A comparison of escape and avoidance conditioning in wild and domesticated rats.

Researchers compared how wild and domesticated rats learn to escape and avoid electric shock. Both groups first learned to press a lever to stop ongoing shock. Then they had to press before shock came on to avoid it entirely. The setup was the same for both types of rats so any difference would come from their genes or life history.

Domesticated rats picked up the avoidance trick faster and kept it longer. Wild rats learned to escape just as quickly, but they struggled with the avoidance part. Once shock was removed, both groups stopped pressing, yet the wild rats quit sooner.

Schmidt et al. (1969) later showed Mongolian gerbils reach the same final avoidance level as rats, but they do it without the warm-up burst seen in rats. The gerbil data extend the rat findings to another species and hint that different animals use different learning paths.

Kelly et al. (1970) and Hineline et al. (1969) moved the same lever-press avoidance to pigeons. Birds learned even faster on a foot treadle and could be shaped from escape to key-peck avoidance. These studies confirm the basic procedure works across species, yet show response form and speed can vary.

BAER (1960) swapped shock for brief loss of candy in preschoolers. The kids still learned avoidance, proving the principle holds when the aversive event is social, not physical. Together the papers say: avoidance learning is general, but domestication, species, and stimulus type tweak the rate.

When you set up avoidance programs for clients, remember that history matters. A child with little exposure to structured tasks may act like the wild rat—quick to escape, slow to avoid. Build strong escape first, then fade in the warning signal gradually. Use species-friendly responses: a treadle button for a toe-walker, or a big paddle for a client who likes to hit. Start with an aversive the client already notices—task removal, brief silence—before moving to physical prompts.