The DOI matches its Crossref record; 131 of the 131 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learned helplessness: Theory and evidence
Abstract
\, SUMMARY In 1967, Overmier and Seligman found that dogs exposed to inescapable and unavoidable electric shocks in one situation later failed to learn to escape shock in a different situation where escape was possible. Shortly thereafter Seligman and Maier (1967) demonstrated that this effect was caused by the uncontrollability of the original shocks. In this article we review the effects of exposing organisms to aversive events which they cannot control, and we review the explanations which have been offered. There seem to be motivational, cognitive, and emotional effects of uncontrollability. (a) Motivation. Dogs that have been exposed to inescapable shocks do not subsequently initiate escape response in the presence of shock. We review parallel phenomena in cats, fish, rats, and man. Of particular interest is the discussion of learned helplessness in rats and man. Rats are of interest because learned helplessness has been difficult to demonstrate in rats. However, we show that inescapably shocked rats do fail to learn to escape if the escape task is reasonably difficult. With regard to man, we review a variety of studies using inescapable noise and unsolvable problems as agents which produce learned helplessness effects on both instrumental and cognitive tasks, (b) Cognition. We argue that exposure to uncontrollabl e events interferes with the organism's tendency to perceive contingent relationships between its behavior and outcomes. Here we review a variety of studies showing such a cognitive set. (c) Emotion. We review a variety of experiments which show that uncontrollable aversive events produce greater emotional disruption than do controllable aversive events. We have proposed an explanation for these effects, which we call the learned helplessness hypothesis. It argues that when events are uncontrollable the organism learns that its behavior and outcomes are independent, and that this learning produces the motivational, cognitive, and emotional effects of uncontrollabi lity. We describe the learned helplessness hypothesis and research which supports it. Finally, we describe and discuss in detail alternative hypotheses which have been offered as accounts of the learned helplessness effect. One set of hypotheses argues that organisms learn motor responses during exposure to uncontrollabl e shock that compete with the response required in the test task. Another explanation holds that uncontrollable shock is a severe stressor and depletes a neurochemical necessary for the mediation of movement. We examine the logical structure of these explanations and present a variety of evidence which bears on them directly.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Interestingly, this definition of instrumental contingency is identical to the definition of control that Maier and Seligman (1976) provided, although Maier and Seligman were referring to shock rather than food.”
From Learned helplessness at fifty: Insights from neuroscience. (2016) · cites this paper as Maier and Seligman (1976)
In the citing paper
“In contrast, the concept of “learned controllability” was introduced more recently to describe a condition in which individuals learn to recognize—or believe—they have the ability to respond effectively to environmental stressors, thereby counteracting the deleterious effects of learned helplessness (3, 4).”
In the citing paper
“Helplessness, also unrelated to anger, has been linked to resignation and depression.”
From Management of emotional distress following a myocardial infarction: a qualitative content analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Maier & Seligman, 1976
Citations
Cites
Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
Rotter, J. B. (1966) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0092976 · Cited by 21,937
Psychological stress and the coping process
Lazarus, R. S. (1966) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 7,164
Helplessness: On Depression, Development, and Death
Seligman, M. E. P. (1975) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 6,181
Self-citationSubjective probability: A judgment of representativeness
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1972) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(72)90016-3 · Cited by 4,996
Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957) · doi:10.1037/10627-000 · Cited by 4,894
Langer, E. J. (1975) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.2.311 · Cited by 3,909
(1967) · Cited by 3,831
Punishment and aversive behavior
Campbell, B. A., & Church, R. M. (1969) · Appleton-Century-Crofts eBooks · Cited by 1,989
Failure to escape traumatic shock.
Seligman, M. E., & Maier, S. F. (1967) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0024514 · Cited by 1,981
Self-citationSpecies-specific defense reactions and avoidance learning
Bolles, R. C. (1970) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0028589 · Cited by 1,610
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,008 of 1,008
Drüge, M., Guthardt, L., Haller, E., Michalak, J., & Apolinário-Hagen, J. (2024) · Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-4402-2_11 · Cited by 11
Defining and Measuring Tolerance of Uncontrollability
Hay, A., Barthel, A. L., Moskow, D. M., & Hofmann, S. G. (2022) · Cognitive Therapy and Research · doi:10.1007/s10608-021-10259-9 · Cited by 8
Quintino‐dos‐Santos, J. W., Müller, C. J. T., C. Santos, A. M., Tufik, S., Rosa, C. A., & Schenberg, L. C. (2014) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.12410 · Cited by 7
Active disambiguation guides inferring controllability and cause in social interactions
Spiering, L., Trier, H. A., O’Reilly, J. X., Kolling, N., Wittmann, M. K., Rushworth, M. F. S., & Scholl, J. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-67853-8 · Cited by 2
Rebellious yet apathetic: System justification and learned helplessness in collective action
Couto, C., & Pilati, R. (2024) · Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología · doi:10.14349/rlp.2024.v56.2 · Cited by 1
Tafet, G. E. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1692598
A Comment On "The Illusion of Thinking": Reframing the Reasoning Cliff as an Agentic Gap
Khan, S., Madhavan, S., & Natarajan, K. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.18957
Metadata
- Authors
- Maier, S. F., & Seligman, M. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
- Published
- 1976-03
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-46
- ISSN
- 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2222
- OpenAlex
- W2022987442
- Semantic Scholar
- bd0b38c23bb66a0762b0023b0306c86411f47edc
- Cited by
- 2,494
- References
- 131
- Citations by year
- 2026: 105 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 105 · 2021: 90 · 2020: 78 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 68 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 69 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 66 · 2012: 69
- FWCI
- 35.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
- Keywords
- learned helplessness, uncontrollability, inescapable shock, escape learning, motivation, cognitive set, stress, rats, human, unsolvable problems, noise aversion
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review