Goal-box activity of Ss run in a single alley was compared to activity of Ss placed directly into the goal box. Following nonreward significant increases in activity above rewarded activity levels were found for both Run and Placed groups. When these effects were compared to goal-box activity levels of never-rewarded control groups, however, only the activity increments in the Run group could be attributed to frustration produced by nonreward. The results are discussed in terms of Amsel's (1958) theory.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmselA.The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situations. Psychological Bulletin, 1958, 55, 102–119.
2.
AmselA.ErnhartC. B.GalbrechtC. R.Magnitude of frustration effect and strength of antedating goal factors. Psychological Reports, 1961, 8, 183–186.
3.
AmselA.RousselJ.Motivational properties of frustration: I. Effect on a running response of the addition of frustration to the motivational complex. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1952, 43, 363–368.
4.
CliffordT.CrossM. S.Response enhancement in children as a function of blocking at different distances from start and goal. Psychonomic Science, 1970, 20, 327–329.
5.
CliffordT.SchindelheimR. H.The frustration effect as a function of runway length. Psychonomic Science, 1968, 10, 109–110.
6.
ColeM.Van FleetF. M.The frustration effect as a function of interoceptive and exteroceptive cues in a Skinner box analogue of double runway. Psychonomic Science, 1970, 20, 33–35.
7.
DalyH. B.Is instrumental responding necessary for nonreward following reward to be frustrating?Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 80, 186–187.
8.
DunlapW. P.HughesL. F.O'BrienT. J.LewisJ. H.DachowskiL.Goalbox activity as a measure of frustration in a single runway. Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23, 327–328.
9.
GrusecT.BowerG.Response effort and the frustration hypothesis. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1965, 60, 128–130.
10.
KembleE. D.ClaytonK. N.Prefeeding and the apparent frustration effect. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 9, 491–492.
11.
LoganF. A.Frustration effect following correlated nonreinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 78, 396–400.
12.
McCainG.McVeanG.Effects of prior reinforcement or nonreinforcement on later performance in a double runway. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 73, 620–627.
13.
McCainG.PowerR.Extinction as a function of reinforcement conditions in the start box. Psychonomic Science, 1966, 5, 193–194.
14.
MowrerO. H.JonesH. M.Extinction and behavior variability as functions of effortfulness of task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1943, 33, 369–386.
15.
WagnerA. R.The role of reinforcement and nonreinforcement in an “apparent frustration effect.”Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959, 57, 130–136.
