Avoidance conditioning with shock contingent upon the avoidance response.

Researchers worked with lab rats in a small chamber. A lever sat on one wall.

Every 20 seconds a timer reset. If the rat pressed the lever before time ran out, it got one short shock right away. That same press also stopped five bigger shocks that were due later.

The rats quickly learned to press. They kept pressing even though each press gave them a shock.

The deal was worth it: one small shock now beat five later ones. The animals lowered their total shock count.

Farmer et al. (1966) showed the same thing without the extra response shock. Their rats learned to press just to cut the overall shock rate. Lambert et al. (1973) adds the new twist: the immediate shock for pressing does not block learning.

Delprato (2001) warns that shock-frequency reduction may not be the only game in town. Other factors can also keep avoidance alive. The 1973 data do not rule those out; they just show that added response shock is not a deal-breaker.

Navarick et al. (1972) saw rats bite the lever right after a shock. That biting could look like an operant press. Lambert et al. (1973) counted only clean lever presses, so their data stay clear of that trap.

If you use mild aversives in a treatment plan, remember that the overall rate of aversives matters more than any single bump. A brief consequence for the coping response will not kill the response, as long as the move still cuts total trouble. Check the big picture, not just the moment.