Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Dogs which had 1st learned to panel press in a harness in order to escape shock subsequently showed normal acquisition of escape/ avoidance behavior in a shuttle box. In contrast, yoked, inescapable shock in the harness produced profound interference with subsequent escape responding in the shuttle box. Initial experience with escape in the shuttle box led to enhanced panel pressing during inescapable shock in the harness and prevented interference with later responding in the shuttle box. Inescapable shock in the harness and failure to escape in the shuttle box produced interference with escape responding after a 7-day rest. These results were interpreted as supporting a learned helplessness explanation of interference with escape re-sponding: Ss failed to escape shock in the shuttle box following in-escapable shock in the harness because they had learned that shock termination was independent of responding. Overmier and Seligman (1967) have shown that the prior exposure of dogs to inescapable shock in a Pavlovian harness reliably results in interfer-ence with subsequent escape/avoidance learning in a shuttle box. Typically, these dogs do not even escape from
Seligman et al. (Sun,) studied this question.