THE RELATIVE AVERSIVENESS OF SIGNALLED VERSUS UNSIGNALLED SHOCK‐PUNISHMENT1

Abstract

Six rats were trained on a two-component multiple schedule with each component consisting of a two-link chain schedule. Differential response suppression in the two initial links, as well as in the two terminal links of the chain schedules, was used as a measure of the relative aversiveness of stimulus events in the two terminal links. When signalled and unsignalled shock-punishment (in addition to equal numbers of food reinforcers) were scheduled in the separate terminal links, subjects responded at lower rates in the initial link preceding unsignalled shock-punishment than in the initial link preceding signalled shock-punishment. Similarly, subjects responded at lower rates in the terminal link containing unsignalled shock-punishment than in the terminal link containing signalled shock-punishment. Reversing the terminal-link positions of signalled and unsignalled shock-punishment led to a reversal of the differential response suppression in the two initial and the two terminal links of the chain schedules. These results indicate that signalled punishment is relatively less aversive than unsignalled punishment and support an "information hypothesis", which assumes that a condition in which information is provided about the onset of environmental events, even negative events such as shock punishment, is more reinforcing than a condition in which such information is absent.