The effect of stimuli followed by response-independent shock on shock-avoidance behavior.
The timing between warning stimulus and shock can either brake or gas the avoidance engine.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Scientists worked with monkeys trained to press a lever to delay electric shocks.
They added a light or tone right before shocks that the monkey could not avoid.
The team changed two things: how long the warning signal stayed on, and how soon the shock came after the signal.
What they found
Short signals or long shock delays made the monkeys press less.
Long signals or tiny delays made the monkeys press more.
Same warning, different timing, opposite effects on avoidance.
How this fits with other research
Kelly (1973) saw the same flip: one stimulus sped up slow responding and slowed down fast responding.
Gardner et al. (1977) later showed pigeons keep pecking even when shock delays shrink, stretching the timing idea across species.
Bernal et al. (1980) added that once monkeys learn any avoidance, future shock delivery alone can keep new responses going, showing how early timing lessons stick.
Why it matters
Your cues matter as much as your consequences. A ‘safety’ signal that is too brief or comes too early can shut down escape behavior. Make signals longer or delays shorter and you can boost the same behavior. When building avoidance or safety drills, tweak how long the warning lasts and how soon the aversive follows until you get the response level you want.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Lengthen the ‘get ready’ cue and shorten the delay to the aversive event to see if client compliance speeds up.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Four rhesus monkeys were trained on a non-discriminated shock-avoidance schedule (baseline). Stimuli followed by response-independent shock were then presented with the avoidance baseline no longer in effect. The main portion of the experiment consisted of superimposing (independently of responding) the stimuli followed by response-independent shock on the avoidance baseline. Different temporal values of stimulus duration and delay of shock (produced by an avoidance response) were presented successively, using each subject as his own control. When the stimulus duration was short or the delay of shock was long, so that avoidance rate during the stimulus could assume any value without resulting in baseline (avoidable) shocks during the stimulus, a lowered or "suppressed" rate of responding developed during the stimulus. When the stimulus duration was long or the delay of shock was brief, so that avoidable shocks resulted from a response decrement during the stimulus, high or "facilitated" rates of responding developed for a large proportion of the time that the stimulus was present.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1970 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1970.14-11