Social facilitation of responses during a stimulus paired with electric shock.

Hake et al. (1967) worked with two pigeons at a time. Both birds were trained to peck a key for food on a fixed-ratio schedule.

A red light then came on. That light meant a mild electric shock would soon follow. The shock made the lone bird stop pecking.

The test was simple. Keep the warning light and shock, but add a second pigeon. Would the first bird still freeze?

When the partner pigeon was present, the shocked bird kept pecking. The warning light no longer shut the behavior down.

Social facilitation beat conditioned suppression. Peer presence alone reduced fear enough to keep the food schedule running.

LYOSLOANE (1964) showed that timing matters. A shock cue early in a long ratio stops the bird; late in the ratio the bird keeps going to get the food pellet. F et al. add a social factor that can override even early-cue shutdown.

McIntire et al. (1987) stretched the time window. They found that one daily shock session can suppress appetite behavior for hours before and after. F et al. show the opposite: immediate social contact can shrink suppression right now.

WALLER et al. (1962) used drugs to lift suppression. A dose of amphetamine made shocked pigeons peck again. F et al. got the same lift with no drug—just another pigeon nearby.

If a client stops working when a hard task signals correction, try adding a peer. Let the learner see a classmate doing the same work. The sight alone may keep responses flowing and reduce avoidance. No extra tokens, no drugs—just social facilitation.