ABA Fundamentals

The influence of the victim on shock induced aggression in rats.

Hynan (1976) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1976
★ The Verdict

Body posture and shock intensity steer aggression, so keep your own stance calm and predictable.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who handle crisis or aggression in any setting.
✗ Skip if Practitioners who only treat skill acquisition with no problem behavior.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Scientists watched pairs of rats get brief electric shocks.

One rat in each pair could attack the other.

They changed two things: how strong the shock was and how the victim rat lay.

The victim was either upright or on its back.

02

What they found

Upright victims got less aggression than ones lying on their backs.

When the attacker got a stronger shock, it bit more often.

When the victim got a stronger shock, it was attacked less, but only while on its back.

The rats seemed to read body posture as a threat signal.

03

How this fits with other research

CHARNEY et al. (1965) showed that the chance to fight can reward a new response.

T (1976) adds that the fight itself is shaped by how the victim looks.

Together they tell us aggression is both a reinforcer and a reaction to social cues.

Liberman et al. (1973) and later papers prove rats hate unpredictable shock.

Those studies used shock intensity only to make events worse.

T (1976) flips the focus: intensity changes who gets blamed, not just how bad it feels.

04

Why it matters

Your clients may show aggression when they are hurt or scared.

This rat work warns that tiny cues, like another person’s posture or facial angle, can turn pain into attack.

Give clear, calm body language during crisis.

Reduce unexpected bumps or noises that feel like "shock."

These simple moves can lower the chance that your client sees a "victim" and strikes.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Stand sideways, hands low, and speak softly when a client is upset to cut visual threat cues.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
other
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

In two studies, free-roaming male rats (aggressors) were shocked in the presence of male target rats restrained in either an upright or a supine posure. In addition, in Experiment II, two levels of aggressor shock intensity (0.8 mA or 2.0 mA) were used while targets received one of three levels of shock (0.5 mA, 1.5 mA, or 2.5 mA). In both studies, upright targets were attacked less than supine targets. Frequency of aggression was directly related to level of aggressor shock intensity in Experiment II. Also, attack by 0.8-mA aggressors against supine targets was inversely related to level of target shock intensity. The low level of attack against upright targets was interpreted in terms of a threat diaplay. Similarily, it was concluded that the target shock-intensity effect in Experiment II was due to specific threat behaviors displayed by those supine rats that received the highest-intensity shocks.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1976 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1976.25-401