Responding in the cat maintained under response-independent electric shock and response-produced electric shock.
Fixed-interval shock produces the same scalloped response curve we see with food or tokens, so watch the schedule before blaming the learner.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Scientists worked with cats in a small lab cage.
They gave two kinds of electric shock. One kind came no matter what the cat did. The other kind only came if the cat hit a lever.
They also tested a fixed-interval 15-min shock schedule. Shock arrived 15 min after the last response, but only if the cat pressed again.
What they found
Cats kept pressing even when shock was coming anyway.
Under the 15-min schedule the cats started slow and then sped up as shock time neared.
Adding extra schedule rules made the cats pause or press faster, showing the rules matter.
How this fits with other research
Davison et al. (1991) saw the same speed-up pattern in pigeons that pecked for food. The species and reinforcer changed, but the FI scallop stayed.
Wasserman (1977) proved you can shape fine-grained pause-peck patterns in pigeons. Together the papers show schedules control both big trends and tiny details.
Kelly (1974) found monkeys that ate pellets their own way also pressed the lever their own way. The cat data echo this: individual style plus schedule equals final pattern.
Why it matters
You can see the same FI scallop in classroom token boards, toilet-training charts, or staff coffee breaks. If the learner starts slow and speeds up, check the schedule, not the person. Try shortening the interval or adding a mid-point cue to flatten the rush and cut problem behavior near the end.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Graph your client’s last week: if responses speed up right before the reinforcer, switch to a shorter fixed interval or add a midway cue.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Key-pressing responses in the cat were maintained under conditions in which brief electric shock was first postponed by responses (avoidance), then periodically presented independently of responses, and finally produced by responses on a fixed-interval schedule of 15 min (FI 15-min). A steady rate of responding occurred under shock avoidance and under response-independent shock; positively accelerated responding was engendered by the FI 15-min schedule. A second experiment studied responding under second-order schedules composed of three FI 5-min components. Responding was suppressed when a stimulus was presented briefly at completion of each FI 5-min component and a shock followed the brief stimulus at completion of the third component. Responding was maintained when each of the first two components was completed either with or without presentation of a brief stimulus and a shock alone was presented at completion of the third FI 5-min component.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1969 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-1