analysis and learning (1995), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
13. Reed P., Collinson T., and Nokes T. Aversive properties of auditory stimuli. Learning and Motivation 26 (1995) 101-115
14. Reed P., Mitchel C., and Nokes T. Intrinsic reinforcing properties of putatively neutral stimuli in an instrumental two-levers discrimination task. Animal Learning & Behavior 24 (1996) 38-45
15. Reed P., and Yoshino T. The effect of response-dependent tones on the acquisition of concurrent behavior in rats. Learning and Motivation 32 (2001) 255-273
16. Reed P., and Yoshino T. Effects of contingent tone on concurrent schedule performance at different deprivation levels. European Journal of Behaviour Analysis (2005) 6
17. Symmes D., and Leaton R.N. Failure to observe reinforcing properties of sound onset in rats. Psychological Reports 10 (1962) 458