Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2026

Investigating Pain-Related Avoidance Behavior using a Robotic Arm-Reaching Paradigm
Published on: October 3, 2020
Partial avoidance contingencies: Absolute omission and punishment probabilities
Abstract:
Avoidance contingencies were defined by the absolute probability of the conjunction of responding or not responding with shock or no shock. The "omission" probability (rho(00)) is the probability of no response and no shock. The "punishment" probability (rho(11)) is the probability of both a response and a shock. The traditional avoidance contingency never omits shock on nonresponse trials (rho(00)=0) and never presents shock on response trials (rho(11)=0). Rats were trained on a discrete-trial paradigm with no intertrial interval. The first lever response changed an auditory stimulus for the remainder of the trial. Shocks were delivered only at the end of each trial cycle. After initial training under the traditional avoidance contingency, one group of rats experienced changes in omission probability (rho(00)>0), holding punishment probability at zero. The second group of rats were studied under different punishment probability values (rho(11)>0), holding omission probability at zero. Data from subjects in the omission group looked similar, showing graded decrements in responding with increasing probability of omission. These subjects approximately "matched" their nonresponse frequencies to the programmed probability of shock omission on nonresponse trials, producing a very low and approximately constant conditional probability of shock given no response. Subjects in the punishment group showed different sensitivity to increasing absolute punishment probability. Some subjects decreased responding to low values as punishment probability increased, while others continued to respond at substantial levels even when shock was inevitable on all trials (noncontingent shock schedule). These results confirm an asymmetry between two dimensions of partial avoidance contingencies. When the consequences of not responding included occasional omission of shock, all subjects showed graded sensitivity to changes in omission frequency. When the consequences of responding included occasional shock delivery, some subjects showed graded sensitivity to punishment frequency while others showed control by overall shock frequency as well.
Related Concept Videos
Probability Laws
Frustration and Conflict: Avoidance-Avoidance, Double-Approach Avoidance
Operant Conditioning
Reinforcement in operant conditioning can be positive or negative, both of which serve to increase the likelihood of a behavior. Positive...
Avoidance Learning and Learned Helplessness
Avoidance learning occurs when an organism learns that a specific behavior can prevent an unpleasant outcome. For example, a student who receives a bad grade may start studying harder to avoid future poor grades. This behavior persists even when the negative outcome is no longer present. Avoidance learning is powerful because it maintains behavior in the absence of the...
Hindsight Biases
Timing and Consequences on Behavior
Humans, however, can respond to delayed reinforcers. We often make decisions between immediate small rewards and delayed larger rewards. This ability to delay gratification is a significant factor...

