| Abstract: | Trained an instrumental goal (G) response in 40 undergraduates in 4 groups under intermittent reward (money). When the acquisition criterion was met, reward was withdrawn and different punishment treatments administered. Group C received contingent punishment (electric shock) of the G response whenever it was omitted. Shock occurring on a variable interval schedule provided noncontingent punishment to another group (NC). Contingent and noncontingent punishments were combined and administered to Group C and NC. The 4th group (E) served as a control and received no punishment. This entire study was repeated, and both experiments indicate that the C treatment yielded most suppression, even exceeding that obtained under the C and NC procedure which administered more punishments. Results favor the notion that punishment acts in an analogous, but opposite direction to reward, and that its consequences may be predicted on the basis of the consistency of the information conveyed by a punisher. (French summary) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
